HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1998/12/15
"I declare under penalty of perjury that I am
employed by the City of Chu!a Vista in the
Office of the City Cler" and that I posted
this Agenda/Notice On the BulleUn Board at
Tuesday, December 15, 1998 the Public ervi s Building II on Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. DATED,/. SIGNED 'Þublic Services Building
ReI!ular Meetin" of the Citv of Chula Vista Citv
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL: Councilmernhers Davis_, Moot_. Padilla_, Salas_. and Mayor Horton_,
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. MOMENT OF SILENCE
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
A. Oath of Onice:
Commission on Aging - Emma Ahutin;
Child Care Commission - Doralee Radichel;
Design Review Committee - Jose V. Alherdi, Jr.;
Growth Management Oversight Commission - Bud Gray;
Library Board of Trustees - George Hartman; and
Olay Valley Road Project Area Committee - Gregory Alahado.
B. Recognition of the 10th anniversary of the Arturo Barrios Invitational.
C. Proclamation "Recognizing Henry's Marketplace for their donation to the Norman Park Senior
Center." The proclamation will he presented hy Mayor Horton.
D. Dr. Libia Oil, Superintendent, Chula Vista Elementary School District, will recognize the Mayor
and City Council for their support of Prop JJ.
E. Presentation/commendation hy residents of Twin Oaks Avenue.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(llems 5 IhrollKh 2 J)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by
the Council by one 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 Fonll " available in the lobby alld submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meetillg. 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 busilless.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
A. Letter from the City Attorney statin ( that to the hest of his knowled (e from ohservance 01'
actio", taken in Closed Session on Decemher 8, 1998, that there were no actions taken which
are required under the Brown Act to he reported. It is recommended that the letter he
received and filed.
Agenda -2- December 15, 1998
6. ORDINANCE 2769 AMENDING SECTION 2.52.040 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY
THE DEFINITION OF "CONTRIBUTIONS" TO ALLOW FOR COLLECTION OF ADDITIONAL
FUNDS TO RETIRE A DEBT INCURRED IN A DECLARATORY RELIEF ACTION OR ANY
ACTION TO ENFORCE PERCEIVED RIGHTS UNDER THE ELECTIONS CODE OR THE
MUNICIPAL CODE (first readin,,) - During the most recent Council election a candidate incurred
substantial legal fees in an effort to enforce rights under the Election Code. The current City ordinance
exempts from the definition of "contrihutions" other donations made to a candidate or council members to
assist in paying legal fees. The proposed amendment to the ordinance would make the legal defense fund
exception more equitable. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on tirst reading. (City Attorney)
7. RESOLUTION 19304 APPROVING COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR THE CITY MANAGER -
In accordance with the provisions of Resolution Numher 18909, the Mayor and Council have reviewed the
performance of the City Manager, David D. Rowlands, Jr., and have proposed that an adjustment he made
in his salary. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City Attorney)
8. RESOLUTION 19305 APPOINTING SUSAN BIGELOW AS CITY CLERK - Council directed that
a resolution be prepared setting forth those terms anù conditions for the initial employment of the new City
Clerk, Susan Bigelow, as agreed upon hetween the City Clerk and Council. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (City Attorney)
9. RESOLUTION 19306 APPROVING THE FIRE STATION NUMBER 4 THIRD DEFERRAL
AGREEMENT - This is the third deferral agreement with regard to the construdion of the new Fire
Station Numher 4 in Rancho del Rey off of East "H" Strext. The City's current agreement with Rancho
del Rey Investors, L.P. (the McMillin Companies) to extend the deferral for the advancement of funds for
relocating Fire Station Numher 4 was predicated upon the City adopting an updated Puhlic Facihties
Development Impact Fee Program (PFDlF) by December 15, 1998. As the PFDlF will not be presented
to Council for action until after January l. 1999, an extended deferral agreement is necessary. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Fire Chief and Deputy City Manager)
10. RESOLUTION 19307 ACCEPTING AND AMENDING THE SALARY AND BENEFITS
INCREASE FOR THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE CALIFORNIA BORDER ALLIANCE
GROUP AND APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FROM UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE - On
September 5, 1995. Council approved the City to ad as the "fiscal agent" for the CalifÒrnÎa Border
Alliance Group (CHAG) and act as comJuit to ohtain civilian support personnel and to acquire related
supplies for three employees. On July J6. 1996. Council approved adding two additional CBAG support
personnel. This action provides for the executive level position tied to the federal pay schedule to receive
a step increase within the prescribed federal General Schedule (GS), level 14, step 6, for the Deputy
Director position to he effective January. 1999, a net increase of 3.6 percent. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Chief of Police) 4/5th's vote required.
11. RESOLUTION 19308 AUTHORIZING AN EXPENDITURE OF $400,000 FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP) STl23 FOR SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT
OF THE MATTER OF GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY V. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RELATING TO THE CONTRACT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD FROM
1-805 TO 1200 FEET EAST OF NIRV ANA A VENUE - This action will authorize appropriating funding
for the settlement of all claims related to the matter of Granite Construction Comnany v. City of Chula
Vista (San Diego Superior Court Case Number 70690 I) arising out of the contract and construction for the
improvement of Assessment Distrid Numher 90-2 (Otay Valley Road) from 1-805 to 1200 teet East of
Nirvana Avenue. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Risk Manager)
Agenda -3- December 15, 1998
12. RESOLUTION 19309 ACCEPTING A DONATION OF EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $.11,000, FROM IBM CORPORATION AND CHARLES SCHWAB FOUNDATION,
THROUGH SENIORNET, TO IMPLEMENT A SENIORNET LEARNING CENTER AT THE
NORMAN PARK SENIOR CENTER; AND ACCEPTING A DONATION OF $2,000 IN CASH
FROM IBM CORPORATION AND CHARLES SCHWAB FOUNDATION, THROUGH
SENIORNET; AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 1998/99 BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING
$2,000 TO THE LIBRARY AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUDGET FOR RELATED
EXPENSES; AND APPROPRIATING $3,000 IN UNANTICIPATED REVENUE FROM CLASS
FEES TO THE LIBRARY AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUDGET FOR RELATED
EXPENSES; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO SIGN THE
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE SENIORNET LEARNING CENTER - The
City and the Norman Park Senior Center have received a donation from IBM Corporation and the Charles
Schwab Foundation through SeniorNet to set up a Learning Center at the Norman Park Senior Center. The
purpose of this donation is to provide older adults education for and access to computers and the Internet
to enhance their lives and enahle them to share their wisdom and knowledge with the world. In addition
to a donation of equipment, $2.000 has been provided to cover expenses. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Library and Recreation Director) 4/Sth's vote required.
13. RESOLUTION 19310 APPROVING INDIVIDUAL PARK MASTER PLANS AND ASSOCIATED
PROPOSED NAMES FOR PARKS P-S, P-6, P-7, P-8, AND P-9 OF VILLAGE 1 AND 5 OF THE
OTAY RANCH SPA ONE SUBMITTED BY MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH LLC . MCMILLIN
COMPANIES, LLC - The McMillin Companies LLC, developers of a portion of Village land 5 of the
Otay Ranch SPA One, propose individual Park Maskr Plans and asso¡:iat~d nam~s for tiv~ n~ighborhooù.
p~destrian and town square parks to h~ located within both Villag~s. Th~se parks are proposed to be
named Alcala Park (P-S), Cottonwood Park (P-6), Santa Cora Park (P-?), Terra Fina Park (P·8), and
Breezewood Park (P-9), and ar~ designed consistent with the policies of the adopkd G~neraJ Devdopment
Plan for the Otay Ranch. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning and
Building)
14. RESOLUTION 19311 APPROVING A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH
KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC., FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
A FEASIBILITY AND FINANCING STUDY OF OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND APPROPRIATING
$60,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF THE TRANSPORT A TION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO PROJECT STM-331 - The consultant, Kimley-Horn and
Associates, has heen working on devdoping a t~asihility and tinancing study to construct Olympic Parkway
from Oleander Avenue to one mile east of SR-125 and identi(ying pnÙed constraints and opportunities in
terms of funding, traffic needs, timing, phasing, environmental requirements and a comprehensive project
schedule. Due to a desire to have the consultant continue work on the environmental permit process
beyond the original scope of the contract and additional landscape conceptual design, it is necessary to
extend the consultant's contract. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Puhlic Works)
4/Sth's vote required.
15. RESOLUTION 19292 ACCEPTING THE GRADING AND WET UTILITY BIDS RECEIVED FOR
OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND AUTHORIZING THE EASTLAKE COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT
OLYMPIC PARKW A Y IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN HUNTE PARKWAY AND THE OL YMPIC
TRAINING CENTER AND HUNTE PARKWAY BETWEEN OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND SOUTH
GREENSVIEW DRIVE AND RECEIVE CREDIT OR REIMBURSEMENT AGAINST
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES - A letter was received from the EastLake
Company, dated September 28, 1998, requesting authorization to hegin construction of roadway facilities
identified in the City's Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDlF) Capital Improvement Projects list
and initiate the DlF credit process. The grading plans have heen submitted and approved. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Diredor of Public Works) Continued from the meetin" of
December 8. 1998.
Agenda -4- Decemher 15, 1998
16. RESOLUTION 19312 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "DRAINAGE
MITIGATION - RIENSTRA/LOMA VERDE PARK IN THE CITY (DR-12I) - Bids were received
on October 21, 1998. The work consists of installing erosion control matting in and adjacent to the natural
channel located in Rienstra Park, north of Orange A venue. Staff recommends approval of the resolution
awarding the contract to New Century Construction in the amount of $21 ,860. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
17.A. RESOLUTION 19313 APPROVING FINAL "B" MAP FOR TRACT NUMBER 97-02, MCMILLIN
OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, PHASE 1, UNIT 5, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE
PUBLIC STREETS GRANTED ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, ACCEPTING ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID
SUBDIVISION, ACKNOWLEDGING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE IRREVOCABLE
OFFER OF DEDICATION OF FEE INTEREST OF LOTS FOR OPEN SPACE AND OTHER
PUBLIC PURPOSES ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION AND APPROVING
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS
REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREE:MENT - Council will consider the approval of Final "B" Map, Sundivision Improvement
Agreement, and Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Unit 5 of the McMillin Otay Ranch
SPA One, Phase I (CYT 97-02). Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Puhlic
Works)
B. RESOLUTION 19314 APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FINAL "B" MAP FOR MCMILLIN OT A Y RANCH, SPA ONE, PHASE ONE, UNIT
FIVE, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
18. RESOLUTION 19315 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
NUMBER PE-441 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ENTRY MONUMENT SIGNS PROPOSED
FOR THE OT A Y RANCH SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF TELEGRAPH
CANYON ROAD AND PASEO RANCHERO - Otay Project, LLC, owners of the Otay Ranch
Subdivision, are proposing to construct two entry monument signs along Telegraph Canyon Road and Paseo
Ranchero frontage. The frontage area is located within a City lIrainage easement and an assignahle and
irrevocable general utility easement. According to Section 12.28 of the Municipal Colle, any permanent
structures built within any easement, such as permanent monument signs, require Council approval utilizing
the encroachment permit process. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public
Works)
19. RESOLUTION 19316 AMENDING THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO ESTABLISH
NEW GREEN FEES AT THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE - American Golf
submitted a fee adjustment request on April 28, 1998. In accordance with the lease agreement, the City
has the right to review and approve Green Fee rates. Green Fee rates may he comparable to those charged
by other public golf courses in San Diego County. The proposed rate fee increases were posted at the Pro-
Shop four weeks prior to the July 16 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. In addition, the golf
course manager presented American Golf's fee proposals to the Men's and Women's Golf Cluhs at their
general membership meetings. Both cluhs had no ol:iections or ¡,;oncems since the increases are reasonable.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Punlic Works)
20. RESOLUTION 19296 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH LAW CRANDALL, A DIVISION
OF LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC., FOR MATERIALS
TESTING AND GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE MA YOR
TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY - To assure that the City continue
to obtain quality improvements, the City needs to ontain materials testing and geotechnical engineering
services for pr<~iects built with hoth puhlic and private funds. These services will assure that the materials
supplied to construct the City's infrastructure meeting the project's specitications. Staff has completed the
Request for Proposal and consultant selection process and has negotiated the proposed contract with Law
Crandall to provide material testing services from January I, 1999 to Decemher 31, 2000, with an option
to extend the agreement for an additional year. Staff re¡,;ommends approval of the resolution. (Director
of Puhlic Works) Continued from the meetin" 01' December 8. 1998.
Agenda -5- December 15, 1998
21. RESOLUTION 19317 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
NUMBER PE-44S FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A POTABLE WATER LINE WITHIN A CITY
DRAINAGE AND SEWER EASEMENT FOR MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH, SPA ONE, PHASE
ONE, UNIT 5 BY OT A Y WATER DISTRICT - Otay Water District is proposing to install a water line
on a City sewer and drainage easement to be granted on the McMillin Gtay Ranch, SPA I, Phase I, Unite
5 final map. The tïnal map will be pœsented to Council for approval at the Decemher 15, 1998 Council
meeting. The property is located north of East Palomar Street between La Media Road and Santa Cora
Avenue. In order to provide a water loop for the proposed development, Otay Water District has requested
the City to grant an encroachment permit to allow a water line to he installed within said sewer and
drainage easement. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
* * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * *
ADJOURNMENT TO REGULAR AND/OR JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
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 yau wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Font!" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior 10 the meeting. 17lOse who wish to speak,
please give your name ami 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 ta any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior ta the meeting.
22. PUBLIC HEARING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF LOCAL LA W ENFORCEMENT
BLOCK GRANT FUNDS - The Police Department has recently received notice of a 1998 Local Law
Enforcement Block Grant A warù in the amount of $269.739 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance. These
funds were allocakd to the Police Department haseu on a thret-year average Part 1 Viol!;':nt Crimes. Part
1 Violent Crimes are murder and non-negligcmt manslaughtèfs, forcihle rape, roondry, and aggravated
assault as reported hy the FBI. Acceptance and appropriation of these funds requires a public hearing per
stipulations of the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions.
(Chief of Police)
A. RESOLUTION 19318 ACCEPTING $269,739 FROM THE 1998 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
BLOCK GRANT AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:
$30,000 HIRING, $10,000 DRUG COURT, $20,000 IN OVERTIME, AND $209,739 FOR
EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT - 4/Sth's vote required.
B. RESOLUTION 19319 AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO UTILIZE (REPROGRAM)
SA VINGS RESULTING FROM THE COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOR
ADDITIONAL UNSPECIFIED OFFICER SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
Agenda -6- Decemher L5, L998
23. PUBLIC HEARING USE OF FISCAL YEAR 1998/99 COPS FUNDING PER CITIZENS OPTION
FOR PUBLIC SAFETY FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES - The fiscal year 1998/99
State Budget was adopted appropriating $365,388.30 to the City's Police Department as a result of
Assembly Bill 3229, Bndte. This Bill allocates State money to police departments for purposes stipulated
by the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Program. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions.
(Chief of Police)
A. RESOLUTION 19320 ACCEPTING $365,388.30 FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FROM
THE STATE BUDGET TO PAY FOR POLICE PERSONNEL ($191,417) AND RELATED
EQUIPMENT ($174,971.30)
B. RESOLUTION 19321 AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO UTILIZE (REPROGRAM)
SAVINGS RESULTING FROM THE COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOR
ADDITIONAL UNSPECIFIED SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
24. PUBLIC HEARING OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD NAME CHANGE . On March 26, 1996, the
Redevelopment Agency requested that staff investigate a proposal suhmitted hy the Auto Park dealers to
change the name of Otay Valley Road to Auto Park Drive (or something similar) from 1-805 east. Staff
studied a number of issues associatt:d with this requt:st and devdoped several alternative solutions. Staff
recommends an incremental solution renaming only a st:gment of Otay Valley Road !;':ast of 1-805 to
Brandywine Avenue until further development occurs to the east of this aft;~a. The Planning Commission
recommended a more tar œaching solution. Staff recommt:nds approval of the resolution. (Director of
Community Development and Director of Planning and Building) Continued from the meetin" of
Novemher 24. 1998.
RESOLUTION 19268 CHANGING THE NAME OF THE SEGMENT OF OTA Y V ALLEY ROAD
FROM 1-805 TO BRANDYWINE A VENUE TO OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD-AUTO PARK DRIVE
25. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTION OF THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE I AND 5 PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE REPORT AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE I AND 5
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE - The developers of Otay Ranch SPA One
are required to fund the fair share of constmcting three pedestrian hridges within Villages 1 and 5. On
May 14, 1998, both the McMillin Company and the Otay Ranch Company requested that a Development
Impact Fee he created to spread the cost of these facilities over those areas benefitting from the proposed
bridges. Staff recommends that Council place the ordinance on tirst reading and approve the resolution.
(Director of Public Works) Continued from the meetin2 of December 8. 1998.
A. ORDINANCE 2767 ESTABLISHING THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE I AND 5 PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
IMPROVEMENTS AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS (Iirst readin,,)
B. RESOLUTION 19293 ADOPTING THE CITY'S PEDESTRIAN BRmGE DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE REPORT
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been fonva1'(led to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions, and/or Committees.
Nooe suhmitteJ.
Agenda -7- December 15, 1998
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be consUlered indivUlually 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 the meeting.
26.A. RESOLUTION 19300 AMENDING THE CITY'S STATEMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES
REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS - On
November 24, 1998, Council held the public hearing for the formation of Community Facilities District
Number 97-3. The district will fund the construction of hack hone infrastructure within the McMillin Olay
Ranch SPA I project. Council action will certify the results of a special election where the qualified
electors of the District were asked whether the levy of this special tax should he authorized. In addition,
Council will be considering an amendment to the current Community Facilities District Policy which
requires that a project he fully completed and accepted hy the City prior to acquisition. The amended
policy will allow for the aC<. uisition of complete discrete components of a project. Said amende<.l policy
is incorporated in the proposed amendment to the Acquisition/Financing Agreement which estahlishes the
procedure for aClfuiring the improvements from the developer. Staff recommends Council approve the
resolutions and place the ordinance on first ft~ading. (Director of Puhlic Works) Cuntinued from the
meetin" uf December 8. 1998.
B. RESOLUTION 19301 APPROVING THE FORM OF AN ACQUISITION/FINANCING
AGREEMENT PERTAINING TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NUMBER 97-3
(MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH SPA ONE)
C. RESOLUTION 19302 ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NUMBER 97-3 (MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH SPA ONE)
DECLARING THE RESULTS OF A SPECIAL ELECTION IN SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT
D. ORDINANCE 2768 ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NUMBER 97-3 (MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH SPA ONE)
AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT (first readin2)
27. REPORT CONSIDERATION TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE A KIOSK
SIGN PROGRAM - The Planning and Building Department is in the process of drafting an ordinance for
Council review which would amend the Municipal Code to allow the estahlishment of an off-site real estate
directional Kiosk Sign Program to provide directions to master planned communities on th~ east side of
Interstate 805. The propose<.l program will allow the City to ~nter into an agreement for the installation,
maintenance, and enforcement of off-site real estate directional signs located within the Pllhlic right-of-way
in the eastern area of the City. Staff recommends COllnci I: (I) Direct staff to prepare an ordinance
establishing a Kiosk Sign Program for consideration hy the Planning Commission and Council; (2) Direct
staff to process a Request for Proposals and select an administrator for the Kiosk Sign Program; and (3)
Approve in concept the dratì Kiosk Sign Plan with the understanding that it will he tïne tuned by the
Director of Planning and Building in tìnal negotiations with the proposed administrator. (Director of
Planning and Building) Continued frum the meetin" of December 8. 1998.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discllss 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.
Agenda -8- December 15, 1998
OTHER BUSINESS
28. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTlS)
A. Scheduling of meetings.
29. MAYOR'S REPORTlS)
A. Committee appointments.
30. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the regular City Council meeting on January 5, 1999
at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: ~
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Proclamation: Recognizing Henry's Marketplace for their donation
to the Norman Park Senior Center
SUBMITTED BY: Library and Recreation Directo
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~Q..- ~ (4I5ths Vote: Yes _ No 1U
~
Henry's Marketplace has donated 3% of one day's Grand Opening sales to the Norman Park Senior
Center. As a result, Norman Park Center received a check for $872.10 which was used to
purchase blackout shades for two rooms in the Senior Center. The shades will allow Senior Center
participants to enjoy film and video programs, or to run programs simultaneously in different rooms.
The City wishes to thank Henry's Marketplace for their generosity. A representative of Henry's will
be present at the Council meeting to accept the Proclamation.
[h:\home\parksrec\a 113\henrys.prc] i/c~/
. ---- ------ - ----- ----_._.._-~._---
December 10, 1998
TO: Th, Hono"bl, Moy", =d City Council ~
FROM: David D. Rowlands, Jr., City Manage~~
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting of December 15, 1998 ------
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting of Tuesday, December 15, 1998. Comments regarding the Written
Communications are as follows:
5a. 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 12/8/98, 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
~M~
=~_:
....::...,.¡¡;:~~
-:....-~~
CllY OF
CHUIA VISTA
OFFICE OFTHE CITY ATTORNEY
Date: December 9, 1998
To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: John M. Kaheny, City Attorney ~~
Re: Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meeting of 12/8/98
The City council met in Closed Session on 12/8/98 to discuss:
Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9:
Gillespie v. City of Chula Vista.
Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957.6: POA 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
H:\home\lorraine\lt\clossess.no
-.5/9-- )
276 FOURTH AVENUE· CHULA VISTA· CALIFORNIA 91910. (619) 691-5037. FAX (619) 409-5823
%- Po.t.Con.~merRecycl&dF>.p.'
.-.--...----- ........- ----....--"------.-..-." -"".,-- ---"-" ...-.-..........---.....-.. ..-.-- - .- _..._--_.__._-_..-..,---~-----_._..._.,...---
ITEM NUMBER: ?
RESOLUTION NUMBER:
ORDINANCE NUMBER: ~7b '1
OTHER:
CONTRACT:
CONTRACT/RESOLUTION DATE:
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE WAS CONTINUED FROM
(DATE): ·~6~. 15 I 9'78
AGENDA PACKET WAS SCANNED ON (DATE):
THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO (DATE): fA/V 026 /999
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION (TITLE OF CONTRACT, ORDINANCE, RESOLUTION, ETC):
O~bIAl;9NCZfÇ "fEV IS GLJ
FIRST ~é¡::¡'¡)//V c;;:.. / - 26· 99
SGeo/Ú D Æt!9f (J//V G- /)'/1/ ¡) /T{JCJPtIO N .,;('-5-99
6-,tJ
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: Þ
Meeting Date: 12!L5}98
ITEM TITLE: Ordinance c2?¿ j amending Chapter 2.52.040 of the Municipal Code
to modify the definition of "contributions" to allow for collection of
additional funds to retire a debt incurred in a declaratory relief action or any
action to enforce perceived rights under the Elections Code or the Municipal
Code.
SUBMITTED BY: City Attorn~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_1U
During the most recent City Council election a candidate incurred substantial legal fees in an effort
to enforce rights under the Election Code. The current City ordinance exempts from the definition
of "contributions" donations made to a candidate or councilmember to assist in paying legal fees
owed as a result of defending a criminal or administrative prosecution. The proposed amendment
to the ordinance would make the legal defense fund exception more equitable by excluding rrom the
definition donations made to assist in retiring legal fees incurred securing a right under the Election
or Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council amend the ordinance to make the legal defense fund exception within the
definition of "contributions" more equitable by including fund-raising to retire debt associated with
prosecution of a civil action to ensure rights under the EJection Code or Municipal Code.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
None. The Council may chose, as an alternative to introduction ofthe attached ordinance, to refer
the proposal to the Board of Ethics for review. The Board of Ethics has reviewed and made
recommendations with regard to the Campaign Contributions Ordinance in the past. The next
meeting of the Board of Ethics has not been scheduled.
DISCUSSION:
The Campaign Contribution Ordinance is contained within Chapter 2.52 ofthe Municipal Code. The
tenn "contributions" for the purposes ofthat Chapter is contained in section 2.52.040(E). Originally,
the Campaign Contribution Ordinance defined the tenn "contribution" as follows:
6 ; I 11-
r........
"Contributions" are defined in a manner identical with the definition found in
Government Code section 82015 and any related provisions in the California
Administrative Code.
This was amended at the January J5, 199J, Council meeting to address an ambiguity regarding
donations to a candidate or councilmember to retire the debt incurred in defense of a criminal or
administrative prosecution. This created a legal defense fund exception to the definition of
contribution. At that time, it was felt a legal defense fund was not intended to be included within
the definition of "contributions' and thus, subject to the $250 limitation contained in section
2.52.050. The current definition of "contributions", incorporating the legal defense fund for criminal
and administrative prosecutions, reads as follows"
"Contributions" are defined in a manner identical with the definition found in
Government Code section 82015 and any related provisions in the California
Administrative Code, except that, notwithstanding anything contained herein to the
contrary, a payment by a third party to, or for the benefit of, a councilperson made
and used for the express purpose of offsetting costs already incurred by that
councilperson in the defense of a criminal or administrative prosecutorial action
against said councilperson, and not made or used for the purpose of aiding in the
election of said councilperson, and not made within (before or after) 100 days of an
election in which the councilperson is competing for a seat or office, shall not be
deemed to be a contribution for the purposes of this chapter.
Proposed Amendment
The proposed amendment will make the definition of "contributions" more equitabJe. Currently,
only legal fees incurred as a result of a criminal or administrative action are included within the legal
defense fund exception. However, there are times when a candidate or councilmember must pursue
an action to enforce a right guaranteed under either the Election Code or the Municipal Code. To
pursue a civil action to enforce a right under one of these laws can result in substantial legal fees
which, when combined with the City's $250 contribution limitation, may prevent candidates from
being able to ensure their rights under the law. The intent behind the definition of contribution is
to ensure a level playing field among candidates in City elections.
To avoid the misuse offunds the ordinance has been written to ensure the funds are only collected
after the debt has been incurred. This prevents a candidate from raising funds for a potential legal
action that never materializes. The constraint of payment "not made within 100 days of an election"
is included as an additional safeguard to ensure the payment is unrelated to the councilmember's bid
for public office and it is not used for traditional campaign expenses. Finally, the "made and used"
language is added to assure the legal defense fund payment, despite the purpose and intent of the
donating party, is not diverted to aid in an election bid.
Although the payment will not be subj ect to the City campaign contribution ordinance, it would still
subject the Councilmember to the Fair Political Practices Commission's rules relating to the conflict
of financial interest and disclosure of financial sources of income. Payments relieving a public
¿ rd---
official of an expense are considered a source of income. Also, there are other regulatory schemes
requiring abstention for conflicts of interest which may prohibit abuse ofthis exception.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None to the City.
Attachment:
1. Draft Amended Ordinance
t-Jß-1
ORDINANCE NO. J.7¿ 9
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION
2.52.040 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE
DEFINITION OF "CONTRIBUTIONS" TO ALLOW FOR COLLECTION OF
ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO RETIRE A DEBT INCURRED IN A
DECLARATORY RELIEF ACTION OR ANY ACTION TO ENFORCE
PERCEIVED RIGHTS UNDER THE ELECTIONS CODE OR THE
MUNICJPAL CODE.
The City Council of the City ofChula Vista does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 2.52.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 2.52.040 Definitions.
A. "Agent". For purposes of this section, a person is the "agent" of the party to, or a
participant in, a proceeding involving a license, permit or other entitlement for use
only ifhe or she represents that person in connection with the proceeding
involving the license, permit or other entitlement for use. If an individual acting
as an agent is also acting as an employee or member of a law, architectural,
engineering or consulting firm, or a similar entity or corporation, both the entity
or corporation and the individual are "agents".
B. "Candidate" means a candidate for any city elective office, the candidate's
campaign committee, commitlee(s) controlled by the candidate, agents of the
candidate, and any person acting at the behest of a candidate. An incumbent shall
be presumed to be a candidate unless he or she files a written statement with the
city clerk stating that he or she does not intend to be a candidate for the next
election for his or her office.
C. "City Campaign Statement" means the statement which, to the extent practicable,
shall be similar to or consolidated with that required by state law.
D. "City Elective Office" means the offices held by members of the city council and
any other separately elected offices of the city.
E. "Contributions" are defined in a manner identical with the definition found in
Government Code section 82015 and any related provisions in the California
Aciministrttti iE C"cic Code of Regulations, except that, notwithstanding anything
contained herein to the contrary, a payment by a third party to, or for the benefit
of, a councilperson made and used for the express purpose of offsetting costs
I
~-~S
already incurred by that councilperson in the defense of a criminal or
administrative prosecutorial action against said councilperson, or for the purpose
of offsetting costs already incurred by Councilperson in a declaratory relief action
or in enforcement of any perceived rights under the Elections Code or Municipal
Code during the period of the campaign, and not made or used for the purpose of
aiding in the election of said councilperson, and not made within (before or after)
100 days of an election in which the councilperson is competing for a seat or
office, shall not be deemed to be a contribution for the purposes of this chapter.
F. "Intermediary" means a person who delivers to a candidate or committee a
contribution rrom another person unless such contribution is rrom the person's
employer, immediate family or an association to which the person belongs. No
person who is the treasurer of the committee to which the contribution is made or
is the candidate who controls the committee to which the contribution is made
shall be an intermediary for such contribution.
G. "Organization" means a proprietorship, labor union, firm, partnership, joinl
venture, syndicate, business, trust, company, corporation, association, or
committee, including a political action committee.
H. "Person" means a natural individual.
I. "Political Purpose" means an action by a candidate for the purpose of influencing,
or attempting to influence, either directly or indirectly, the actions of the voters
for or against the election of that candidate or any other candidate for the same
city elective office.
J. "State Campaign Statement" means an itemized report which is prepared on a
form prescribed by the Fair Political Practices Commission and which provides
the information required by Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Government Code.
K. "Party" means any person, who files an application for or is the subject or, a
proceeding involving a license, permit or other entitlement for use.
L. "Participant" means any person who is not a party, but who actively supports or
opposes a particular decision in a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other
entitlement of ruse, and who has a financial interest in the decision as described in
Article I (Commencing with Section 87100) of Chapter 7. A person actively
supports or opposes a particular decision in a proceeding ifhe or she lobbies in
person, the officers or employees of the city, testifies in person before the city, or
otherwise acts to influence officers of the city.
M. "Regulated Independent Expenditure Committee" means an independent
2
i~?
expenditure committee as defined in Government Code Sections 82013 and 82031
which supports or opposes in whole or in part a candidate for city elective office if
contributions are made to said committee with the intent that they, or a
comparable amount of funds otherwise owned by, or under the control of, the
committee be used to support or oppose a particular candidate for a city elective
office.
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day
from and after its adoption.
Presented and Approved as to form by
i¿
. Kaheny, City Attorney
3
t-?
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM:~
MEETING DATE: December 15, 1998
ITEM TITLE: Resolution No. I1JtJJj' : Approving Compensation
Benefits for the City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: City AttorneY~
4/5ths Vote: ( ) Yes (X) No
In accordance with the provisions of Attachment A of Resolution No.
18909, the Mayor and City Council have reviewed the performance of
the City Manager, David D. Rowlands, Jr. , and have proposed that an
adjustment be made in his salary.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving the compensation
benefits for the City Manager.
7~/
RESOLUTION NO. /C/,Jotf
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING COMPENSATION BENEFITS
FOR THE CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council have reviewed the
performance of the City Manager in accordance with the provisions
of Attachment A of Resolution No. 18909. NOT SCANNED
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista that the following adjustment be made in the
salary for the City Manager:
ANNUAL SALARY EFFECTIVE 12/16/98
$145,000
Presented and Approved as to form by
Atto
?~~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM: ~
MEETING DATE: December 15, 1998
,,-/
ITEM TITLE: Resolution No. J93tJ!? : Appointing Susan
Bigelow as City Clerk
SUBMITTED BY: City Attorney~
4/5ths Vote: ( ) Yes (X) No
The City Council directed that a resolution be prepared setting
forth those terms and conditions for the initial employment of the
new City Clerk, Susan Bigelow, as agreed upon between the City
Clerk and the City Council.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving the terms and
conditions of the employment agreement between
the City and Susan Bigelow.
H:\home\lorraine\al13\clerk
~~)
RESOLUTION NO. ) 93cJ ~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPOINTING SUSAN BIGELOW AS CITY
CLERK
WHEREAS, the city Council of the city of Chula Vista in
Closed Session on November 16, 1998 voted to extend an offer to
Susan Bigelow to be the City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista by a
vote of 5-0; and
WHEREAS, as reported in Closed Session on November 17,
1998, Susan Bigelow has accepted such offer; and
WHEREAS, the Council established the initial date of Ms.
Bigelow's assumption of office on December 11, 1998; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary and appropriate to establish the
terms and conditions in connection therewith.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista, that pursuant to Section 500 of the Charter of
the City of Chula Vista, Susan Bigelow be and she is hereby elected
as City Clerk of the city of Chula Vista, pursuant to the terms and
conditions set forth in Attachment A hereto, to commence her
employment on December 11, 1998.
Presented and Approved as to form by
/'
C----!~ ~ Þ ¡é?~.t? _ 7
John M. Kaheny, éity Attorney ~
H:\home\lorrdine\rs\appoint.clk
8'--2
ATTACHMENT A
EXECUTIVE PAY/BENEFIT PACKAGE FOR
CITY CLERK SUSAN BIGELOW
Initial Salarv: $70,000
3% increase effective January 1, 1999
4% increase effective January 1, 2000
5% increase effective January 1, 2001
Retirement:
City will pay employee portion for 2%@55.
Flexible Benefit Plan:
$8,500 (includes semi-annual cash back option) (pro-rated first
year)
Life Insurance:
$50,000 Policy
Lonq Term Disabilitv:
City pays premium for policy
Severance:
For other than gross misconduct: six (6) months pay plus six (6)
months Cobra payments for health insurance.
Administrative Leave:
Eighty (80) hours per year (pro-rated first year) .
Hard Holidavs:
City Offices Closed: Nine (9) holidays as follows:
Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, day after
Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's Day, Martin Luther
King, Jr.'s Birthday and Memorial Day
Floatinq Holidavs:
Accrued in a leave bank: 32 hours per year (pro-rated first year) .
Vacation:
Fifteen (15) days accrued per year cumulative to forty-five (45)
days. Initial vacation balance of 15 days.
?š~3
vacation Sellback:
Effective July 1, 1999, Executive Managers may sell back two (2 )
weeks accrued vacation leave each year.
sick Leave:
Twelve (12) days accrued per year with unlimited accrual (pro-rated
first year) .
Non-Contributory Deferred Compensation Plan.
Auto Allowance:
$285 per month auto allowance.
y~1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ItemL
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /9 YrJ t Approving the Fire Station No. 4 Third Deferral
Agreement.
SUBMITTED BY: F;", Ch;e¡ 01'- t!J!
Deputy City Manager
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ ~ p:
(4I5ths Vote: Yes_No.x)
This is the third (and anticipated as the final) deferral agreement with regard to the construction
of the new Fire Station #4 in Rancho del Rey off of East 'H' Street. The City's current agreement
with Rancho Del Rey Investors, L.P. (the McMillin Companies) to extend the deferral for the
advancement of funds for relocating Fire Station No.4 was predicated upon the City adopting an
updated Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Program (PFDIF) by December 15,1998. As
the PFDIF will not be presented to the City Council for action until after January 1, 1999, an
extended deferral agreement is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the Resolution extending the final date for which
advance funds from McMillin would be due if not otherwise paid pursuant to the terms Df the Third
Deferral Agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
(Note: The background and discussion information which follows is virtually identical to that which
the Council approved on June 23, 1998 with the Second Deferral Agreement.)
The purpose of this item is tD consider deferring again the obligation of the Rancho del Rey
Investors, L.P. (the McMillin Companies) to advance funds for relocating Fire Station No.4 from
the current site on Otay Lakes Road to the approved site in Rancho del Rey on Paseo Ranchero
north of East "H" Street. The original request was to defer the payment until the adoption of the
revised Public Facilities DIF or July 1, 1998, whichever occurs first. The Second Deferral
Agreement extended that period until December 15, 1998.
Background
In July of 1995, the City and McMillin agreed upon terms and conditions including financing for a
new relocated fire station in Rancho del Rey (Attachment 'A'). The terms of this agreement
("Agreement") were memorialized as condition #53.5 in the project's final map supplemental
subdivision improvement agreement, and included a provision for McMillin to deposit with the City
on February 1,1998, an advance of $598,600 adjusted upward for inflation from February, 1996.
The funds are for the construction of a 4,000 s~uare-foot 2-bay fire station including furnishings.
-/
...-._-- ,--~~-_._._-_.-
Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
Page: 2
With, however, the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Program (PFDIF) and the 1989 Fire
Station Master Plan being updated, the City approved a request by McMillin to defer the payment
of the advance funds until such time as the update to the PFDIF was complete, or until July 1,
1998, whichever occurred first.
PFDIF UDdate and the Fire Station Master Plan
The revised Fire Station Master Plan has been completed. The technical work for the PFDIF
Update has also been completed; final draft printing and an extensive public review process will
begin around the first of the year. With the annexation of the Otay Ranch Western Parcel and a
revised fire station system, the Fire Station Master Plan suggests that fire station needs be
addressed differently and more globally through the Fire DIF fee than they have in the past. This
approach, when fully laid out and presented to Council with the Master Plan, could affect both the
amount of the obligation McMillin (as well as other developers) have for providing fire protection
facilities and the timing of those obligations. Although the revised Fire Station Master Plan has
been completed, it is desirable to have it reviewed as part of the overall PFDIF update. In that way,
the new fee for fire-related facilities and equipment can be properly assessed within the context
of the overall citywide fee for public facilities.
For the above-stated reason, it made sense to defer McMillin's February 1,1998 obligation (as
long as it had no negative impact on City fire operations, capital improvement planning, or the
threshold standard) until the City Council received all the necessary information and made a final
policy decision on both the Fire DIF fee and Master Plan updates. That information was anticipated
to be broughtforward to Council by December 15, 1998. However, due to a number of unforeseen
factors, the update should be ready for Council action sometime early in the new calendar year.
Consequently, Staff is recommending that the payment be deferred again to permit sufficient time
to finalize the PFDIF with the stakeholders, and bring it forward for Council review and subsequent
implementation, as appropriate.
StatuslTimina for the Construction of the New Fire Station No.41 and Trainina Classroom
The prDject architect is in the process of completing the design for the fire station and training
classroom. The updated project schedule estimates the construction of the fire station to begin in
April/May '99; the advance funds from McMillin will need to be available to the City shortly
thereafter. The current schedule for the construction of the new Fire Station #4 is such that the
deferral is of no consequence.
Terms Under a Revised Deferral Agreement
(Note: the terms below are the same as those previously approved with the Second Deferral)
The following terms have been agreed to by McMillin to make payments against their obligations
with reference to circumstances where the revised PFDIF is adopted, and those where it may not
be ultimately adopted.
1. On or before December 31, 1998, Developer shall pay to City a lump-sum payment at the
rate of $141 per unit for all building permits which will have been issued as of December 31 ,
1998 for which no Fire Development Impact Fees (Fire DIF) have yet been paid.
~--2
~.
.. -_....".__._-----~--_._-_._,._.._- -.-,--.------.
Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
Page: 3
2. Developer shall make the following payments to the City if the revised PFDIF is adopted by
the City and if such adoption occurs on or befDre June 1, 1999:
2a. Lump-sum payment at the revised Fire DIF rate for all remaining units in Rancho del
Rey SPA III for which permits have been issued and for thDse which will be issued
pursuant to the Rancho del Rey SPA III Plan and for which no Fire DIF has been
paid subsequent to December 31, 1998. Payment shall be made within 15 calendar
days of the effective date of the revised PFDIF. Developer acknowledges that this
will include a combination of permitted as well as future-permitted units; and
2b. The non-reimbursable portiDn of the Agreement ($125,000) shall be paid on or
before December 31, 1998 with interest accruing from February 1, 1998 at the City's
Pooled Investment Rate, adjusted monthly. This amount has been calculated at
$132,049.
3. In the alternative, should the revised PFDIF not be adopted by the City on Dr before June
1, 1999, City and Developer agree that the final date for payment of the Advance Amount
as referred to in the Deferral Agreement dated February 17,1998 ($647,202 plus interest
from February 1, 1998 at the City's Pooled Investment Rate, adjusted monthly), shall be
deferred to June 4, 1999, at which date it shall be paid in full. Those funds paid pursuant
to paragraph 1 of this Third Deferral Agreement shall be credited against the Advance
Amount due on June 4, 1999.
4. Developer's existing performance bond with the City shall remain in effect until Developer's
obligations as set forth in this Third Deferral Agreement have been satisfied.
FISCAL IMPACT:
In accordance with the terms of the Second Deferral Agreement, McMillin paid the City $79,383
on July 14, 1998 for 563 units which had been permitted and for which Fire DIF fees had not been
paid as of July 1, 1998. Under this Third Deferral Agreement, McMillin will also pay, no later than
December 31, 1998, an estimated $35,532 for 252 units which have been permitted since July 1,
1998 (through December 31, 1998) and for which Fire DIF fees have not been paid. In addition,
McMillin will pay, by December 31, 1998, $132,049 which is the non-reimbursable portion of the
total owed. In total then, the City will have received $246,964 (estimated) by the end of this
calendar year. The fees for any permits issued after December 31, 1998 will be received within
15 days from the adoption of the PFDIF Update, and will be calculated at the new rate.
This deferral does not remove the previously agreed-upon commitment, nor the amount Df the
obligation, but allows for its reconsideration at a later date. Additionally, the time frame of the
deferral will not affect the ability of the City to proceed with the completion of the fire station design,
preparation of bid documents, or the construction schedule for Fire Station No.4.
~<J
^ ---,._------------~.......,"._._--- --'- -- ---"-------
RESOLUTION NO. /9 ]tl&
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRE STATION NO. 4
THIRD DEFERRAL AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City's current agreement with Rancho Del Rey
Investors, L.P. (the McMillin Companies) to extend the deferral for
the advancement of funds for relocating Fire Station No. 4 was
predicated upon the city adopting an updated Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Program (PRDIF) by December 15, 1998; and
WHEREAS, as the PFDIF will not be presented to the city
Council for action until after January 1, 1999, an extended
deferral agreement is necessary.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Fire station No. 4
Third Deferral Agreement, a copy of which shall be kept on file in
the office of the City Clerk as Document No.Ct:) 9S... .:z.o¥7
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby
authorized and directed to execute said Agreement for and on behalf
of the city of Chula Vista.
Presented by Approved as to form by
ð1 U)7\c~
James B. Hardiman, Fire Chief J~. Kaheny, City ttorney
H:\home\lorraine\rs\firedef.4th
9~f
FIRE STATION NO.4
THIRD DEFERRAL AGREEMENT ~
This Third Deferral Agreement is made this day of December, 1998, by
and between the City of Chula Vista, California and Rancho del Rey Investors, L.P.,
with reference to the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute a part of this
agreement:
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista ("City") and Rancho del Rey Investors, L.P.
("Developer") entered into a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
("Agreement") on July 5, 1995, whereby Developer agreed to advance funding for Fire
Station NO.4 by a certain date; and
WHEREAS, City and Developer entered into a deferral agreement ("Deferral
Agreement") on February 17, 1998, whereby the Agreement was modified to defer the
advance funding payment for Fire Station No. 4 until July 1, 1998; and
WHEREAS, City and Developer entered into a deferral agreement ("Second
Deferral Agreement") on June 23, 1998, whereby the Agreement was modified to defer
the advance funding payment for Fire Station No. 4 until December 15, 1998; and
WHEREAS, on July 15, 1998, in accordance with the terms of the Second
Deferral Agreement, Developer paid to City the sum of $79,383 for Fire Development
Impact Fees for 563 units permitted as of July 1, 1998 in Rancho del Rey SPA III; and
WHEREAS, the parties now wish to extend the deferral period"as the revised
Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Program (PFDIF) will not be presented to the
City Council for action until after January 1, 1999; and
WHEREAS, Developer acknowledges that the revised PFDIF mayor may not be
adopted by City.
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Developer agree as follows:
1. On or before December 31, 1998, Developer_ shall pay to City a lump-sum
payment at the rate of $141 per unit for all building permits which will
have been issued as of December 31, 1998, for which no Fire
Development Impact Fees (Fire DIF) have yet been paid.
2. Developer shall make the following payments to the City if the revised
PFDIF is adopted by the City and if such adoption occurs on or before
June 1, 1999:
1
9-5
2a. Lump-sum payment at the revised Fire DIF rate for all remaining
units in Rancho del Rey SPA III for which permits have been .
issued and for those which will be issued pursuant to the Rancho
del Rey SPA III Plan and for which no Fire DIF has been paid
subsequent to December 31, 1998. Payment shall be made within _
15 calendar days of the effective date of the revised PFDIF.
Developer acknowledges that this will include a combination of
permitted as well as future-permitted units; and
2b. The non-reimbursable portion of the Agreement ($125,000) shall
be paid on or before December 31, 1998 with interest accruing
from February 1, 1998 at the City's Pooled Investment Rate,
adjusted monthly.
3. In the alternative, should the revised PFDIF not be adopted by the City on
or before June 1, 1999, City and Developer agree that the final date for
payment of the Advance Amount as referred to in the Deferral Agreement
dated February 17, 1998 ($647,202 plus interest from February 1, 1998 at
the City's Pooled Investment Rate, adjusted monthly), shall be deferred to
June 4, 1999, at which date it shall be paid in full. Those funds paid
pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Third Deferral Agreement shall be
credited against the Advance Amount due on June 4, 1999.
4. Developer's existing performance bond with the City shall remain in effect
until Developer's obligations as set forth in this Third Deferral Agreement
have been satisfied.
-
2
9~?
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
-
FIRE STATION NO.4
THIRD DEFERRAL AGREEMENT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Third Deferral
Agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RANCHO DEL REY INVESTORS, L.P.
A California limjted partnership
By: By: McMillin Project Services, Inc.
Shirley Horton, Mayor a California Corporatjon,
As Attorney-In-Fact under
Durable Power of Attorney
Attest:
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
Approved as to form: By:
Name: ~t::.'..:~
ði4· CQfl~ Title: Vlc..:.
JOh~aheny
City Attorney
-
3
9~ 7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ¡¿J
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /9 J ¿? lccepting and Amending the Salary and Benefits
Increase for the Deputy Director of the California Border Alliance
Group (CBAG) and Appropriation of Funds from Unanticipated Grant
Revenue 'ì
SUBMITTED BY: Ch;efOfPOI;~ ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag r \
~ ~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: YeslL No_)
On September 5, 1995, City Council approved the City of Chula Vista to act as the "fiscal
agent" for the California Border Alliance Group (CBAG) and act as conduit to obtain civilian
support personnel and to acquire related supplies for three employees. On July 16,1996,
City Council approved adding two additional CBAG support personnel. This action
provides for the executive level position tied to the federal pay schedule to receive a step
increase within the prescribed federal general schedule level 14, step 6 for the Deputy
Director position to be effective January, 1999, a net increase of 3.6%. The proposed
resolution would enable: Chula Vista to pay federal government pay increases effective
January 1, 1999, to the executive position for the CBAG Deputy Director. These
amendments would represent pass through costs from the City of Chula Vista to these
employees. The funding is from the San Diego Police Department Master Fiscal Agent
MOU.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the proposed resolution. The staff
recommendation will: 1) provide the City to be reimbursed for all expenses associated with
the salary and benefits increases for the CBAG executive position including a nominal
processing cost reimbursement; 2) appropriate funds from unanticipated grant revenue and
amend the Police Department's grant fund budget to support this action (Attachment A).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The United States Attorney's Office - Southern District of California (USA), a division ofthe
United States Department of Justice (DOJ), had received federal funding to implement the
California Border Alliance Group (CBAG). The mission of CBAG is to develop multi-
jurisdictional, cooperative strategies to: a) gather intelligence on drug trafficking; b)
investigate drug trafficking activities; c) arrest persons involved with illegal drug trafficking;
d) to successfully prosecute those arrested. CBAG is funded through a "High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Area" (HIDTA) funding provision contained in the Federal Appropriations
Act for each federal year from 1988 through 1998; the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988; and,
Jf)~1
Page 2, Item _
Meeting Date:
the National Drug Control Strategy of 1990. San Diego and Imperial Counties have been
designated a HIDTA due to the volume of illegal narcotics entering the United States
through the international border.
The City of San Diego, through the Police Department, is the Master Fiscal Agent for all
participating state and local law enforcement agencies. The San Diego Police Department
receives an annual allocation of HIDTA funding each federal fiscal year. Participating
agencies make individual claims to obtain reimbursement for expenses related to their
CBAG assigned personnel.
The resolution proposed by staff will amend the FY 98-99 budget to reflect reimbursement
of expenses associated with the federal salary increase. The total reimbursement to the
City will include a processing fee payable to the City that will be calculated at 2% of total
funds passed through the City to CBAG. Approval of this resolution will reflect the actual
federal allocation for CBAG staff in the Police Department's FY 98-99 budget.
FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of the staff recommendation will result in the total appropriation
of $2,292. This figure represents the total salary increase and 2% processing fee applied
to the Deputy Director's position for the remaining six months of this fiscal year. Based on
anticipated expenses, net fiscal impact is +$45 in new revenue to the City. The Deputy
Director of CBAG is not eligible for the wage increase to be received by City employees in
January.
Attachment A:
J:IUSRIADMfNlScslA 113SICBAGSAL WPD
)jJ¿J-
RESOLUTION 195¿J 7
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VIST AACCEPTING AND AMENDING THE SALARY
AND BENEFITS INCREASE FOR THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OF THE CALIFORNIA BORDER ALLIANCE GROUP
(CBAG), AND APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FROM
UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE
WHEREAS, on September 5, 1995, the City Council approved the City of
Chula Vista to act as the "fiscal agent" for the California Border Alliance Group and act as
conduit to obtain civilian support personnel and to acquire related supplies for three
employees; and,
WHEREAS, on July 16, 1996, the City Council approved adding two
additional CBAG support personnel; and,
WHEREAS, this action provides for the executive level position tied to the
federal pay schedule to receive a step increase within the prescribed federal General
Schedule pay by level and level 14, step 5 for the Deputy Director position to be effective
January, 1999; and,
WHEREAS, staff recommends that Chula Vista pay federal government pay
increases effective January 1, 1999 to the two executive positions for the Deputy Director,
which would represent pass through costs from the City of Chula Vista to this employee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby accept and amend the salary and benefits increases as set forth in
Exhibit "A" forthe Deputy Director (level 14, step 6) of the California Border Alliance Group
(CBAG) effective January 1, 1999.
BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED thatthe City Council does hereby appropriate
$2,292 as set forth in Attachment "A" from the unanticipated grant revenue and amend the
Police Department's grant fund budget to support these actions.
Presented by: Approved as to form by:
Richard P. Emerson A;(~
Chief of Police
H :\SHARED\CLERK\CBAGSAL.WPD
/tJ/;3
Attachment "A"
CBAG Executive Salary & Benefits Increase
OBJECT COST-
ACCOUNT 6 MONTHS PROPOSED USE
5101 $1,735 CBAG Deputy Director salary
increase
5141 260 Increase in retirement contribution
5143 252 Increase in medicare contribution
Subtotal $2,247 Increase in total compensation
45 2% processing fee on increase
Total Cost Increase $2,292
/tl ~ 1"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J/
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE. Resolution /9 J¿) ~uthoriZing an expenditure of
$400,000 from Capital Improvement Project (CIP)
ST123 for settlement of all claims arising out of
the matter of Granite Construction Company v. City
of Chula vista relating to the contract for the
improvement of otay Valley Road from I-80S to 1200'
East of Nirvana Avenue
SUBMITTED BY. Risk Manager
REVIEWED BY. city Manage¡;~ (4/5ths Vote. Yes__No~)
city Attorne ~~
Director of Public Works
This action will authorize funding for the settlement of all claims
related to the matter of Granite Construction Company v. city of
Chula vista (San Diego Superior Court Case No. 706901) arising out
of the contract and construction for the improvement of Otay Valley
Road from I-80S to 1200' East of Nirvana Avenue (CIP ST123) .
RECOMMENDATION. Council approve the resolution authorizing an
expenditure of $400,000 as a settlement with Granite Construction
Company for the improvement of Otay Valley Road (ST123) .
BOARD/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION. Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION. Pursuant to prior council authorization, a
settlement of the pending litigation by Granite Construction
Company was negotiated in the amount of $400,000.00. In exchange,
Granite Construction Company has agreed to a full and complete
release of any and all known and unknown claims against the City
which in any way arise out of its work on the otay Valley Road
Widening Project. All of Granite Construction Company's claims are
contractual or arose directly out the agreement and construction
related to the widening of Otay Valley Road. Therefore, it has been
deemed appropriate that funds from the contract for construction of
the improvement of Otay Valley Road from I-80S to 1200' East of
Nirvana Avenue be used to finance the settlement of claims.
Utilization of such funds will also facilitate in tracking
J/,')
expenditures for such contractual work.
FISCAL IMPACT: $400,000.00 will be paid from the available balance
of the Contract and Construction Fund (Capital Project STl23
Project Accounts) . Approximately $22,200 will be paid from
Transportation Sales Project funds, and $71,100 will be paid from
Otay Valley Road Redevelopment funds, with the remainder coming
from Assessment District No. 90-2 funds, which are the available
funding sources from the project.
c,\cbs\cvcity\bjm\otayvally.ags
//,-;2,
RESOLUTION NO. /93¿J7
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING AN EXPENDITURE OF
$400,000 FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(CIP) ST123 FOR SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS
ARISING OUT OF THE MATTER OF GRANITE
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RELATING TO THE CONTRACT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
OF OTAY VALLEY ROAD FROM I-80S TO 1200' EAST
OF NIRVANA AVENUE
WHEREAS, all claims arising out of the matter of Granite
Construction Company v. city of Chula Vista (San Diego Superior
Court Case No. 706901), arising out of the contract between Granite
Construction Company and the City of Chula vista relating to the
contract for the improvement Otay Valley Road from I-80S to 1200'
East of Nirvana Avenue in the City of Chula vista have been
settled; and
WHEREAS, claims arising out of the contract should be
paid from the Capital Project ST123 Project Accounts versus the
general funds; and
WHEREAS, utilization of such funds will also facilitate
tracking of expenditures.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby authorize an expenditure from
Capital Improvement Project (CIP) ST123 in the amount of
$400,000.00 for settlement of all claims arising out of the matter
of Granite Construction Company v. City of Chula Vista (San Diego
Superior Court Case No. 760901) relating to the contract for the
improvement of Otay Valley Road from I-80S to 1200' east of Nirvana
Avenue.
Presented by Approved as to form by
~ ~
Teri Enos, Risk Manager rney
c: \cbs\cvcity\reso\otayval1y. res
//~ :3
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: /..2.
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /93tJtj Accepting a donation of equipment and
services, in the amount of $31,000, from IBM Corporation and Charles
Schwab Foundation, through SeniorNet, to implement a SeniorNet Leaming
Center at the Chula Vista Norman Park Senior Center; and accepting a
donation of $2,000 in cash from IBM Corporation and Charles Schwab
Foundation, through SeniorNet; and amending the FY 98/99 budget and
appropriating $2,000 to the Library and Recreation Department budget for
related expenses; and appropriating $3,000 in unanticipated revenue from
class fees to the Library and Recreation Department bUdget for related
expenses; and authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to sign the
Memorandum of Understanding with the SeniorNet Leaming Center
SUBMITTED BY: ~;~:.~~~
REVIEWED BY: (4I5ths Vote: Yes Å No ~
rr
In October, 1998, staff at Norman Park Senior Center ascertained the availability of grant funding
from a non-profit organization entitled SeniorNet. SeniorNet is a nonprofit organization that provides
older adults education for, and access to, computers and the Intemet; to enhance their lives and
enable them to share their wisdom and knowledge with the world. They currently offer computer
classes for seniors at 141 Leaming Centers nationwide. Since 1986, SeniorNet has introduced over
100,000 people age 50 and older to computers.
Staff contacted SeniorNet and a site visitation was made by the organization, who was immediately
enchanted with the City of Chula Vista and the Norman Park Senior Center, as a possible location
for a SeniorNet Leaming Center. The SeniorNet organization submitted Chula Vista, as a proposed
site, to the IBM Corporation and the Charles Schwab Foundation, who are SeniorNet sponsors, and
the City was subsequently awarded a donation to implement a Leaming Center (Attachment "A").
This report describes SeniorNet, the role of IBM and Charles Schwab, and the SeniorNet Leaming
Center Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the Resolution accepting from the IBM
Corporation and the Charles Schwab Foundation, a donation (through SeniorNet); for the SeniorNet
Leaming Center at the Chula Vista Norman Park Senior Center, as follows:
1. An equipment donation of 5 computers, 2 printers and a color scanner, and various services
and software, for a value of $31,000; and
2. Amending the FY 98/99 budget and accepting and appropriating $5,000 to the Library and
Recreation Department budget (1781); based on a $2,000 donation from the IBM Corporation
[H:\home\parksrec\A 113\SeniorNe.8 13 - 12..02-98] 1
I,) ~/
Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
and the Charles Schwab Foundation; and $3,000 from unanticipated fee revenues from
classes; and
4. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to sign the Memorandum of Understanding with
the SeniorNet Learning Center.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: NIA
DISCUSSION: SeniorNet Learning Centers are established as partnerships among local volunteers,
community organizations, SeniorNet, and sponsors. SeniorNet provides the Centers with on-site
training for the volunteer coordinators and instructors, technical support, operations guides,
computer hardware and software, curriculum and course materials. SeniorNet classes are peer
taught by senior volunteers. The Director of Learning Centers, Mr. Joe Walton, has visited Chula
Vista and the Norman Park Senior Center, and is very enthusiastic about placing a Learning Center
here.
About SeniorNet
SeniorNet is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization of computer-using adults, age 50 and older.
SeniorNet has over 25,000 members; publishes a quarterly newsletter and a variety of instructional
materials; has over 140 Learning Centers throughout the U.S.; holds national and regional
conferences and collaborates in research on older adults and technology. SeniorNet operates
SeniorNet Online on America Online and on the World Wide Web.
SeniorNet grew out of a research project funded by the Markle Foundation and begun in 1986 to
determine if computers and telecommunications could enhance the lives of older adults.
SeniorNet is based in San Francisco, and is funded by membership dues, Le~rning Center fees, the
altruistic donations of individuals, and the generous sponsorship of many companies and
foundations.
Sponsors
SeniorNet has two sponsors for a Learning Center in Chula Vista - IBM Corporation and Charles
Schwab Foundation. IBM wants to expend their dollars dedicated for this sponsorship in the 1998
calendar year. IBM is the single largest sponsor for SeniorNet and has done 50 of the total 150 sites
that SeniorNet is affiliated with. The grant from IBM is part of their community support organization
which funds Elder Care and Child Care programs. IBM particularly wishes to invest in communities
where IBM retiree reside and this is the case in Chula Vista and the surrounding communities.
The Learning Center Facility
Learning Centers are located in places that are easily accessible by a population of seniors who
become members of a local SeniorNet Learning Center. The location should have ample parking.
A Leaming Center needs a specific place or room that is designated for SeniorNet use. The facility
[H:\home\par1olrec\A113\SeniorNe.a13 ·12-02-981 2
),J-?-
_.um'.___....
Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
need not be dedicated solely to SeniorNet, but it should be available for at least half a day, five times
a week, for SeniorNet classes and meetings.
A typical Leaming Center contains 5 to 10 IBM compatible personal computers with modem access,
at least two printers and a scanner. Since the space will serve as a classroom and wOrXshop, it
should lend itself to teaching situations. There should be sufficient security to protect the computer
equipment.
Basic computer classes offered include an introduction to computers, word processing,
spreadsheets, data bases and telecommunications. Advanced courses which may be offered
include desktop publishing, genealogy, personal financial management and tax preparation with a
computer.
Each Leaming Center offers open lab time where students can use computers to practice their skills
or to worx on individual projects.
Each Learning Center is managed primarily be senior volunteers, and classes are taught and
coached by volunteer instructors. SeniorNet has found that peer teaching is effective and rewarding
for the older adult instructors, as well as the students.
The Norman Part Senior Center has two spaces available to meet the Leaming Center criteria; both
are on the second floor of the Center, with elevator access.
City Responsibility as Site Location
1. Appoint a Volunteer Leaming Center coordinator(s) (preferably a senior); recruit volunteers
to help at the Leaming Center; and identify instructors
2. Provide a City staff liaison person to assist coordinator
3. Offer dasses at the Leaming Center that are based on, or cover the same subjects as, the
SeniorNet curriculum
4. Publicity
5. Provide brief Quarterly Reports
Benefits and Costs to Senior Participants in the Learning Center
All seniors participating in the dasses are required to become members of SeniorNet, at the current
membership fee of $35.00 for the first year and $25.00 per year thereafter (scholarships are
available from SeniorNet). Membership benefits to the participants include a subscription to
SeniorNet's quarterly newsletter, filled with computer news and reviews and member activities and
projects. It also indudes access to the computer classes which will be held at the Leaming Center
at Norman Part.
(H:\home\parkarec\A113\SeniOfNe.a13 - 12~2-98] 3
/2~5
Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15198
The minimum age for senior participation is age 50.
SeniorNet members range from novice to expert computer users. Members use their computers to
write letters and stories, desktop publish newsletters and books, manage their personal finances,
document their family histories, and communicate with friends and family online.
SeniorNet members leam and teach others to use computers and communications technologies to
accomplish a variety of tasks. They leam to desktop publish anything from a newsletter to an
autobiography, manage personal and financial records, communicate with others across the country
and the world and serve their communities.
Classes will be offered to seniors for a fee in order to cover Learning Center costs (it is estimated
at this time that classes will be $15 - $20 each).
FISCAL IMPACT: For the first year of operation, it is anticipated that the $2,000 cash donation will
cover such City expenses as telephone line installation for the computers, and miscellaneous
fumiture and utility costs. It is also anticipated that Learning Center revenue from classes will fund
expenses associated with the computer center. Staff believes that there will be no General Fund
impact. In-kind services on the part of the City will be staff time required to set up the Learning
Center and anyon-going liaison efforts to maintain the Learning Center.
REVENUE:
Year 1 $2,000 from SeniorNet plus $3,000 from classes'
Year 2 $7,500 from dasses
Year 3 $7,500 from dasses
EXPENDITURES:
ITEM YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3
Cost (5 mos.) COST COST
Supplies and SelVices:
Security Software $300
2 ISDN Unes (Installation and Usage) $800 (Usage) $900 (Usage) $900
Printer Cartridge Replacement $700 $1,680 $1,680
Promotional Literature $500 $500 $500
Photocopying of Manual $200 $200 $200
10 diskettes.'Neek $60 $250 $250
1 Revenue is baled On $15 per class at 5 participants per class. Staff anticipates 4Qclasses In Year 1
(5 mos.)
H:lhomelporbrec\A1131SeniorNu13 -12.Q2.QS) 4
/eJ -if
Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
ITEM YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3
Cost (5 mos.) COST COST
Utility Costs (& Electrical Upgrade - Year 1) $440 $250 $250
Cepital Expenditures:
Furniture $2,000 $0 $0
Equipment Replacement Fund $0 $3,720 $3,720
Costs Total: $5,000 $7,500 $7,500
Revenue: $5,000 $7,500 $7,500
Net Cost to General Fund: $0 $0 $0
Attachment: "A" .. Award Letter from SeniorNet
"B".. SeniorNet Learning Center Memorandum of Understanding'
[H:\home\parkarec\A113\SeniorNe.a13 - 12-02-98) 5
".---
/;¿-J
RESOLUTION NO. /9 J(J9
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A DONATION OF EQUIPMENT
AND SERVICES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $31,000, FROM
IBM CORPORATION AND CHARLES SCHWAB FOUNDATION,
THROUGH SENIORNET, TO IMPLEMENT A SENIORNET
LEARNING CENTER AT THE CHULA VISTA NORMAN PARK
SENIOR CENTER; AND ACCEPTING A DONATION OF
$2,000 IN CASH FROM IBM CORPORATION AND
CHARLES SCHWAB FOUNDATION, THROUGH SENIORNET;
AND AMENDING THE FY 98/99 BUDGET AND
APPROPRIATING $2,000 TO THE LIBRARY AND
RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUDGET FOR RELATED
EXPENSES; AND APPROPRIATING $3,000 IN
UNANTICIPATED REVENUE FROM CLASS FEES TO THE
LIBRARY AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUDGET FOR
RELATED EXPENSES; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO SIGN THE
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE SENIORNET
LEARNING CENTER
WHEREAS, in October, 1998, staff at Norman Park Senior
Center ascertained the availability of grant funding from a non-
profit organization entitled SeniorNet; and
WHEREAS, SeniorNet is a non-profit organization that
provides older adults education for, and access to, computers and
the Internet, to enhance their lives and enable them to share their
wisdom and knowledge with the world and currently offers computer
classes for senior at 141 Learning Centers nationwide; and
WHEREAS, staff contacted SeniorNet and a site visitation
was made by the organization, who was immediately enchanted with
the city of Chula vista and the Norman Park Center, as a possible
location for a SeniorNet Learning Center; and
WHEREAS, the SeniorNet organization submitted Chula Vista
as a proposed site to the IBM Corporation and the Charles Schwab
Foundation, who are SeniorNet sponsors, and the City was awarded a
donation to implement a Learning Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby accept from the IBM Corporation and
the Charles Schwab Foundation, a donation (through SeniorNet) for
the SeniorNet Learning Center at the Chula vista Norman Park Senior
Center of 5 computers, 2 printers and a color scanner, and various
services and software, for a value of $31,000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the FY 98/99 budget is hereby
amended by accepting and appropriating $5,000 to the Library and
Recreation Department budget (1781) ; based on a $2,000 donation
1
/d~i-
from the IBM Corporation and the Charles Schwab Foundation; and
$3,000 from unanticipated fee revenues from classes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager, or his
designee, is hereby authorized to sign the Memorandum of
Understanding with the SeniorNet Learning Center.
Presented by Approved as to form by
David Palmer, Library and ci orney
Recreation Director
H:\home\lorraine\rs\senior.net
2
j;¿ ~7
Bringing Wisdom to the Information Age
November I J, J 998
Ms. Nancy Wood
City of Chula Vista
Library and Recreation Department
365 F Street
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
Dear Nancy,
I am pleased to inform you that the City of Chula Vista has been selected to benefit from
grants awarded by the IBM Corporation and the Charles Schwab Foundation for the
establishment of a Senior)let Leaming Center at the Chula Vista Senior Center.
This learning center will be dedicated to helping older adults learn how to use the
personal computer and how to use online services such as email and the Internet.
Funding from the sponsors identified above provides for the following:
Equipment with a value of $11 ,000
5 IBM Aptiva personal computers with I T monitors
2 Hewlett Packard or LexMark color printers
I IBM flat bed, color scanner
Initial funding support for startup expenses ($:2.00()\
Site licensed software ($5,000)
One week, on site volunteer training ($3,000)
Initial Curriculum materials ($800)
2 on line accounts for a minimum of 2 years ($1,200)
Site licensed softv..'3l'e updates ($3,000 - $5,000 per year)
Curriculum updates (dependent upon number of students)
SeniorNet is most impressed with the quality of the senior center and its programs. We
believe it to be an ideal facility for hosting a learning center program, one that can
incorporate SeniorNet computer literacy training into an already outstanding group of
older adult activities.
Please let me know if you have any questions. We look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
¥~
415.495.4990 Joe Walton
fax 415.495.3999 Director of Learning Centers
www.seniornet,org
121 Second Street. 7th Floor /c2-~
San FrancIsco. CA 94105
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
SENIORNET LEARNING CENTER
This document is a Memorandum of Understanding between SeniorNet@ ("the project")
and City of Chula Vista (the "Site Sponsor") regarding the establishment and operation of
a SeniorNet Learning Center located at Norman Park Senior Center, 270 F Street, Chula
Vista, CA, 91910.
1. The SeniorNet Organization
SeniorNet is a nonprofit organization whose goal is to provide educational services to
older adults, using new information technologies, and to mitigate the social, political, and
economic isolation now being experienced by aged, retired citizens by providing them
with education in computers and computer telecommunications. SeniorNet works with
local sponsors to operate Learning Centers where computer classes are offered for
seniors. SeniorNet provides the Learning Centers with training, support, and curriculum
materials. SeniorNet also operates a national online network that links the Learning
Centers and individual members, holds conferences, conducts research, and promotes the
concept of seniors as computer users.
2. SeniorNet Learning Centers
SeniorNet Learning Centers are places where computer classes for seniors are offered. A
typical Learning Center is equipped with five to ten personal computers, two printers, two
modems, and appropriate software. The Center should be given a dedicated space suitable
for instruction.
Each Center is managed by a local Learning Center committee and coordinator who are
responsible for organizing classes, recruiting participants, keeping Center records, and
teaching classes.
All seniors participating in classes are required to become members of SeniorNet, at the
current membership fee of $35.00 for the first year and $25.00 per year thereafter.
Membership fees are subject to change. Classes may be offered to seniors for a fee in
order to cover learning center costs.
3. SeniorNet Responsibilities
SeniorNet agrees to provide the Learning Center with the following:
(a) Assistance, where needed, in finding, equipping, and organizing a Learning
Center and in identifying a Learning Center committee and coordinator.
SeniorNet will provide computers, printers and a scanner for use in the
Learning Center classroom
(b) Orientation and training sessions at the local Learning Center for the sponsor,
Learning Center committee, Learning Center coordinators, and core group of
instructors and coaches.
SeniorNet Memorandum of Understanding 11112/98/02-/ Page lof6
(c) Funding to the site sponsor in the amount of $2,000 to assist with learning
center startup expenses
(d) SeniorNet curriculum materials (e.g. Introduction to Computers, Word
Processing and Going Online).
Application software including Windows'98, Works for Windows, Print
Artist, Quicken, Family Tree Maker and other programs. As new software is
donated to SeniorNet that software will be made available.
(e) Two online access accounts for the first two years of operation of the Learning
Center. After two years payment of the online account charges become the
responsibility of the Learning Center.
(f) On-going telephone and online consultation with the sponsor and Learning
Center coordinator on all aspects of Center activities.
(g) Assistance in securing publicity or other forms of promotion.
(h) SeniorNet signage, including a map, banner and door sign.
(i) Complimentary memberships in SeniorNet for all sponsors, sponsor
liaisons, coordinators, and instructors.
4. Site Sponsor Responsibilities
The Learning Center Sponsor agrees to:
(a) Appoint a Learning Center coordinator who will be responsible for the
administration of the local Learning Center. It is preferable that the Center
coordinator be a senior.
(b) Provide a liaison person to act as interim coordinator until a volunteer Center
coordinator can be found and to assist the coordinator after he or she has been
appointed.
(c) Arrange for appropriate classroom and storage space. The classroom may be
located on the sponsor's premises, or may be located in a community facility
such as a senior center, an adult education center, or a college campus. Space
needs to be equipped with furniture for the computers and printers, as well as
two phone lines to use for telecommunications.
(d) Offer classes at the Learning Center that are based on, or cover the same
subjects as, the SeniorNet curriculum.
(e) Be responsible for expenses such as Learning Center mailings, printing
charges, phone lines, and online charges for extra-cost features on the
network, etc.
(f) Include the information that SeniorNet is a nonprofit organization in all local
publicity about the Learning Center, and provide copies of all articles about
the Learning Center to SeniorNet.
SeniorNet Memorandum of Understanding 11/12/98 /;¿ -)0 Page 2 of6
---_.~-------,..
(g) Ensure that all Learning Center participants register as members of SeniorNet.
(h) Provide quarterly reports for the first two years to SeniorNet on participation
by IBM retirees and on overall community participation.
5. Termination
This agreement may be terminated by either party by giving a minimum of sixty
(60) days prior written notice to the other party. Upon termination, all
contribution amounts and costs due SeniorNet shall immediately be paid and no
contributions or costs previously received by SeniorNet shall be refunded. Upon
termination the Sponsor agrees that the Learning Center shall cease to be
designated, operated, or represented to be a SeniorNet Learning Center. Should
the sponsor decide to terminate the learning center within the first 5 years, the equipment
will be returned to SeniorNet and SeniorNet will work with the SeniorNet Members to
find a suitable new location for the equipment.
6. Learning Center Personnel
Sponsor's liaison person for the Leaming Center will be:
Leaming Center coordinator (if known) will be:
7. Learning Center Operation
The Learning Center Sponsor (s) shall have exclusive controJ over the establishment,
maintenance and operation of the Leaming Center and the physical conditions of and all
activities occurring at the Learning Center location.
This agreement does not in any way create the relationship of principal and agent
between SeniorNet and the Sponsor, and under no circumstances shall the Sponsor be
considered an agent of SeniorNet. The Sponsor agrees not to act or attempt to act or
represent himself, directly or indirectly, as an agent of SeniorNet, or in any manner
assume or create or attempt to assume or create any obligation on behalf of or in the name
of SeniorNet, nor shall the Sponsor act or represent himself as an affiliate of any other
SeniorNet Leaming Center.
8. SeniorNet Program
SeniorNet grants to the Sponsor the right to establish and operate a SeniorNet Leaming
Center at the designated location and to use, in connection with the operation of that
Learning Center, the SeniorNet program; and the Sponsor further agrees that upon
termination of this agreement, the Sponsor shall not thereafter use the SeniorN et program.
For the purpose of this agreement the SeniorNet program shall mean SeniorNet
curriculum materials, SeniorNet Learning Center Operations Manual, and the various
marks, names and materials developed by SeniorNet, including but not limited to, those
which may be registered with the state or federal government or any other mark or name
which incorporates the word" SeniorNet." The Sponsor acknowledges that these items
are the exclusive property of SeniorNet and that the Sponsor shall not utilize any portion
of the SeniorNet program or any item confusingly similar to any portion of the SeniorNet
SeniorNet Memorandum of Understanding 11112/98 ) eJ.. - ) / Page 3 of6
v
--,,--~..... ---.... ._._-~. .....~- -- ,-- "-"--' _....__.~._~.__._~-~-----_._----
program, except in accordance with this agreement. The sponsor further acknowledges
and agrees that SeniorNet may enter into a similar agreement with other Sponsors.
The Sponsor acknowledges and agrees that SeniorNet is the sole owner of all proprietary
rights in and to the SeniorNet program and all material and information relating to the
SeniorNet program now or hereafter revealed to the Sponsor under this agreement, and
that the SeniorNet program, in its entirety, constitutes trade secrets of SeniorNet and they
are reveaJed to the Sponsor in confidence, solely for the purpose of enabling the Sponsor
to establish and operate the Learning Center; the Sponsor hereby agrees that, both during
and after the term of this agreement, he will not reveal any of such trade secrets to any
other person or entity, except as is necessary to the operation of the Learning Center.
SeniorNet Memorandum of Understanding 11112198 )c2 -/2.. Page 4 of6
,.
i./
-------- -------.-----
9. Signatures
For Financial Sponsor (if applicable):
For Site Sponsor I:
Amount committed and specific
Amount committed and specific activities to be supported
activities to be supported
Startup and yearly fees to SeniorNet
Date Date
Signature Signature
Print Name and Title Print Name and Title
Organization Organization
Address Address
( ) ( )
Phone Phone
For SeniorNet:
Date
Ann Wrixon
Executive Director
SeniorNet
121 Second Street, 71h Floor
San Francisco, CA 94 J 05
(415) 495-4990
SeniorNet Memorandum of Understanding 11/12/98 Ie:¿ /" /3 Page50f6
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: 13
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution If;J/tJ approving individual Park Master Plans and
associated proposed names for parks P-5, P-6, P-7, P-8 and P-9 of Village 1
and 5 of the Otay Ranch SPA One - McMillin Companies, LLC
SUBMITTED BY: Di,oclmofPI=iog ,od B~:1JÆ!
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ PQ . (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No....x.J
~
The McMillin Companies, LLC, developers of a portion of Village 1 and 5 of the Otay Ranch SPA
One, propose individual Park Master Plans and associated names for five neighborhood, pedestrian
and town square parks to be located within both Villages. These parks are proposed to be named
Alcala Park (P-5), Cottonwood Park (P-6), Santa Cora Park (P-7), Terra Fina Park (P-8) and
Breezewood Park (P-9), and are designed consistent with the policies of the adopted General
DeveJopment PJan for the Otay Ranch.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve proposed individual Park Master Plans and associated park names
for the following parks within Village I and 5 of the Otay Ranch SPA One: Alcala Park (P-5),
Cottonwood Park (P-6), Santa Cora Park (P-7), Terra Fina Park (P-8) and Breezewood Park (P-9).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Park and Recreation Commission at their reguJar meeting heJd on November 19, 1998, voted
unanimously (7-0) to approve the proposed Parks Master Plans and associated names. Minutes
from the meeting are attached.
DISCUSSION:
The Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP), adopted in October 1993, combines many of
the concepts of neo-traditionaJ or new urbanism pJanning yet maintains the qualitie s of traditional
contemporary community planning. The Otay Ranch GDP is based on a village concept where
each village contains a central focus, either a village square or main street. This central focus,
or village core, is designed with higher density residential and village-serving commercial.
Village 1 has a main street core identity and Village 5 has a town square core identity. The
developer proposes a pedestrian park within their ownership in the eastern portion of Village 1
and a town square park, two neighborhood parks, and a pedestrian park throughout their
/3-/
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
ownership within Village 5. The village core for Village 5 also contains two community purpose
facility sites and an eJementary schooJ site.
Village 1 and 5 park locations and sizes have been identified in the previousJy approved GDP and
the Otay Ranch SPA One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and TraiJs Master PJan documents. The
designs for each of the five proposed Park Master Plans is to be consistent with the conceptual
park plans identified within those previous approvals. The approved Park Master Plans will
subsequently be used in the preparation of construction drawings and specifications which are used
to build the parks.
The Otay Ranch SPA One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master PJan states that the
concept of the village park system is to provide diverse park and recreational opportunities within
SPA One to meet the recreational and open space needs of each village; and that the SPA One
Village pathways and trails system offer opportunities for expanded recreation and convenient,
safe traveJ to the recreational activities within the village park system.
The Otay Ranch SPA One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan envisioned its
neighborhood parks as being oriented to the residents of the neighborhood or sub-community area
in which they are Jocated and to help provide a component of a baJanced recreation activities
system when combined with other parks and recreation facilities. The Otay Ranch SPA One
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan also envisioned a system of pedestrian
parks oriented to providing informal recreational and social activities conducive to encouraging
communication amongst residents within a two to three block radius of the pedestrian park. The
Otay Ranch SPA One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan envisioned town
square parks as providing a focal point for the village core and reflecting a pedestrian-oriented and
urban character in their design.
The applicant's Landscape Architect met with City staff on nwnerous occasions to review alternate
design schemes for each of the five proposed parks. The following are general descriptions of
each of the final proposed Park Master Plans.
Alcala Park (P-5)
AlcaJa Park is a 0.85 acre neighborhood park Jocated north of East PaJomar Street and west of La
Media Road in the single family residentiaJ neighborhood to the northeast of the Village 1 core.
This park's facilities include a half court basketball faciJity, a children's play area with accessible
play equipment, park seating, picnic facilities, canopy shade trees, pedestrian walkways, pedestrian
and security lighting and turf areas for infonnal play.
J3~2
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
This proposed park's design is consistent with the concept pJan contained in the Otay Ranch SPA
One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan document in that it incorporates key
recreational facilities identified for the site. The applicant's estimated date of commencement of
construction for this park is April 1, 1999.
Cottonwood Park (P-6)
Cottonwood Park is a 6.29 acre neighborhood park located north of East Palomar Street to the east
of the Village Five core Community Purpose Facility (CPF) site. The park includes a softball field,
a soccer fieJd, basketbalJ court, children's play area (tot Jot), picnic facilities, pedestrian walkways,
restrooms and parking, pedestrian and security lighting.
Access features to the park include pedestrian waJkways via a Jandscaped open space area (Paseo)
and vehicular driveways. The Paseo, radiating ITom the residential areas north of the park, connects
to the park and continues through the park site to East Palomar Street. Vehicular access, ITom East
PaJomar Street, leads to an on-site parking Jot for approximateJy 24 parking spaces incJuding two
disabled access parking spaces. Pedestrian access ITom the parking Jot to the recreation portion of
the site is accented through the use of a raised planting area which contains a specimen tree
surrounded by a specialized pJanting and enhanced paving design scheme. The west end of the
parking Jot provides for potential future vehicuJar access to the CPF site to the west via a driveway.
To the west of the specimen tree planting area is a basketbalJ court. To the east is the chiJdren's play
area with accessible play equipment. The site's softball field has been placed near the park site's
north boundary to serve as a visuaJ and functional extension to the proposed elementary school
property playground area immediateJy to the north. Both the school district and the City are
currently working together on a potentiaJ joint use agreement which would serve to further
encourage expanded recreationaJ opportunities for both parties, to the benefit of the community at-
Jarge.
A soccer fieJd has been sited along the park site's east boundary. At the north end of the soccer field,
trees are provide to serve as a buffer between the field and the adjoining residential development.
The proposed park's design is consistent with the concept plan contained in the SPA One Parks,
Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master PJan document in that it incorporates key recreational
facilities identified for the site. The applicant's estimated date of commencement of construction
for this park is April I, 1999.
Santa Cora Park (P-7)
Santa Cora Park is a 5.68 acre neighborhood park located south of the East Palomar Street and
adjacent to the commercial and residential core. The park's configuration is a function ofthe layout
J;J~3
------ .-
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
of the Santa Cora Avenue loop, resulting in a haJf circJe shape. Due to the avaiJabiJity of on-street
parking aJong Santa Cora Avenue, no parking on-site has been proposed. This pennits full use of
the park's land acreage for recreationaJ purposes. The park's north boundary abuts a higher density
residential area within the Village Five core. A Paseo, leading from this residential area, allows for
pedestrian access to the park. Residential areas to the south of the park site contain a series of public
sidewalks to facilitate compJete pedestrian access to the park.
The park site contains a lawn area for infonnal play. Lighted tennis courts are provided at the north
west portion of the site. To the east of the tennis courts is a chiJdren's play area with accessible pJay
equipment, a restroom faciJity and picnic facilities. Basketball courts are Jocated on the north east
portion of the site. Pedestrian and security Jighting is also provided.
Similar to Cottonwood Park, Santa Cora Park contains a special theme area which contains a raised
planter with a specimen tree, accent planting and enhanced paving design scheme. This feature
serves as the tenninus of the Paseo pedestrian access from the north, and as a gathering place for
park patrons. Santa Cora A venue trees and northern boundary trees provide a continuous frame of
vegetation for the park.
This proposed park's design is consistent with the concept plan contained in the Otay Ranch SPA
One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan document in that it incorporates key
recreational faciJities identified for the site. The applicant's estimated date of commencement of
construction for this park is April 2, 2000.
Terra Fina Park (P-8)
Terra Fina Park is a 0.9 acre town square park located just south of East PaJomar Street and is the
centraJ focus for the Village Five core. The main purpose of this park is to act as a gathering pJace.
which fonns a landmark in the center of this village's mixed use (retail/office/residential) district.
The predominant feature of this park is a central plaza area containing a vertical design eJement and
water feature. A fonnal grid of palm trees will create shade and opportunities for the public to sit
and enjoy the sounds ofthe water feature while interacting with the businesses located around the
park's edge. A simple shrub and turfpJanting layout out in an infonnal arrangement surrounds the
centraJ feature.
This proposed park's design is consistent with the concept pJan contained in the Otay Ranch SPA
One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan document in that it incorporates key
recreationaJ facilities identified for the site. The applicant's estimated date of commencement of
construction for this park is April 2, 2000.
/ ;J -1
..,.~~._--_._._---_._-_.._-
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
Breezewood Park (P-9)
Breezewood Park is a 1 acre pedestrian park located north of East Palomar Street and east of La
Media Road in the single famiJy residential neighborhoods north of the Village Five core. This park
will ultimately be two acres in size; however, this developer is proposing a design for approximateJy
one-haJf of the park. The adjacent deveJoper will be responsibJe for completion of the other half of
the park.
This park's faciJities include children's pJay areas with accessibJe play equipment, park seating,
picnic facilities, canopy shade trees, pedestrian walkways, pedestrian and security lighting, and turf
areas for infonnal play. A pedestrian walkway runs through the center of this park linking it via a
landscaped open space area with a continuation ofthe pedestrian trail (Paseo) to Cottonwood Park
(P-6), a neighborhood park.
This proposed park's design is consistent with the concept plan contained in the Otay Ranch SPA
One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master PJan document in that it incorporates key
recreational facilities identified for the site. The estimated date of commencement of construction
for this park remains to be detennined.
Park Names
The park names proposed by the applicant (see above) were chosen to identifY each park as a
reflection ofthe adjacent neighborhood within which it is located. Each name was seJected based
on the street name on which the park is Jocated. The applicant felt this would create a singular
identity for each park and tie it to the adjacent neighborhood.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff has perfonned a review of preliminary park construction estimates of probable cost and firs t
year maintenance cost estimates provided by the applicant. WhiJe changes to the cost estimates
are anticipated as the Park Master Plans evoJve into construction drawings, staff is of the opinion
that the estimates are a fairly accurate representation of anticipated costs. Construction costs will
be borne by the developer in response to Park Acquisition and DeveJopment (PAD) Fee
requirements of the proposed deveJopment. Long-tenn park maintenance costs for public parks
will be addressed through the City's General Fund.
Alcala Park (P-5) $153,037.00 (Minimum construction cost)
(Not appJicabJe, Home Owners's Association maintenance)
Cottonwood Park (P-6) $1,058,931.00 (Minimum construction cost)
$28,952.00 (Minimum annual maintenance cost)
JJ~ç
Page 6, Item:
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
Santa Cora Park (P- 7) $855,837.00 (Minimum construction cost)
$16,180.00 (Minimum annual maintenance cost)
Terra Fina Park (P-8) $312,045.00 (Minimum construction cost)
$4,050.00 (Minimum annual maintenance cost)
Breezewood Park (P-9) $321,387.00 (Minimum construction cost)
$6,945.00 (Minimum annuaJ maintenance cost)
Attachments'
1. Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes
2. Alcala Park Master Plan (P-S)
3. Cottonwood Park Master Plan (P-6)
4. Sanla Cora Park Master Plan (P-?)
S. Terra Fina Park Master Plan (P-8)
6. Breezewood Park Master Plan (P-9)
(H:\SHAREDIPLANNINGIDUANEIMCMPRKS.All)
);~?
RESOLUTION NO. ¡I}1~¡I¿?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING INDIVIDUAL PARK MASTER
PLANS AND ASSOCIATED PROPOSED NAMES FOR PARKS
P-S, P-G, P-7, P-8, AND P-9 OF VILLAGE 1 AND 5
OF THE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE SUBMITTED BY
MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH LLC, MCMILLIN COMPANIES LLC
WHEREAS, the applicant, McMillin Otay Ranch LLC, McMillin
Companies LLC is requesting approval of five park master plans and
corresponding park names for Village 1 and 5 of the Otay Ranch SPA
One, including two neighborhood parks (Cottonwood Park - P-G, and
Santa Cora - P-7), two pedestrian parks (Alcala Park - P-S, and
Breezewood Park - P-9), and one town square park (Terra Fina Park -
P-8); and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation commission at their
regular meeting on November 19, 1998 considered the request to
approve five park master plans and corresponding park names for
identified above and voted unanimously to approved said park master
plans and names; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that the project is exempt from environmental review
under the Class 4(b) exemption identified by CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the park master plans are in compliance with the
adopted Otay Ranch General Development Plan, Otay Ranch Spa One
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan and Otay Ranch
Village Design Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL does
hereby approve the Park Master Plans, attached as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein by this reference, and the associated park
names for the following parks within Village 1 and 5 of the Otay
Ranch SPA One: Alcala Park (P-S), Cottonwood Park (P-G), Santa Cora
Park (P-7), Terra Fina Park (P-8) and Breezewood Park (P-9).
Presented by Approved as to form by
úL- ~ f/&'--
Robert A. Leiter, Director of John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
Planning and Building
(H:\SHARED\PLANNING\DUANE\MCMPRKS.RES)
/3~7
~~ 4lTA C.H M EAIT .L
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
<\)ç-
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Thursday - 6:32 p.m. November 19, 1998
Conference Rooms 2 & 3 - PSB 276 Fourth Avenue
1. ROLL CALL Chair Palma~, Vice Chair Cochran L Members Dennison ~,
Radcliffe....lL, Rude.JL, Vaccaro~, Weidner..L
Others Present: Duane Bazzel, Dave Byers, Brian Cox, Jerry Foncerrada, Craig Fukuyama,
Mary Hofinockle, David Palmer, Sunny Shy, Nancy Woods
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 17,1998
Chair Palma asked that the minutes reflect that Commissioner Rude was excused.
MSUC (Cochran/Radcliffe) to approve the minutes of September 17, 1998.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS OR REMARKS - None
4. REPORTS - FOR INFORMATION ONLY
a. Athletics
Assistant Director of Recreation Shy reported on staff turnover in the Recreation Division.
She then turned the meeting over to Senior Recreation Supervisor Brian Cox who reported On
the activities of the Athletics Section. This section includes the otay Recreation Center and
Parkway Gym, aquatics, and organized youth and adult sports such as basketball, soccer,
volleyball, track and softball.
b. After School STRETCH Program
Director Palmer introduced Meg Schofield, Educational Services Manager. Mrs. Schofield
previous headed the award-winning Chula Vista Literacy Team. She reported that the
Extended School Day Program was created to provide much needed academic as well as
recreational after school activities for children. The pilot program begins next semester in six
Chula Vista elementary schools that were chosen on the basis of need. The program will put
together an arts, recreation and literacy program at each of these six school sites with the
hope of acquiring grant funds from the Department of Education to provide programming at
other Chula Vista elementary schools. The target date to begin this program is the end of
February.
/3~6
Parks and Recreation Commission -2- November 19, 1998
ACTION ITEMS
It is required that for an item to be considered "approved," the votes of the Commission must be a
minimum of four (4), which is a majority of the Commission's seven (7) members. With fewer
members in attendance, the minimum approval vote is also required to be four (4).
5. Unfinished Business
a. Golf Oversight Advisory Committee
At their last meeting, the Parks and Recreation Commission requested that staff examine the
feasibility of forming a Golf Advisory Committee. The City Attomey responded that this would
not be permissible under the City Charter. The City Attomey did state that the Commission
may informally ask One of its members to report periodically On golf matters, but there may be
nO formal committee.
MS (Cochran/Radcliffe) to request staff investigate the possibility of the Commission asking
Council to form a Golf Oversite Advisory Committee in Chula Vista.
Director Palmer stated that this request would carry more weight if the Parks and Recreation
Commission directly communicated their request to Council in the form of a written
communication.
Motion and second withdrawn
MSC (CochranNaccaro) That the commission send a letter to the City Council asking that a
Golf Oversite Advisory Committee be formed to report back to the Commission. (4-2 with
Commissioners Dennision and Weider abstaining)
S. New Business
a. McMillin - Otay Ranch Village 5 Parks
Mary Hofmockle explained that the Landscape Architecture and Parks Design Section is
currently in the process of developing a number of master plans as part of some of the
development occurring in the Eastem Territories. Presented for the Commissions review was
the McMillin oWned portions of Otay Ranch Villages I and V. She then introduced Craig
Fukuyama of McMillin and his Landscape Architect Design Consultant, John Patterson, of
the Gillespie Design Group.
Mr. Patterson discussed at length the location, square footage, design and usage of the
following parks: Cottonwood Park - PS, Santa Cora Park - P7, Alcala Park -P5, Breezewood
Park - P9, and Terra Fina Park - P8.
Commissioners commented On the size of some of these parks and also the lack of areas
designated for organized sports. Commissioners also questioned when these parks would
be built. Director Palmer reported that he is meeting on a regular basis with the school
districts to develop a memorandum of understanding with an emphasis to utilize middle
schools for their ball and soccer fields. The school district is willing to support this type of
usage.
/:Jrl
. -~-"--------------'-'---~-'---
Parks and Recreation Commission -3- November 19, 1998
MSUC (RadcliffelDennison) that the Commission approves the master plans for each of the
five parks as well as the proposed park names
b. Cancellation of December meeting
By cOnsensus of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the December meeting has been
cancelled.
7. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS-
Staff response to letter from Bruce Burton regarding Loma Verde Pool
Assistant Director of Recreation Shy responded to a letter from Bruce Burton regarding covering
the Loma Verde Pool.
Director Palmer reported on a letter from the Chula Vista Aquatics Association in opposition to an
increase in rates for pool rental. Staff has been asked to explore other options to reach a
compromise with this group. Staff will report their findings to the Commission earty next year.
8. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS
Commissioner Radcliff asked if there was a way to assure that the Chula Vista Aquatics
Association would receive a share of CDBG funds. Commissioners discussed the use of sponsors
to help defray these costs.
Chair Palma reported that he will attend a meeting of the otay Valley Regional Park on
November 20, 1998 and distributed the Otay Valley News to meeting participants.
Commissioner Dennision asked if developers took into consideration maintenance involved when
choosing trees for public parks. Assistant Director Shy informed her that staff has asked
developers to prepare a cost benefit analysis to determine if the City can afford to maintain these
parks. She also distributed Senior News to meeting participants.
Commissioner Vaccaro thanked Director Palmer and Assistant Director Shy for continually actively
supporting this commission. He also asked about roller hockey and skateboard facilities.
Assistant Director Shy reported that part of the Park Master Plan will include roller hockey, bmx,
and skateboard facilities. Staff is studying putting roller hockey facilities On multi purpose courts in
neighborhood parks. The Sweetwater Union High School District is working with a private entity to
place three or four courts in local high schools, and the otay Recreation Center will have an
alternate floor covering installed to allOw indoor hockey.
9. STAFF COMMENTS
a. SeniorNet
Staff is pleased to announce the Norman Park Senior Center has being awarded a $33,000
donation from SeniorNet to establish a computer lab for seniors.
/3 - /0
____n_ - -,_.,...._._---~--- - -- ----------
Parks and Recreation Commission -4- November 19, 1998
b. otay Recreation Center
Director Palmer reported that the City Attorney's office has recommended award of bid to the
second low bidder. The low bidder is appealing this decision. The answer to this appeal is
being written up for final decision by the City Council in December. COnstruction of the Center
should be completed by August.
c. Implementation of Pool Fee Increases
No Action
ADJOURNMENT AT 8:49 P.M. to the regularly scheduled meeting of January 21, 1999.
/ J -J I
~ . i
~ u 5'
< z~ /1íÚCIlr¡è/VT ;L 1I~~lli~
" ::!! °0 "
c w"o ,
> z- !
t: <~ - ~ ~~
ffi~ ~ mom >
W < ~ . ~
w ><1: = m o~ 0
~ ~ "~ z-
~ o~ > g ~~ ~~ .
~ "< <
W ill! :J: a:: :t: 11.I- ·
W 00 ~ o ::I:!tcn Ow
~ o z ~ ~ =~æ ~~
~
m zz <
om ~ _ z \¿. enl-
I ·
.';
· -
\ i . i1
,
·
I~
,
I
"--
m
z
W
we z
~CI:I ~ 1-..,
9:0 0 ~
fl)1-!i!CI > I-
æt-<z a:I -
Uffifll> j G
(J::¡¡z< .c z
<!!:-a. :=: ::;
~ 1I.::I0L.l..
«O~a: ~ .J
UW...J~ Z <I;
õ>< 0 l-
I! ~~:;;b ~ ~
:r1l.~1- ::I in
I I ! I I
~
..
L'::::J p:; lr¡
I
0 p..
µ, I
<
f ¡ ¡ Ii ~ ~IK !~ ~ ~
r ~¡
I ~
/LJ LU ....:¡ ~
I i ¡~ U!UC p.. p..
LJ ~ ~
< ~' - ~ ....:¡
<~ I
W~ ~ ~
z<
<.
~z r/'J. U
~o
o~ ~
~. ....:¡
~ ~
w
·
< " .
z ! ~"
0 0 u
z . .. ~ "
0 t'!!t; "" ~; ~ ~
· u..
· i¡~æ . ::¡:z..... ".
0 i Q:;:~!\! i~ ~ ~ ffi ,
" S::!:! 00". ~ ~
" .,..0..
æ ª .
~ ~ 0
w ¡
N ¡ "
;; " e
~ · ~ ~ 0
< i
" . · " !
¡;: 0 0 2 · " "
~ õI , 0
> · . 0
~ - . · · · " ó -
i · . o Õ o.
· . . :>: ~ "'
5 c ~ ~ ::0 ~ : ~ ~ ~
Z · . -
w , ~ g ~ i '. .
::Ii ..~ =~ UJ " _ 0 :=
2 · " "
0( ~_... c ~c · . " ~ ~ '" o . . . "0
z :!3~;h: .J UJ - > > 2 ~ ~
:.!! , . · . . ~ ~
c ;¡ .;eQ~~ ~; ;~ :~æ -' m · . . 000
z r o . 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ :f
u ~"!;;'" '.. . . '" ~ - . -
UJ ~~ ....~~ o . ~ 2 ~ ~ : ;
'" ~ ~j!~i !! '! f¡¡~ !h " 0 z ;; , .
i g · . .
UJ I- ~=::::!=: ;, ~~ ~ã! ;: " .. ~ f . . . ""
-' ~ ¡í2:~ ~~ o . '" z ~ ¡: ¡: I ; ~
!!~ ªi:2 ~ ¡ _ 0 8 1 i :;¡ ~ ~ -<
'" "'Q ...;¡¡¡: Z ~ , 0
~g0* ~ cr ~ ª i l g ;;;:
::J
~ U. m o - ,>-
i i õ ~ ~ ~ ~ ã :~
UJ " .@,-~oY\".'
-'~ ' 0 LJ >- . u 0 t.¿..,?",'" ^ :; ~ :i ¡ ìiJJ-J)... ~
Q, m . ¡¡; >
m z .: ~
,'-
-
~~" .J:¡ 0 /J1ß it"? ·
3~~g~ >- ~ æOQ~ r/C.L1/1£/fJ. .-5 i!! II
::z:o( 1-'" "''''zo(' /l' ::til ..
ca:z(,)e cr ::¡-:¡¡ 01-<11, -! a: > 3i! II=~
¡¡jOQUI. W '": Õ~ Wzcn U:.c :J CI. ii:I =~;!;
¡¡;:::t;~~ ~ ~ ~,:;~ g~~~ ~~ ~ ~ '~ - Þ]lë; ;,,¡
~OZ<Z z _ C~ C~ ~~. " ~ C Þ] ¡i ,!~
:il-~I-O en::z: ~Wð- lI..::)ffi¡- 9% 0« ~ Uã: i i
I!!:~æ~ ~ ~ g~~ffi ~g:::O >!O b <:I II.!.....:: .."
u..CJU~Q Z W ~u..-O ë>C"" ZW -I ~::z: 11.I- i
Ooe -1% 2 ED Ø!a::a:U ZC"C;;:U I- :II: Cð Ow
rnc:a:!:wCl: Q.' w::Jog o(...I~Z æ 0 ~ ~ <11.I I
~ ""~._Z·_<~I· ~.~ ~~
< "
11, C ::J I
2 ~ 3~ ~ ., ',',
I- wen'
u ø:: a:w ...... I
~ ~ ~¡¡:¡ ...J a: I~
z O...l<C 0( ~- ~
o 0 ~....w ¡:: oei i
U w øus Z u>- I '
o ~ 02:= e ~t: :, I
Iä s ž21i: en ::10(
0( Ñ 2a.o( ~ g~ 3
II.. ... a...,.ca 1.:1< r
I \
\ _l--::/
\ -- - /
-----r I
I
,
/
¡..' \0
UJ l I
'" I "
f! I ""'"""
"'I ..
_' tr ,.J I
«, ¡.o.¡~
" ;:" 0
? 0/
-" rT,
«' -
0./
Ò ¡..! Z-<
__ __ ~ 31 -< ~
~ I ~ Q
. ~ ~ 0
~~ r---. ~o
en > :
~ . I
g ~ rT' ~
::z: 0 _ ¡.ø..
o__C- /' L..
.............._--~1Þ a. _____ (""'"'"1
...-- <J --" ! r/1 Oz
~...-- )~. ' ~
...-- \ I ......
...-- ...-- \ ~ ____ / 10:::' E-;
_ ,,<, g ~L..
o .., ,,,- I' I r
o ...._ ._Ct...·....cz:·d:t 1-.... ø w' J
IQ .__" "__¡¡j-o( g3!:!!? § Z III CI l I I 0
. .___..' 'z' ,.-- ~ CI 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ / / .
_ . .._ .__ 0 Z () Q. (,) w u CI '
.' ~ 2;: -'11.I20 ...I jjj 0( (ñ I I U
w .. Z .. <.... ...J , I (
u.: = > u W a: w 0 4( ~ u: ~ lI:--·' I ' '"
~ I/ ~ ã: : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ __--Ä-.- -~ I r .-
o \ ~ . c z, . 0/ -- " ./ 1 I" i
~ ~ LZß2- ~/~ ;/ '
. ~"" /' I
. ~ ~
\ ~. II!
-Iii \ --~.-.-..- .-- ~ ',~
~ I I . . \ ",,,/ - / ,i
z~, .;~ ~ U '!
z !:i ! ã; ; ¡II V ~ ~ J 1/
¡ ¡I!! ! ; ! ! : Ii. !¡il¡ ¡ ; "I I /1
o =11" I :!I =!=~!~""co ~ ~ ~ '
u ~:_ ~ " ! I I Ua;..;n,,! ~ ~ ~
,
: , __ ¡ j I ~,.
~ ¡ ¡ ¡! : ! ¡ !! ~ =1'
.. _ , ÎI ~ ~ . ; ~ ;
i ! 0 ¡¡ ¡ ¡ __ ;, I
!W.~"j !:,-z :~~ ~ ~.~ rØ-.
:!: .. W ... . .. .
<Ii!. . .. "0'" ,... . .. I....
o ~ -,¡hi i ~5 :: ; u~ ;~~:;: W ! : :: . ~ ~ .......
Z l: ;;a1 ~i i~ ~~!I ! ':!::!;U¡: ~ ~ ! t. ~ to . ~ ~ :E
~ ~ .. r 3:"~!! h:n~U~ ¡¡ ;1 ~ ¡ f ~!: T ~i
~dldll ¡¡ I¡d! ¡¡¡linn I n ¡¡!in ;;;1 ! j~ I
z * Z" . . . , . , ... / J ~ J ,~
" 0.. * ~ " I
z 'lJ ~ n. ~ " I
~ 'w 0 . ~ .. ~Z
. 0 Q. ' LJ ~ ~ 0 g;o,.;>.~l \ ; :: I
I/ ... Z -~
-------. "-" "...
-------:4 ~.: .~ . i ",
>- -----> . ,/ ~
a ~ \ ,.
0-'
~;;: <~ _ d ¡
u> ~o ¡;:§ ':!I
,,__ ____ ..(¡¡-c.._--~_:æ.. I'
_ CI, , II. --',_ a
,/ Cw Ira: "
/" :t: 11::)0 .~~, i
" ( ) ~ I-u.
//' a
i
rei;
~~ ~
<>
~
w a::- 0
~ ~c ~ -
w> o~ ~ ~
Ll..m ã go( ID
~~ !ž¡:: ªm :;;~
;>c<!ï: oæ ¡g~
~.-._-----=-t~,..",o -_~ <II( 0
, _ ~Œ¡¡jæ~ I "_,mu .I
/'" . 0::1:>0 '~"
"'u..u:! u ~"
'. /
o ;
a: ,Z /
>- :to( I
!: z: /
w 0....1 /
æ 0.: ;¿~ /
0( >- >¡-.
I- !: 0( .~
o :t: a.g/o
Z ~ 2~ciJ
~ !::2 w ~_iia:
0( Q.. ID - 0(
3:' I- 11..""=
:at~ ffi~ r
~ ~ u> . .........
~I- 0...: ,1 ' ~
;>.::::__.____ 0( Q.. _ _.' . I
,'-... "" 1'1
/, T~- ~
/// '. ¿¿ I
. f ,,,- ~ ~
~~
WW ~ ~
.,;i.llt eJ
ID .,~_
¡¡¡~i~'\
(1)...00(0.. \ III W ~ .
~ZU)u. i ~... § ~
UW a: I z 0 en
<~~~/ IJ ffi,~ 9 0
a.50/ ::!i I-J;~ U rT'1 U
~:¡f~Lb g Ocnu ffi ~
¡h..~'" II: ~:ra:: :t: L
Z"ll"~O ti :t::)w ( ) (""'"""I <r:
-c.....cnz w <'02 0(
Z'a.!:< a: :;:u¡:: =._ CI'J.
. <r:~
. ~Z
<r:
í/J.
I
I
I
,
!I .. ~ I M
::¡ ! 1. Ii :1 Þ ~ ¡
~ ! rJ ~ i ~;¡¡ : ~ III -
I ¡'il ! .' Ii! ; Ij. !¡'!' 0 ,
o '1 , I ' II," "";;,,.,!. : ,
t,1 :..; ~ ~ 0:.. .. ¡ ·~IIJ~! . .
. ' .... .. H ¡ ¡ I
¡¡:¡; ~" ~ ¡¡ œ:
!o g ~ ___
~ ~ . ¡ I" c ~] ¡ ~
eo. II ¡ . .> ~ ~ ~ >
<. .... .' . " "¡ I
:¡", ¡ 0 HH ~
! ¡. , " , , z . - '! ...
,,! . ,<5 :;¡ ,~:; I....! w . ~ ; ~ ......
.I! ; ~ !!I " :on" .. ~ c ~
o "!,' . I .! " f; ! d· ,"¡u; ~ w .. I a e ~
z II!S ~I! $' =-5 ."" .iI: ¡ = ... a ~
~ !'m I I! ¡ II' i! ¡Wi'l! ¡ 0 . : ¡ ,¡ >-
~ 11m I¡ !i ¡ i¡1! I! ¡¡lhill! I ~ ¡ ¡ ! h ! 1 Y' ~
z ~ z· . , .. 'õ /3 ) I
~ ~ f{) * - æ ~ !~ i ~ .- ~
~ r!'\ 00 i1 0 ~ o@Mn:1 ~:!!n I I...·
~ ( ) g ! ~~ : ~ :
!
/1 ~ ~ LLJ d111~£1iIIi
I r ,
/ ~ I ,
" ü ,
/ w~ !
~w
~~
:;8
I - 'v-í~\ .
.
~
;
I'
I'
I >
I <
I ! .
r
~ ,
<
"
...-----\: r
/ ø ~
"
"
! ~
~ \" \
, \
~ .
/ ,------) \
\
! I \ \
\ 00
I
) HP",
~I
! )-- I ~~ I
I
/ 0" "
"~ ---- ~<
0"
~ z5_ w
z <z "
! " ŽO j
0 w
0 wO " ~P",
< /- ------ ~ I
I P",<
~/<C I ~~
I
I ~Hr.,
! ---- I ~~
I
ì-
:;E~
~
w
·
· ; ~ !
z
z < , .' ;
0 . . .. ~ :i ...
'I <
· H : =!f~..~ a
· <. ~~~~; o .
0 '0 . = ~
g ! 0" <
0 .. 0 ....of..
w
N ¡
¡;
· . ,
· =
0 0 ¡
~
> , ,;
~ . .
=¡
! .
"
~ I .
0 , I
z
w ~ w i
· ..:!~ ~< · . '" \
· : Ill.
z ~~h ¡ ¡; ~ w I
~$ ..J ø
o . , :~ i · . 0
~",,,,. · . I~
z . ~~d ;: · < '" z
W g .. u. o . ~
~i !~ i u . ;;: I~
'" z ~ii:: i i ø
w . :!! ""- ,. ~ :I: Z
..J ~ ",=8i .5 ~~ (f ~ I~
~ · . _ 0 J3 -;5Î
'" = iit2;: ~, z ~ I~
a:
z Ø*fI ::>
- ø U. ø
t- . 0 .
z 0 0 w ~ ,¡¡ I
< = 0
..J · t- . ~
.. ~ - > 0
(f ø z
M4CME~¡i "I
" ~I
=",,1
d
.
0 ,
-¡ ~ ,
r/J .,':
<
A.. ,
.. ....... ,
~O'\ ,
01
µ.A..
~~
-- --0 ~<
I A.. A.. I
I
"c I ~O
c.
>. I
~c
~z - - ~O
~o
w~
>c r/JO
_w
ø.
Øu
cw <~
~.
-.--
~~
N
~
~
ÇQ
l ~~ I, ¡
Ô"
.~ !èl , ; II ¡
llli, ¡ lI¡ì~;¡¡!! Š ~ ¡
n t
!
-- . ~ : I
ww~ ¡ : , ~ :
"øc --- , ¡ !; ·il
!!!Oc .
ø~z . . .' "
æ~:~ ~ i ~ ~ I I ï
<:I . nil': ~ a i
Uw > ffi ! " ì ¡' i;"
~l~~ u :; :; - 1 ~ !
o.5Cu.. ~. I~} ~ -¡ ;~~i
<oLl,la: d ¡I'P '" 'i , !¡
ow::!;:) ;¡; ~ ~. I ì ~ ~ i ¡ i ¡;
õ><~
Z.~I- ~~ !IJJlr!; ~j~~!¡i
<....J(/)O II: . a : ~ a. I : . ;
:rQ.~1- ~ ~ HH n ~
!:: ~ n @~.¿;.¡t ~ ~; d ¡ I g ¡
.0.. "" ~~H~~ii
=1
p.,
,¡ \ «:
/7,( ::E
011 \ " >-
Ii \
" \ ¡¡¡
" " ~
, í
I
I ßi: - /J1f}l{II/J£/7/Î~]I¡¡ I
œoU .~] ä!
:: I-§¡1 ~ ~
zz~ -
'co a
¡ -~¿
~~c1.
œ
wZ~ 0
oZœ
wOe
~u~
~
r./'J.
- ~
O~~ ---- --- ~
------~ ...........
ø/ ~
/ 00;"
~( - - - ~ ~
~ Z I
ùll j ~
~~
~
c ~~
i;\~1 ~ Õ
I\~~ r./'J. 0
10 <
\ :ili:
'" U> ~
'. ". ~
~V\ ~~ ~ rT'1
zœ ~
,œ N
I ~
~
¡:Q
i : . ~
) r¡ , ' 'II .: ~
Ii I n-.n Ii ~ ~ i
lid I n~hdHJ ¡~! i;
; I ~ ~
.. ¡
>- i I; .!
c .,! i¡
3: Ë ~ J i : ! I J f ~
J: ..' . ~ . .! ~ ;!
~ . . . 1 i ; ~ ¡
~ I ¡ 0 ¡! ! "'!'
. ; . . æ ·1 1 't. !
N . ~" Iii...' j 0 ¡ õ õ '. ¡.
- ¡ 'iill ill ¡,j,¡!ii' ~ I';, '¡', ;¡ ,II
. II"~ 'I ! II¡,III i z .¡! i' ì I' .
¡§ ßÏn~ Ii u:id¡!I! H~ fÎH n~ H
~ * æ. Ih ä~
11 rI\. O~ 0 ~! "@~4.'I\ ".; ¡! P
-k;jJ . ø. __. _S
oj
c
3:(1)/1
>œ, I
i~I:,
1-1"
gOI\¡1
C>,
~œ\
\:
~ =1
) I' ~
\ ~ I ~
'~. t
/ :' ¡¿
" II
__D_
O 81t L33HS 33S 3NIlH:JL It".. I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Itemd
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution )9;1// Approving a first amendment to the agreement
with Kimley-Hom & Associates Inc., for Professional Engineering Services
for a Feasibility and Financing Study of Olympic Parkway and appropriating
$60,000 from the unappropriated balance of the Transportation Development
Impact Fee fund to Project STM-331.
SUBMITTED BY, 0;_, of"",,lio w~y £~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~l2.-- ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes.K...No_)
The consultant, Kimley-Horn and Associates, ha een ~ng on developing a feasibility and
financing study to construct Olympic Parkway from Oleander Avenue to one mile east ofSR-125
and identifying project constraints and opportunities in terms of funding, traffic needs, timing,
phasing, environmental requirements and a comprehensive project schedule. Due to a desire to have
the consultant continue work on the environmental permit process beyond the original scope of the
contract and additional landscape conceptual design, it is necessary to extend the consultant's
contract.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution approving a first amendment to the
agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc., for Professional Engineering Services for a
Feasibility and Financing Study for Olympic Parkway, and appropriate $60,000 from the
unappropriated balance of the Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) fund and authorize
the Mayor to execute said agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A.
DISCUSSION:
BACKGROUND
On March 31, J998, the City Council approved, Resolution #18939, the selection of Kimley-Horn
& Associates as the project consultant to do the OJympic Parkway Feasibility & Financing Study.
The Olympic Parkway project, with estimated costs in excess of $80,000,000, is too Jarge for a
single developer to undertake. The limits of this project traverses numerous parcels ofIand under
several ownerships and several development projects such as EastLake, McMillan Otay Ranch, Otay
Ranch and Sunbow II. Kimley-Horn and Associates have been working with City staff and the
developers to determine and recommend a collective financing and construction methodology which
can be utilized to provide for the timely financing and construction of this facility. Further, City
staff and the consultant have met with the state and federal environmental agencies to discuss the
environmental mitigation and constraints for the construction of Olympic Parkway through Poggi
Canyon. /1-/
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 12/15/98
The subconsultants working with Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. on this project represent well-
respected firms such as: AGRA Earth & Environmental for geotechnical analysis, Berryman &
Henigar for the financial studies, BR W for traffic analysis, Cotton/Beland Associates for
environmental review and, Estrada Land Planning for landscaping conceptual plans. Kimley-Horn
and Associates Inc., is directly responsible for the project management associated with this scope
of work, roadway design evaluation, project cost estimates, drainage/flood controJ issues, utilities
and project phasing alternatives.
Status of Feasibility & Financin¡¡ Study
As oflast month, the consultant has completed approximately 7J % of the work and been paid 68%
of the total ($166,386) with the final report due at the end of this month. A report to Council on the
feasibility & financing is planned to go to Council for consideration on January 26,1999. Due to
the extent of the project and the high cost of construction for the Olympic Parkway project, the
developers have looked into the benefits of several CFD districts versus one larger CFD district to
finance the project. City staff have been in negotiations with the developers in order to ensure the
timely construction of this vital facility. The environmental issues have been evaluated and a draft
Opportunities and Constraints report has been completed by the consultant and discussed in a
meeting held with the state and federal environmental agencies and staff. The final Opportunities
and Constraints report will be compJeted by the environmental consultant prior to submitting the
appJication for the environmental permits.
It is staff's desire to continue working together with the consultant and have, if Council approves,
the consultant's scope of work be modified to allow them to do additional work in the environmental
process to help expedite obtaining permits from the resource agencies. In addition, further work is
desired of the landscape subconsultant to complete work on the master plan for the segments of
Olympic Parkway that are not covered by this feasibility and financing study. The areas are
specifically at the west end (I-80S to Brandywine Avenue) and the east end of Olympic Parkway
(SDG&E easement, east ofSR-125, to the Olympic Training Center).
Existing: Ag:reement Scope of Work
The scope of work for the consultant includes all of the necessary requirements for extending
Olympic Parkway east from Oleander Avenue to Hunte Parkway. The study will include a detailed
cost estimate with financial analysis and recommendations, including phasing possibilities, of the
following: roadway improvements, drainage system, sewer facilities, environmental mitigation,
financing alternatives, and landscaping. Olympic Parkway from Oleander Avenue to Hunte Parkway
is identified on the City's TDIF list as three projects; Oleander A venue to eastern Sunbow boundary
( #16); eastern Sunbow boundary to EastLake Parkway (#22) and; EastLake Parkway to Hunte
Parkway (#24).
Following is a listing of tasks identified in the project's existing scope of work:
Task one. Traffic Forecasts, Analysis and Results
J1j-~
\'J
Page 3, Item_
Meeting Date 12/15/98
Task two. Design Criteria and Engineering Studies
Task three. Alternative Analysis, Schematic Plans, Cost Estimates and Schedules
Task four. Financing Alternatives and Recommendations
Task five. Legal Review and Recommendations
Task six. First Draft Report
Task seven. Second Draft Report
Task eight. Final Report
There have been eight regular staff committee and developer meetings held from April to November,
with an additional two or three more meetings anticipated throughout the initial project schedule.
This aspect of the project has provided much needed deveJoper input on the roadway alignment
issues and the financial concerns combined with project scheduling.
Additional Scope of Work (Proposed Contract Extension Work)
Due to the need for the consultant to provide additional work to obtain completed environmental
pennits and project needs for a complete landscaping master pJan for the entire length of Olympic
Parkway, an extension of the project scope of work is necessary in order to have the Olympic
Parkway project proceed through the environmental process with the least amount of deJay. The
additional scope of work proposed has been summarized below:
A. Environmental Permittin~ Prol¡¡ram
The consultant will pursue and obtain wetland and endangered species authorizations for the
construction of Olympic Parkway. The additional work will involve the following tasks:
Task one; Wetland Delineation and Habitat Impact Refinement.
This work will update the wetland delineation area along the roadway corridor from the
Sunbow site eastward.
Task two: Evaluation of Special Issues Associated with Roadway Design and Regional
Setting.
This task will evaluate the roadway and how it fits into the regional context of development
and demand and its utility as a circulation element, independent from adjacent development
and how this roadway would dictate alignments of north-south roads. This task will consider
whether or not there are other practical alternatives to achieve the basic project purpose so
that environmental impacts are kept to a minimum.
Task three: Wetland Mitigation Plan.
The consultant will prepare a wetland mitigation plan to offset impacts associated with the
construction of Olympic Parkway. This task will select a mitigation site aJong the roadway
/7-)
Page 4, Item_
Meeting Date 12/15/98
alignment and define the boundaries of the mitigation area with the preparation of a planting
plan and typical plant layout for the mitigation area. An irrigation system concept plan
and written mitigation plan per the City standards and the Corps of Engineers standards with
cost estimate will also be prepared.
Task four: Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat and California Gnatcatcher Issues.
This task will address impacts to Califomia Gnatcatchers and coastal sage scrub east of the
Sunbow deveJopment since these impacts are not authorized yet for the portion of Olympic
Parkway east of Sunbow. Ultimately a biological assessment wouJd need to be prepared to
evaluate the impacts to gnatcatchers and suggest mitigation measures. The United States
Fish & Wildlife Service would then issue a biological opinion, which wouJd provide an
assessment of the roadway project effects, outline the terms and conditions and authorize the
take of gnatcatchers and habitat.
Task five: Environmental Permit Application Packages and Submittal.
The consultant will prepare permit application packages for submittal in order to obtain to
the regulatory agencies by the City of Chula Vista. Applications, notifications, and
supporting documentation will be submitted for the following processes:
A). Clean Water Act, section 401 State Water Quality Certification or Waiver;
B). Clean Water Act, section 404 Permit;
C). California Fish and Game Code, Section 160 I;
D). Endangered Species Act, Section 7 Consultation, OR;
Endangered Species Act, Section J Oa permit (if needed).
Task six. Provide Support Services in Permit Processing.
The consultant will work with the regulatory agency staff to keep the permit process moving
forward to resolution. This work is difficult to estimate the number of hours needed and will
be billed on a time and material basis with an amount not to exceed $2,904. Staff will be
monitoring the time and materials and will not authorize payment of the additional funds
unless it is adequately justified.
B. Landsca.J!e Master Plan
The consultant will expand the work they have compJeted to cover additional segments of Olympic
Parkway to the west and to the east of the original boundaries. The consultant will also meet with
City staff to discuss and present the Master Landscaping Plan for the entire length of Olympic
Parkway from 1-805 to the OJympic Training Center and refine the mitigation pJan.
Task one. Data Collection.
The consultant will meet with City staff to discuss project status and receive input and
direction on additional areas. The consultant will visit the site to review existing conditions
and photograph site for landscape planning purposes. The consultant will obtain and review
existing and proposed landscape concepts and themes for land developments adjacent to the
Olympic Parkway corridor. ) 1- t(
Page 5, Item_
Meeting Date 12/15/98
Task two. Prepare Comprehensive Landscape Master Plan.
The consultant will prepare the initial comprehensive landscape master plan, including the
mitigation plan, and construction cost estimate for the Olympic Parkway corridor and present
plan to City staff and make revisions as needed based on comments from City staff.
COST PROPOSAL
The consultant has submitted a cost estimate in the amount of $57,096 to cover the additional scope
of work. The additional $2904 in funds is for the time and material basis for one of the
environmental work tasks which is difficult to quantify until the resource (environmental) agencies
has reviewed the application packet for environmental permits and made their recommendation on
which environmental permits will be required.
CONCLUSIONS
As a result of this agreement, the City will be authorizing the consultant, Kimley-Horn and
Associates Inc., to commence work. The first phase of this project will evaluate the issues required
to ultimately construct Olympic Parkway from Oleander Avenue to Hunte Parkway. Thismajor
east/west corridor is rapidly becoming a necessity due to the growth anticipated and already under
construction in the area generally to the south of Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road.
Staff, developers as well as the general public will benefit immensely from this project since the
impact of this project greatly affects the eastern portion of the City. Based on the strength of the
consultant and the subconsultants, staff recommends that Council approve the resolution.
Staffhas reviewed the cost proposal for the additional work and due to the favorable work provided
by the consultant and each one of the subconsultants to date, recommends approval of the contract
extension.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Fiscal Year 1998-99 CIP budget for this project, shows a total of $270,000
budgeted for the Preparatory Planning, which includes City staff time. The existing consultant
services contract is for $244,930. Due to the additional scope of work required, an additional
$60,000 will need to be appropriated now from the TDIF fund so that the revised total for consultant
services is now revised to not exceed $304,930.
Attachments: Exhibit A - Area Plat - Olympic Parkway J
Exhibit B - Resolution # J 8939 dated March 31, 1998
Exhibit C - Minutes of the City Council dated Marc 98
Exhibit D - Consultant cost estimate proposal
Exhibit E - Agreement (Exhibit C) Additi0t(
~O .
File:073S-10-STM331
Rev.December 9, 1998 (9:52am)
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\STM331E2.FXR /y-ç
RESOLUTION NO. / f;J / /
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC.,
FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR A
FEASIBILITY AND FINANCING STUDY OF OLYMPIC
PARKWAY AND APPROPRIATING $60,000 FROM THE
UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF THE TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO PROJECT STM-331
WHEREAS, Kimley-Horn and Associates has been working on
developing a feasibility and financing study to construct Olympic
Parkway from Oleander Avenue to one mile east of SR-125 and
identifying project constraints and opportunities in terms of
funding, traffic needs, timing, phasing, environmental requirements
and a comprehensive project schedule; and
WHEREAS, the Professional Engineering services to be
provided includes obtaining wetland and endangered species
authorization and related environmental permits; and
WHEREAS, the consultant's involvement in the process to
date will facilitate the environmental process through to obtaining
the necessary permits, as well as preparation of the landscape and
mitigation plans; and
WHEREAS, due to a desire to have the consultant continue
work on the environmental permit process beyond the original scope
of the contract and additional landscape conceptual design, it is
necessary to extend the consultant's contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby approve a First Amendment to the
Agreement with Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. for Professional
Engineering Services for a Feasibility and Financing Study of
Olympic Parkway, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the
office of the City Clerk as Document No.q8·~~9.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amount of $60,000 is
hereby appropriated from the unappropriated balance of the
Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) fund.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said First
Amendment on behalf of the City.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of ~:~~orney
Public Works
H,\home\lorraine\n\kimley.lst ) Lj _"
-<
~ avo II
~ a.naIl.6 , ,
,::" ?" J
~ \ -
.. . :
~ . : ~
¡.¡ ; " .: -<
~" .. G ~
gill 0 -
... .. -
ß¡ ~ : ~ · ~
Þ : !f ~
... ," ~
> - .. ~
s . ... ....
. 0 -
"' G III
Q ::: 110 U
- s
~ .. 0 ~
_.;QÞ- ~
Q_'<C =s
:;r:; CI > ~
'" ,,., . . . 0
0;1.\ .... ;:; r::I < >
~'d~'" ,.; :;r:; Ij 0 .,
< ::> lid III -
~ 1>:'" < JIll 0
Z 'ò ~ ,.; III
Q ~ '" ::¡
r,;¡ 'ò '" III '" I
0'" Q < ::>
rz::I Ij ... ~
.' . ~ . . -<
0" · ~ I · ~
oa'd . · ~ I ·
.'>f\C!:!!I'<'" .~I· ~
. ,.' ~ .
~I'" ..' ~ . .
"": '. -<
'1 ~
o
'. == I
'0 -<
o
. .
'1-0 · ....
~. ..e
X':> .,.
. '
. . .
o
,f¡.
0<2.
o~
o~
"..
o .
~ ....
o
~
11'!(l ¡¡V '!'l
.
/ ~
...... /#-1
"
This Page Blank \
,
\
'j
7--
-~- - - ~- ~- --- ---~- . ~ ---~----- -
~ \ d_I~,q( ø/i
~
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA ~~
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, by Resolution 18939 on
March 31, 1998, approved an Agreement to provide professional
services in connection with the Olympic Parkway Feasibility and
Fi!lancing Study; and
WHEREAS, there is a need for additional consultant
ser\7ices' in order to ensure the timely construction of Olympic
Park",'ay; and
WHEREAS, the City requires further consultant efforts in
order to obtain completed environmental permits; and
WHEREAS, the City requires further sub-consultant work on
the Master Landscaping Plan for the entire length of Olympic
Park",·ay, and
WHEREAS, expanding the scope of work for the consultant
and sub-consultant who have extensive experience and familiarity
with the Olympic Parkway Feasibility and Financing Study will
result in enhanced continuity and move the permit process
efficiently forward to resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. Exhibit A, paragraph 8 D to the Agreement is hereby
amended to read as follows: Date for completion of Consultant
services: Ap:dl 15, 1999.
2 . Exhibit A, paragraph 11 B is hereby amended to add
the following to the Phase list:
Phase Deliverable Date Fee
Milestone 8 April 15, 1999 $60,000
3 . Exhibit A, paragraph 11 C (1) (X) is hereby amended to
delete the figure $244,930 and to substitute in its place the sum
of $304,930.
4. Exhibit B: SCHEDULE is amended to add the following:,
Activity Delivery Time J
Milestone 8 April 15, y"'
- 1999 JJ ~~
- Environmental Permitting. Task 9
.\,:\ ,.....
i\ .~
1 ( ~%'
-.-... -----~_.._-- ----.-..-
- Landscape Master Plan. Task 9
5. The Agreement is amended to add Exhibit C attached
hereto and incorporated herein.
6. All other terms and conditions not modified by this
First Amendment to the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.
NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE
2
--.-.-.-. - .-----------.------.-.--
S~:;KÞ.T1JRE ?F..GE TO FIRST Þ.M~lmMENT :") AGREE!.c~~T
BETWEEN CITY OF C~Ü~_ VIST~ ~2'-D
KIM~EY-30PJ. þ~ ASSOCIATES, :NC.
IT WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant ha·ve executed
tt.is Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and
un5e=stood samet and indicate their full and complete consent t.o
~t.S ~erms:
DÞ_':'E::J: CITY OF CrtU~_ VISTA
By:
Shirley 30rton, !'Iayor
At:.est:
r
Beverly A. Þ.uthelet
City Clerk
Ap?roved as to form:
JO""1 M. Kaheny
City Attorney
DÞ.TE:J : Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
3Y~
Charles ~. Spink~, P.E.
Principal in Charge
BYDe~i¡I./3
Project Manager
3
-. .------- ^-_.~------------
EXHIBIT C - ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK (DETAIL)
The additional scope of work tasks have been arranged in a logical fonnat and have been outlined
into maj or sections:
9.0 Additional Scope of Work (Proposed Contract Extension Work)
OVERVIEW
Due to the need for the consultant to provide additional work to obtain completed environmental
permits and project needs for a complete landscaping master and mitigation plan for the entire length
of Olympic Parkway, an extension of the project scope of work is necessary in order to have the
Olympic Parkway project proceed through the environmental process with the least amount of deJay.
The additional scope of work proposed has been summarized below:
A. Environmental Pennittin¡¡ Program
The consultant will pursue and obtain wetland and endangered species authorizations, permits, for
the construction of Olympic Parkway. The additional work will involve the following tasks:
Task 9.1: WetJand Delineation and Habitat Impact RefInement.
This work will update the wetland delineation area along the roadway corridor from the
Sunbow site eastward. The wetland delineation will be incorporated into the permit
applications to the Resource Agencies. It will be prepared in accordance with the United
States Fish & Wildlife Services protocal for wetland delineation.
Task 9.2: Evaluation of Special Issues Associated with Roadway Design and Regional
Setting.
TIris task will evaluate the roadway and how it fIts into the regional context of development
and demand and its utility as a circulation element, independent from adjacent development
and how this roadway would dictate alignments of north-south roads. TIris task will consider
whether or not there are other practical alternatives to achieve the basic project purpose so
that environmental impacts are kept to a minimum.
Task 9.3: Wetland Mitigation Plan.
The consultant will prepare a wetland mitigation plan to offset impacts associated with the
construction of Olympic Parkway. TIris task will select a mitigation site along the roadway
alignment and define the boundaries of the mitigation area with the preparation of a planting
plan and typical plant layout for the mitigation area. An irrigation system concept plan
and written mitigation plan per the City standards and the Corps of Engineers standards with
cost estimate will also be prepared.
Task 9.4 (Optional): Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat and California Gnatcatcher Issues.
TIris task will address impacts to California Gnatcatchers and coastal sage scrub east of the
Sunbow development since these impacts are not authorized yet for the portion of Olympic
Parkway east of Sunbow. Ultimately a biological assessment would need to be prepared to
evaluate the impacts to gnatcatchers and suggest mitigation measures. The United States
Fish & Wildlife Service would then issue a biological opinion, which would provide an
4
------
assessment of the roadway project effects, outline the terms and conditions and authorize the
take of gnatcatchers and habitat.
Task 9.5: Environmental Permit AppJication Packages and Submittal.
The consultant will prepare permit application packages for submittal in order to obtain to
the reguJatory agencies by the City of Chula Vista. Applications, notifications, and
supporting documentation will be submitted for the following processes:
A). Clean Water Act, section 401 State Water Quality Certification or Waiver;
B). Clean Water Act, section 404 Permit;
C). California Fish and Game Code, Section 1601;
D). Endangered Species Act, Section 7 Consultation, OR;
Endangered Species Act, Section lOa permit (if needed).
Task 9.6: Provide Support Services in Permit Processing.
The consultant will work with the regulatory agency staff to keep the permit process moving
forward to resolution. This work is difficult to estimate the number of hours needed and will
be billed on a time and material basis with an amount not to exceed limits. Thus the Council
report includes $2,904 in additional funds requested above and beyond the $57,096 proposal
provided by the consultant to total $60,000. Support services in permit processing scope of
work includes tasks necessary to obtain permits prior to beginning construction.
B. Landscape Master Plan
The consultant will expand the work they have completed to cover additional segments of Olympic
Parkway to the west and to the east of the original boundaries. The consultant will also meet with
City staff to discuss and present the Master Landscaping Plan for the entire length of Olympic
Parkway from I-80S to the Olympic Training Center and refine the mitigation plan.
Task 9.7: Data Collection.
The consultant will meet with City staff to discuss project status and receive input and
direction on additional areas. The consultant will visit the site to review existing conditions
and photograph site for landscape planning pUIposes. The consultant will obtain and review
existing and proposed landscape concepts and themes for land developments adjacent to the
Olympic Parkway comdor.
Task 9.8: Prepare Comprehensive Landscape Master Plan.
The consultant will prepare the initial comprehensive landscape master plan, including the
mitigation plan, and construction cost estimate for the Olympic Parkway comdor and present
plan to City staff and make revisions as needed based on comments from City staff.
S
_.--.-._--,.'.- ._-~-_.---
EXHISIT~
-..
R::SO!..UTION NO. . ~939
--
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTI,· ?PROVING AN AGR::EMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN &
ASSOCIA rES INC., FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR A FEASIBILITY AND FINANCING STUDY OF
OL YMPIC PARKWAY AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM THE
TRANSDIF TO PROJECT STM331
W:-iEREAS, Staff prepared and issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) in October 1997
with nine (9) proposals received and reviewed by the City's consultant selection committee
in November; and
WHEREAS, the City's consultant selection committee cor.sisted of five City staff
members with expertise in certain areas: Land Development Civil Engineer Lombardo
DeTrinidad, Otay Ranch Principal Planner Rick Rosaier, Envjronmental Associate Planner
Barbara Reid, Land Development Senior Civil Engineer Sohaib AI-Agha and, Assessment
District Financjng and Trar.sportation Civil Engineer Frank Rivera; and
W:-iEREAS, in December, final interviews with the top three cO:1sultants were held and
the comminee made their final recommendation based on a project related and comprehensive
evaluation criteria; and
-
WHEREAS, based on the criteria, references verification and interview performance,
the sel.ection comminee ranked the top three firms'as to qualificatjor.s for this feasibility study
as follows:
Kimley-Horn & Associates Inc. $252,800
Rick Engineering Company $252,600
P & D Consultants/CTE Engineers $194,000
Revised Kimley-Horn & Associates Inc. Proposal $2?4,930
WHEREAS, the subject project is unique due to the need to assemble a strong project
team cor.sisting of a wide spectrum of expertise in areas such as environmental mitigation,
financial, legal, geotechnical, landscape planning and traffic engineering; and
WHEREAS, therefore, the comminee had to take into consideration the strength and
weakness of all subconsultants listed in each proposal; and
WHEREAS, the fundamental criteria that the committee used to rank the lOP three
consultants was the strength of the project team and their own qualjfication and jnvolved
reference verification, the subconsultant's strength and expertise in their respective fields, the
prime consultant's understanding of this project's unique and time sensitive requirements,
previous experience in completjng projects of similar scope on time and within budget,
demonstrated understanding of the City's transportation needs and abiiity to focus on other
financing alternativas; and
.. W:-iEREAS, using this criteria, the committee's decision was that Kimley-Horn and
,
Associates was the highest qualified consultant firm for this financing study of Olympic
3
?esoluti:;¡:"; i 2939
"age 2 -.
. -
;>arkway. based on favorable work history, the strength of the project manager and
subconsui:ant's past work experien::e wjth the City and other pubiicj'gencjes.
NOW, ïHERE;:OR::. 3E IT R::SOL VED the City Council of the City of Chuia Vjsta does
hereby approve an Agreement with Kimley-Horn & Associates Inc. for Professional ::ngineering
Services far A Feasibility and Finan::ing Study of Olympic Parkway. a copy of whi::h is on file
in the Off,::e of the Ci,y Clerk as Do::ument No. C098-049.
3:: :T FURïH::R R::SOL VEO that the Iv'layor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby
authorize: and directed to execute said Agreement for and an behalf of the City of Chula
Vista.
3:: IT FURTH::R R::SOL VED that the City Coun::il does hereby appropriate $100.000
-
from the Transpon:ation Development Impact Fee (TDI;:).
Presented by Approved as to form by
Ç¡J~ / 1~ (~Å ~Ç? ì
. h I'"" 'II r K'h'oy· c/
JO n , . _1;JPILt
Public Works Director ...c, Attorney -
~/
,
if
Resolution 18939
Page 3
-
- PkSSEO, APPROVED. and AOOPïED by the City CDuncil Df the City Df Chula Vista.
CüliforCliö, this 31 ~t day Df March 1998, by the fDllowing vote:
AYES: . Councilmembers: Moot, Padilla, Rindone, Salas and Horton
NA YES: CDuncilmembers: None
ABSENï: Councilmembers: None
ABST AIN: Councilmembers: None
.J¡Wf~~~
Shirley Ho on, Mayor
ATTESï:
STAïE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) 55.
CITY OF CHULA VISï A )
I. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the fDregoing ReSDlutiDn ND. 18939 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City CDuncil held on the 31st day Df March,
1998.
Executed this 31st day Df March, 1998.
-
,
----
--
J
--.---- . --".--..."
EXHIBIT ('/
MINUTES OF A P~GU'~ ME~~"NG OF TEE CITY COUNC:::""
~.. OF :'RE CITY OF CE"'J'...J, VIS::;'.
:":.;es:jay / M2.:C~~ .:..- , 1;<92 ::~:.JnC'il Cr.aJ:'..::)e=s
E.: :5 ?m. Public: Services Buil:::ing
CÞ.LL TO OP.DER
". ROLL CJ..L!..:
??..ESEJ;': : So:.:n:=ilmembers: M:;¡o:., ?ë.::'illa, Rin::5.o:1e, Salè.s, 2nd
· ~2.yo= R 0::-": on .
J.3SEN:; : C:::,.:.:n=ilmembe=s: N:me
]..l.50 ??~5::!~':: ':-.s£is":.è.n:. Ci-:y ~:;.r.ager I 5~d Marris; ':-.ssis":an-:. Ci:.y
A":.":.o=ney, hnn Y. Moo=e¡ Ci -:y Cle=k, 3everly ¡.... Au-:.hele:.;
a.nd De?u:'y Cit:y Clerk, Cha=line Long.
2. PLEDGE OF Al.LEGIANCE TO TEE FLAG, MOMEh'T OF SILENCE
3. APPRO~L OF MINUTES: M,2.==h 10, 1~9E.
· (P..indone/¡¡o~on) of Mar=h 1D,
MSUC to app=~ve the ~inutes 1998.
4. SPEC¡;':' OP..:>ERS OF ~E::: DJ..Y:
_.- Oath c: :,):::"::e: 'l'ho;:-,as J. Erhard:., ::::.:l,,:u=al A=:.s Commis5:"o~. l"..r. Erha.=dt.
W2.S no:. prese~:. ":0 take his ca-:.n.
3. Charles "Muggs" 5":011, Divisi:::m Chie: :0= Privatization, Ca~trans Dist=ict
" r..aàe a p=oje::t upda-:.e on S?-l25~
--,
CONSEl\7 CALENDAR
· ( Items pu2.1ed: :1one)
CO}~SE!-t"T CALE~,":);'..R. OFFERED BY HAYOR BORTON, 'titles read, headings .....aived, passed
and approved ~an~ously 5-0.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICÞ.TIONS:
h. Le-:.ter from tbe City At.'t.orDey stating that Council did not meet in Closed
Session on 3/"7/98. ?e=- s":.ê.::'s re::om:'nendë.t.ion, -:.he let.t.er ...·=.5 received and
filed.
3. Letter ",..i-:.h 'thirty signatures from Cindi Rinno in favor of building the
Christian Cocmu~i~y Center. Per st.aff's =ecom~endat.i~n, the let.t.er was received
· 2.:1= ::.:...:..ed.
C. ~e~ter fro~ Ramon Provencio, Jr. requesting 510,000 to purchase equipment for
the ::astLake l.i't.'tle League. Per st.aff's recommendatio:1, the League's request for
510,000 was åe::ied and t.he Department of parks, Recreation and Open Space was
dire::ted to 2.ssis't. t.he League by providing equipme;¡t. presently :lOt. in use for
::':'.':.y ?=ograms.
D. Letter from Sberri Kukla, Editor/Publisher of San Diego Off Road Magazine,
requesting the àesignation of some open space areas on tbe outskirts of Chula
Vista as an c== highway vehicle recreation area. Per staff's recom~endation, -ohe
le"C.'-:.e= was =e:e==ed to t.he joi.:""t staff and Citizens hdvisory C~)Jnmit'tee for -:.he
Otay Valley ?e;iD~al ?a~k ::>r their cons:'::Serat.ion an:j recommendation.
· Let:ter 0: ::-esignation :::-om the Child Care Commission James R. Robinson.
-. -
?e= staff's =e:::)m."":1endati:>:l, -:.he . . ""êS ac::ep:.ed \,,'ith regret, and -:.he
=es.:..g:"'lô:'::):1
¿
Mim..:.es
Ma:-=h 31. 1998
Page 2
~
Ci:.y Clerk was d~rected ~o pos:. the vacancy immeàia~ely accord~ng to the ¥.adày
Ac~ in the Cle:-k's Office and the Public Library.
6. RESOLUTION 18934 APPROVING A DETENTION BASIN~ AND SILTATION AGREEMENT WITH
MCMILLIN-D.A. AMERICA OTAY RANCH LLC TO PROVIDE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION
OF A DETENTION BASIN AND REMOVAL OF SILT FROM THE TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT - On 6/3/97 by Resolution No.
18686, the City approved Tentative Map No. 97-02 for the Otay Ranch McMillin
projec~. The Tentative Map conditions regu~re compliance, prior to issuance of
a grading permit, with certain requirements regarding existing and proposed
àrainage improvements serving the project. The developer is cur:,ently processing
mass grading plans with the City and issuance of the grading permi-: is
an:.icipated shortly. The subject agreement aelinea:.es the developer
resp::msibilities regarding the proposed improvements and establishes the security
requirements to ensure their performance. Per staff's recommendation, the
resolution was unanimously approved 5-0. (Director of Public Works)
7. RESOLUTION 18935 APPROVING TRANSFER OF UNANTICIPATED ASSET SEIZURE FUNDS
TO THE GENERAL FUND AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS FOR PAYMENT OF FEES AND
OUTFITTING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PURCHASE OF A REPLACEMENT ASSET SEIZURE
VEHICLE - The Police Department proposed to use the sale proceeds in the asset
seizure account ($3,015) to purchase a vehicle from the United States Marshal's
Of:i::e. Forfei'ture of t.he vehicle was a result of a joint investigation
cond~::ted by the City and the Drug Enforcement Aàministration (DEA). Pursuant
to equitable sharing guidelines, the poli::e Departmen:. has :.he option of
purchasing the vehicle by paying the U.S. Marshal's Office for their federal
share and associated storage fees. The total payment due to the Marshal's Office
is an estimated $2,429. This amount includes $323 for storage and asset ,..--.
management fees. The remaining funds ($586) will be used to outfit the vehicle
for undercover use. Because the vehicle will be used in police undercover
operations, the make and model, or other àetails about the vehicle, are not
disclosed. Per staff's recommendation, the resolution was approved unanimously
5-0. (Chief of Police) 4j5th's vote required.
8. RESOLUTION 18936 TRANSFERRING FUNDS, (FROM PR-162 TO PR-163) ACCEPTING
BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE "PARKWAY COMMUNITY CENTER REMODEL", PHASE II
PROJECT - On 2/25/98, sealed bids were received for the "par'kway Community Cen:.er
Remodel" Phase II Project. The work to be done consists of the ~nstallation of
heating/air conditioning and ventilation, modifications to restroom and other
rooms to conform with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, and
the construction of all other miscellaneous items of work as shown on the plans.
Funds in the amount of 521,000 to be transferred from Parkway Community Center
Remodel Phase I to the proposed Phase II project, and contract :'0 be awarded to
Lesicka and Joy Construction, San Diego, in the amount of 5105,776.00. Per
staff's recommendation, the resolution was unanimously approved 5-0. (Director
of Public Wo:-ks)
9. RESOLUTION 18937 APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE GAS & ELECTRIC FRANCHISES
WITH SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC FOR A 90 DAY INTERIM PERIOD STARTING ON MARCH 31,
1998, PENDING FURTHER CITY REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF A 5 YEAR RENEWAL THROUGH
MARCH 31, 2003 - The City's current franchise with SDG&E are set to expire on
3/31/98. Staff has been negotiating for a five year extension to these
franchises, which will grant the City sufficient time to evaluate the effects of
industry restructuring on local utilities prior to en:.ering into another, longer
term franchise. It is anticipated that negotiations will be completed in the
near future. However, to accommoda~e the public hearing requirements, first and
second reading of the ordinance and 30 day period until its effectiveness, it is
recormnended that the existing franchises be extended for an interim 90 day
period. Per staff's recommendation, the resolution was unanimously approved 5-0.
(Assistant City Manager)
7 ___
~:.;"".-...:-:!:'s
,.....c.:-:;; _' _, _.....-'
?E:.~e -'
r-
- - ;U·;,~;(JLf':':::Oìi 18938 hPPROVING THE FIRST AMEND¥.D\~ TO THE ¡;G?.!:EME~"T BE:-I"r"'"EEN
::=:=: COtfH:l'Y OF SAN DIEGO AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REGARDING JUP.ISDICTION O·VER
~~ O?ERATIO~ OF OTAY LANDFILL - As part of an agreement betwee~ ~he Coun~y ~:
Sa~ )iego an= ~he City of Chula Vi5~a regarding ju~~s=i=tion over and opera~~on
c: -:.~e O't.ay :"a:J::':ill, a landfill buffer area was .crea-:.ed in whic:-¡ ~he City agreed
~~ remove residential land use designations by May :5, 1998. City staff ~as
=e~~es~ed a :B:-day extension of the deadline in oróer to allo~ comple~io~ ~f
ce=-:.ain other proposed amendments which will address ~i~hin tr.is ~uffer. Cou~-:.y
s-:.a.ff suppor":.s ":.he ext.ension but requests ~r.öt t.he Lë.~:': ill ag!'"ee;7,ent be mo::i: ied
....... reflec't. ":..:1: new date. Per s-:.aff's recommen6.s.:.ion, t.he resolution was
~~~~~~ously a?~=oved 5-0. (Dire=tor of Planning)
* . * END OF CONSE~7 CALENDkR . . *
ORAL COMMUN!~.T!ONS
. Douglas ~~rwell, e95 Plaza Ca~alonia, Chula V~s":.a, 91915, representing 24
:a=~:~es an= 5' children in t.he Camino Catal~~~a and ?laza Ca~alonia
nE~g~borhoo¿. They were concerned about ~he proposal ~f a Day Care Cen~er by ~he
ü::~~ed Met.ho=':"st Church loca":ed at East "3"' Stree:. and Pase:J R=.nchero. r ':'he
cr.~==h is ~~.~~g ~o buy a single residen~ial house ~hö":. is in :.heir neighborhood
as 2 ~se :0= a ~ay Care Center. He requ8s":.ed Coun=il direct -:.he City s~a:: :'0
w:;=k ?=oac~:"ve:;'y ,__..ith ":.he families in :.heir nei;::::'b::)=hood :'0 resolve :.heir
==:;,===::;.s.
M:y== 30r~on s:'a~ed Coun=il :.ries to encourage whoever is br:"~;:"ng a proposal
=:;~~a=¿ to ge:. :'~e neighb::)=s involved. She was cer":.a':"~ ":.nat. sta:: ~ill re=o~~end
":.t':"$ ~o the pr::)?onent.
,-
* ... " .. ,..
The meeting a=journed to a Closed Session at. 6:28 p.m. The mee:.ing reconvened
a:. ï:05 prm. ~~th all members of the Council presen:..
* " .... ... '*
?~~!C HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
1ë._ PL"ELTC "!:AR!NG OTAY RANCH RESOURCE Y.ANAGEM:::"'T PLAN CONVEYANCE SCHEDULE
~~MENT - 5":.2:= recommenàs continuing :.his i:.em. (Direc-:.or o~ ?lanning)
~a'\-==- announ=e:5 :.hat the item v,,'ill be continued. S~aff is =eviev,,'ino :.he
C~~:~yance ~=he~ule. The item will be readvert.iseà when staff ~5 =eady ~ogo ~o
?-":'::.:..':"= hea.r:..~;.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDAT!ONS
None submi~:.ed.
ACT!ON !TEMS
12. RESOLUTION 18939 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC!ATES
INC., FOR PROFESS!ONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR A FEAS!BILITY AND FINANCING STUDY
OF OLlrœIC PAP~~AY AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM THE TRANSDIF TO PROJECT STM-331)
T::,is ::-eport ::':"s:::usses the selection process for re-:.aining a ::-:msultan't. ...:i-:.h
ey.pe=:.ise in =eveloping a feasibility and financing s:.uåy ~o co~s't.ruct Olym?ic
?a::-~way from Olea.~der Avenue to one mile east of SR-l25 and iåen~ifying project
co::.s~=aints and. Dpp::>rtunities in terms 0: funding, traf f ic needs, timing,
ph2s~ng, env:'=::)nmental requirements and a comprehensive project schedule. ?er
s:.a::'s reco~~enda't.ion, 't.he resolution ~as a?proved unanimously S-O. (Dire=:or
- a: ?:..:::lic Wa=:·:s) ';'/5th's vote required.
Co:..:~::..:..~membe= ~oa't. asked what kind of op:.io:1s are :.he=e to fun= a $21 million
r:::.a::.. When .....as -:.he last 't.ime we built su::.h an ey.=>e~sive roaò _.. Chula Vis:.ë..
çsr .
Min:;:.es
Ma:-=:"l 31, 1998
Page 4
Cliff Swanson, Deputy Director of Public wo:-ks, responded that ultimately ~he
road will be funded with TransDIF fees, but we will probably have to use a
combina~ion o~ developer, cash advances, and/or bond sales. Po~entially ~he~e
is an option where we sell bonds and redeem those with TransDIF fees. The C~ty
has never built such long a road. However,. the development corrununi ty in
cooperation with the City have built some quite extensive roadways.
May~r Horton asked if we will have the opportunity to request feàeral funding for
a pa~ of this.
Mr. Swanson s~ated that staff has looked very carefully at what we might get
feàeral funding on. Our best shot was the p~rtion from Hunte Parkway east. We
are requesting additional funding to SANDAG unàer the next. ICLEI ?rogram for 5:)me
of t.he discretionary funds for the interchange. That. would relieve the TransDIF
fees.
RESOLUTION 18539 OFFERED BY MAYOR BORTON, beading read, text waived, passed and
approved unan~ously 5-0.
13.1'.. RESOLUTION 18940 APPROVING CONTRACTS WITH BI-TECH SOFTWARE INC. AND DATA
GENERAL CORPOP.ATION FOR INSTALLATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF AN INTEGRATED
FINANCIAL INFORMATION SYSTEM RELATED TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP) NO.
GG152-MAINFRAME/FISCAL SYSTEM, WAIVING THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESS WITH
RESPECT TO THE DATA GENERAL CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE
COl\~CTS. - Capital Project Number GG152, titled "M.ainframe/Fiscal System," was
approved in :iscal year 1995-96. This project entails replacing the aging
main==ame comp~~er system with a mini-comput.er based architecture and replacing
all mainframe application systems, which are primarily fiscal syst.ems, in order
to enhance accountability and facilitate more timely and accurate reporting cf ~\
financial data. Per staff's recommendation, the resolutions were approved ~~~
(Director of Finance) 4/5tb's vote required. --
B. RESOLUTION 18941 APPROVING A LEASE-PURCHASE PLAN TO FINANCE THE COST OF
PROJECT GG152-MAINFRAME/FISCAL SYSTEM THROUGH THE CALEASE PUBLIC FINANCING
CORPORATION (CALEASE), AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO EXECUTE THE
AGREEMENT, AND APPROVING PROJECT APPROPRIATIONS BASED ON THE PROCEEDS FROM THE
LEASE-PURCHASE FINANCING PLAN
Robe=t Powell, Finance Director, stated that this is a culmination of more than
two years of staff effort on a very critical capital projec-t to the City
operations which is the replacement of the City's mainframe computer and of all
the City's fiscal application systems. Both he and Louie Vignapiano, Director
of M~S, made a presentation via overheads.
Mayor Borton asked Mr. Vignapiano if he felt that this system ~ill be able ~o
service us beyond ten years.
Mr. Vignapiano responded that technology changes so greatly that it is hard to
preåi=t what is going to happen. The mainframe that we currently have, ':.he
Unis)"s V Series, is one that is being discontinued and service is no longer being
proviàed by the Unisys Corporation, but other mainframes that are around still
maintain a useful life and have done so for well over ten years. The equipment
we are buying from Data General is newer technology and is running an operating
system that has been around for awhile. It is stable and has been predicted to
be a major player in the computer industry for at least the next ten years.
Councilmember Padilla stat.ed this is complex, and it is clear that you have
utilized a tremendous amount of insight bot.h in selecting the financing mechanism
and in looking at. the infrastructure needs over the long term. This may appear
to be quite a capital expenditure in one lump, but he felt in terms of cost
effectiveness for the service that we provide as an organization to the comrnuni:y
and to other coml'nunities that we contract with and in terms of cost effectiveness
over ~he long term, this is something that is long over due. The financing is
a very low cost when financing this in using unexpenåed revenues of the City, so
q__H
!-".':"n;';:'25
.~ë.==h 3J, ::;'98
?é.~e 5
~.
we =~~ see :he ~o~al pa=kage cos~, but he ~e:~ ~h2= ~~e =os~ 5E~~~;S in ~e=ms -~
C~E~ e::ective~ess over -:.he long term is very c1e2=.
Co~~=i~membe= Salas s~a~ed she hõd a point 0: =on=usio~. During :.he
preserr:.ation, she heard -:.hat 'this will incluòe all :~é.:.u=es lis:.e:: in the ?F? é.:1d
ã~50 the=~ w~~l~ be su::h systems as u~ility billing, ~~sine5s 2::::::15e5, and 603
1.:.:::e::'5e5 ~n=~¡;:Jed. In t:.he report, lot states 'thE.:' 3.:."Cech' 5 :??;:::J.:age does :1::::'
in=:~de 5yste~5 :'0 handle the utility billings, the ~usine5s :::::ense, the ~og
1':"::=:-.5e, and :.:-¡e parking citations. They were g::::';,:;¡ :'0 be :::::ered :.hroug::. ô
s¡,,::::::::::,::.ract ....·::.i:::h includes all those se:-vices. :L.re -:.nese :'n=2.:;:jed in -:.he 52
· æ~~~~~~ pri::: ~a;, Dr ~:'ll we see addi~ional expen=~~~=es ::~ffi~~~ :o~wa=d.
~r. ?~well a~5~ered ~ha-:. all ~f ~hose sys~ems are ~~=~uded i~ ~~~s price ~a;.
The~' are no':. ':"ncluded ':":1 the Bitech con~ra='t. other ':.han -:.he ~':.ili":y billing
sys~e..'T. wn.l.ch -=.ney are subcontracting ~o a compa:-::~' cë.lled Spr:'ngbrook. The
b~5~:1eSS li=e~ses, dog licenses, parking citations, ~:1d others, we are curren~ly
lo~k~ng at sys~ems and have a good ièea of the cost ~= those sys':.ems. Those are
inc:~ded in -:.he 51.1 million item called a??licatio~ s~ftwa=e a:1d installa~ion
se~~:'ces. Tnere is approximately S183,000 for those other smaller systems. !f
thE =~llar affi~~~~ of any of those contracts is high =:1ouch to re-:.urn to Council
.&._- --.-.-ov·a' --_.&..&. ",' 1; a-Þ'&'';n'-e1y re-"-n ,:¡~ app-...·-::., 0' -n' oSP --n-~a-ts U~.; no
_'-'_ r::.:::':::'.... _, :._.c........ _... _,1...........1.. ......_ _ _ .....,-,~...... ...... _ _-' ........... ...._..
tr.:.s as the =~:1=ing source. We wanted to ::'nance every~hing a~ ~~:::e to a:::hieve
~n= ~es~ in~e=es~ rate.
C:::;~::=~:::"mernber ?"~n:5:me 5~a-:'ed that. the 5":.æ:.ff re:::==-":. :;iscus5~$ the i.n-ki.nd
es":.:':'-,E.":.ed s":.E.:: =:>S':.5. J..n e>-:ample is ":.he J..5sis":.~:-.-: Fi.nance :·~=-==":.or fa:- l.3
ye~rs. Does -=.~a":. mean ~ta~ indiviàual ~ill ~e wD=ki.~= ~n -:.hi.s ~r=je='t. for -=.ha~
=¡;~::.. -:.i.me an= "':.na": ":.he 5175,000, substi":.u":.€ money, ~.;" bacf::i.ll what ;,..'ill
_ n:>~E~~Y be -:'~e hssistan":.'s å~ties. Is ~hë't. what is being ?=oposed.
Mr. ?owell ar.swe=ed he àoubted if we "...ill spe:::ifically =:'aeJ.:fill ::J= the Assis't.an~
Dire~or_ Be :elt that the Principal Revenue Analys't. and he will spend a lot of
ho~rs backfill':"ng that p:Jsition. We may end up ba:::k:illing some of her tasks,
bu~ she will de:initely be working on the project. we plan on moving her ~~-:.~
a se?~ra":.e of:~=e in getting her away from her day-tc-day tasks. ~uman Resource
De?~~ent an= ~!S Depar-:.ment want to slso àeàicate one staff person full--:.ime
on ~he ?roje=~. ~he vendor also suggests this type __ ":.reatme~-:. Which of ~he
· p~~:''':.':''o~s we ac-:.ually backfill we won'~ know for s~=e until we d~ a àe't.ai~ed
i~::=men~atio~ 5:::hedule ~:'th ~he vendo~.
Co~~=ilmembe~ ?':'ndone asked if staff has discussed a~y op~ions ~i":.~ o~her public
age::cies in 't.~·:"ng -:'0 åevelop proposals tha-:. ""'ill serve t.he Ci-::y ':":1 o't.he:- pu=:'lic
age~cies and =~~ld eliminate some fixed costs Dr à~~~ication 0: services.
Mr. Vignapiano s-:.ated t.ha't. we are in con~act with Iffi?=rial Beach, Coronado, and
Na-:.:'~:.al Ci t.y t~ make them aware that. we are int.eres":.ed in con't.im.:.ing to be their
service proviàer. They have att.ended all the òemonstrat.ions anà been given cost.
est.~lates, and they are part of this CDn~ract. as an ~?t.ion. There is an option
'n ....~~ -~n----- -~-~ S"a-es -s long as "·';-~~n _he ;;-s- 120 a'a"s -o-er S'gn'ng
-~ -..- _...... ..._.c.-:_ _.n::..... 1... _..0::. , .__,."" ~ ___... .:: .c._,- .._
tne =~~t=act. ":.~;":. they aec~oe to come w~t.n ~S, tney w~~ld get tne exact same C~St
· thE.-=. ~as been ?=ovided t.o ":.hem, t.he exact. same services t.hat are i~cluàed in O~=
co~":.ract. for t.~em as well. He expected some type of decision fro~ t.hem some~ime
in ;'_?r il.
Ccr:..:.nci2.member ?':"ndone asked if we had s'L.:f:icient c:a?acity in the sys~em that we
rn~g~t ~ave other users in ":.he future who w~uld like ~~ buy services and help us
m~-:.~gate our =;:!s~s. Or is this pret.ty well maxed 0'·-
Mr. Vi=napiano res~onded ~hat in no way is the system illaxed out.. -- is àesicned
to ~e ~xD~nda~:e_ . It. is åesicned to have a cer{ain ~:Jrtion for ~s richt no~ so
it ~:'ì ~ake care of our need~. It is moåulized so-t.~at we can ~uy ~òditi~~al
har= ==~ves, me~~ry, and ~ha~ever is needed if aàdi~~~~~l cit.ies ~an~ed ~o c~me
alo:;;. We :::2.::1 ::~ ':.hat. on an "as needed basis" so it ::::;oesn' -:. hE-ve ~:; ~e purchased
u':) :=::n":.. 0"- :::~st.s are not over inflat.ed to ant.i::~:;E.~e ot.her ë.=en:::ies but. :.:;
· ~ -- -' =- -' .;" -.. - þ ~. - . ~
g-'= -~- ,,"'----, .0 _xpan~ h. Iii
.. )
¥.:..:ï....:.~es
Ma~=h 31, 1998
Page 6
co...:.:ï.cilmember Moot stated the ~erm microcomputer w~~k5tation is used. Is that
di::erent from a pc. How many PCs do we get for the S180,000.
Mr. Powell replied that is a pc. There ar-e approximately 36 listed. Staff
bel:"eves that Council will be seeing a recommenòation for a contract tor
microcomputer hardware within the next few weeks. The bids that were received
were extremely aggressive, so we feel that ~his number will cover more than the
36 ~hat we have in the contract.
Councilmember Moot asked if all the City's compu-:.er systems access off the
current mainframe now.
Mr. Vignapiano replied ~he majority of àe?ar~ments ~5e ~he main:rame at least. to
ge~ ~heir buàget and accounting information. There are some departments who use
it more heavily than others, but every department has the ability to get t.o t.he
ma':"n:rame. That is not the main vehicle for departments who have PCs to get to
do ot.her things such as word processing which is no~ run on the mainframe.
Coun=ilmember Moot asked what about computers outside the City Hall complex. For
example, the two libraries.
Mr. Vignapiano answered that the two libraries are bo~h connected to the current
Ci~y's network already. The South Chula Vis~a Library uses a technology called
f~ame relay which goes over T-l lines and connects ~o ~he Main L~brary. The Main
Library is connected with fiber optic cable ~o the =es~ of the network in Cit.y
Ea.::.
RESOLtJ'IIONS 18940 AND 18941 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, headings read, texts waived,
passed and approved unan~ously 5-0.
-.
14. RESOLtJ'IION 18942 AtJ'IHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO EXECtJ'IE A
REFUNDING LEASE-PURCHASE PLAN TO REFINANCE THE EXISTING LEASE-PURCHASE AGREEMENT
THAT PROVIDED FUNDING FOR THE PURCHASE OF ( 1) A PUBLIC SAFETY COMPtJ'IER AIDED
DISPATCH AND MOBILE DATA TERMINAL SYSTEM, (2) AN 800 MHz COMMUNICATION SYSTEM,
AND (3) MISCELLANEOUS BEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT, APPROVING AN
INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF THE REFUNDING LEASE-PURCHASE AGREEMENT TO FINANCE
ADDITIONAL COSTS IN TWO OF THESE PROJECTS, AND APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE
CAPITAL PROJECT AND DEBT SERVICE BUDGETS TO REFLECT THESE ACTIONS - Approval is
requested for a refunding lease-purchase financing ag=eement with CaLease Public
Funding Corporation (CaLease) for the purpose of reducing inte=est costs by re-
financing the existing lease-purchase agreement approved in May, 1997, tor the
funding of a public safety computer aided dispatch (CAD) and mobile data terminal
(MDT) system from Unisys Corp. , an 800 MHz communicat.ion system from Motorola,
Inc. , and miscellaneous heating and air conditioning equipment, t.o increase t.he
borro.....ing to fund additional requirements in the fir-s't two projects totaling
S305,600, and to amend the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) and Debt Service
budgets to reflect these actions. Per staff's recommendation, the resolution was
approved unanimously 5-0. (Director of Finance)
Robert Powell, Finance Director, stated t.hat about. 11 months ago, Council
approved the lease/purchase financing of the Police Computer Aided Dispatch
system, a public safety 800 MHz communication system, and miscellaneous heating
and air condi<:ioning equipment for a tot.al ot approximately S3.5 million.
Interest rates at that time were 6.39%. In dealing .....ith CaLease on the previous
item, we mutually agreed that they should analyze the current. lease/purchase
agreement with the view towards possibility achieving some savings by a
refinancing. They felt that they would be able to obtain a lower interest rate
on the combination of the two because of the larger size of the borrowing. There
is approximately 53.1 million remaining on that original lease. CaLease is
offering 5.46% on their refinancing if we combine that with the mainframe fiscal
system. The savings for the lower interest rate on that project would equate to
approximately S51,000. There have been additional project reouirements on the
CAD system and on the 800 MHz totalling 5305,600 which if we added into this the
refunding lease/purchase woulà have a financing cost of about $75,000, so t.he net
IL
.~.:..~:..;:.;-s
.~ï=.=::r. -' _, _ ~';j::'
?d~E: 7
~
sa·,":.::::s versus :':JE: ::-:)5':. ...·:;;::.l::j =e5u2.:. in ne~ ::::st. 0: a.:;;:::.::. S:¿li, D::': .....:-..:..::h w::>:...;:= ,:)E:
s-==ead over a :':"ve ~o seVe::1 year period. The recom."'nen::5.:.ion __ ~:,. approve :':-:E:
:::-~:~:'l=ing be::a:.:se -:.here are e::onomi:: savings and we ...·ill be ë.b:E: :.::. achieve :':-IE'
l.:n,-,=r in'teres:. rs.-:.e on b:;;-:.h -:.he previous project. a:1d -:.he prev':":;¡:;sly ap?r::ve::i
pr=je=~s and :.:;¡ approve -:.hese aåditional i'terns whi::h have come ~? during :.nese
pr=~e:::' impleme~:.a:.ions.
RES~~L~ION 189_2 OFFERED EY Y~.YOR BORTON, heading =ead, text ~aived.
Co:.:~=ilmember ~:::::. s~a:.e= :.ha:. :.his an:.i::ipa:.es some addi:'ional ~o:'ley neeàed :'0
i..n'::;::'e;.¡e:1:' -:.he S:¡J Y..P.z. sys:.em and :.he CAD sys:.em. -- .....ould be· :::"::e if WI:> ::::>:.:1d
hav~ é.~ ~Dda:'E: é.S :'0 h::~ :.he implemen:.a:.io:'l of :'~a:. :"5 goin~, é.::1d where :.he
a=~':":.:"o~aî =::s:.s are c::æ:"~; :rom.
VO=<:: P.ESOLl1::ION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0.
15. P.ESOLUTION 189'3 KhIVING THE CONSULThNT SELECTION POLICY AND APPROVING
AGP.E~~ FORM KITH A PROFESSIONAL ENGI~~ERING CONSULTAÄ~ FOR Lhh~ DEVELOPME~~
PLhRS PIVIEW, ÀL~ORIZING THE MAYOR TO ErECUTE THE CONTRACT, AÄ~ APPROPRIATE
F1JJ..~S - The eas:.ern t.e:::-ri:.::ries DÍ the Ci-:y a::.-e curren':.ly experiencing aggressive
l~D= develo?me~:. a::.ivi:.':'es. ~he extensive planning e::or':.s for O:.ay Ranch and
o~~=r ?=oje=:.s ~re =ulm':"~=:.ing now wi~h :inal engineering pla~s, enginee~~ng
s~u=:"es, finan:':'ng òis~=i=~5 and many imp=ovemen~ se=~=i:.y agreemen:.s. S':.aff is
man==':.ed by ~~= S~~divisi~n ~a? Act stri::. :.ime limi:.s OD revie~ ~~d prD=essi~9
or ':":::::=oveme:ï.:' :;.2.a:ls. Terr.?:Jrary "ex-:.ension of s':.a::" :JY OU:'siåë: =~Dsultan't.5 is
=e=::~~ended as an in:.erim solu't.ion to aC=Dm~oda:'e and =eac:. :'0 t~= surge 0: ~and
Deve:o?ffient a::.':"vities an= :'0 comply wi':.h the Subdivision Map A::~. 3eca~se~_
the :'~e ne::essa.rv ':.0 sele=:. a consultant -:.hrou:::h the :::=mal const.::~an't. sele:':.':'::n
-- process and the ~ediate neeà :0= additional ;taff ':.0 review maps and plans, it
is :..r.:p=act:.ir::a.l ":.0 £0110...· -:.he Consultant. selection procedure. ?er st.aff' s
re=o~~enda'tion, -:.he resolu-:.ion was approved -**- (Direc'tor of ?~blic Works)
4/5th's vote required.
Mav~= 50r'ton S:'2:.e~ Drevi::~sly we have èiscussed -:.he need for a==~:.ionë.l s:.a::
t.~-ad=ress 'the sur~e ~n àe:elopment that ~ë.s fo~:.h=oæ~~9. Why ài=~'-:. we have :.ne
~~m= -:'0 go for~~r= w~t.h :'~e consultant sele=:'~Dn process.
Cli~f Swanson, Depu-:.y D~rec~or of Public W::rks, s:.a:.ed that s-=~~ has been
wo=ki~9 ~ith ~he Human Resources Departmen~ and we tel:. -:.hat ini-:.~~lly, based o~
the ~~s-:. that ~e had, we would be able to fill it wi-:.hin a re2so~able time anà
:'0 :,e: able :.;:. ::'a=kfill as we have done \f,·i:.h over:.ime hours. Bowever, :.he
ove=-:.~e hours have gott-e:1 to :'he point of 434 ad.èi:.ional hOl':=S overtime ~n
Jam...ary and ~n ?ebruary a:1other 384. ..r.t is having an impact ::>ecause of :.he
len~h of time i:. :.~kes :'0 go :.hrough the ent.ire hiring process, we need to tire
the consultants now.
Sid ~.:;=ris, }..Es:.s:.ant City Manager, aåded wø have also }-iad s:::J:ne unexpec-:.ed
~1..:r:::~\*e= ·.in En;:"neer.ing _..~_ has exacerba-:.ed that. pr:;::;lem. The=-=::::re, beca~se
of t~;:., we ~re ~ooking ~~ ~n ex:.ended p=~=e55 even __ we wen':. t~=o~gh the R??,
we ....:J:.:2.=. s:.ill :-.ave :.he nee:: to fill three permanent. p:JEitions in :.::e depart.ment.
we 't.~o~?ht. we c::::.:2.d handle :.his in over~ime hou=s. O~r posit.ion ~~s ëlways been
not 't.:J st.aff a:. the peaks ~~:. -:'0 be able t.o handle :.he st.affing as neeàed. We
may have underes:.,im2t.ed a litt~e, bu~ at the same time the aàdit.io~al vacancies
have creat.ed headaches :or us, so t.his is t.he bes~ way t.o handle t.his at. :.his
p:;:i~~. T~e over:.irne hours ::id not. adequat.ely hanàle that. when cOilibined with t~e
exis-:..ing vacancies.
Mayor ~:::rton asked if we have done any kind of cost analysis to de:.ermine whet.her
or n::::. ......e shoul:S. ~e hiring :.hese people "Co a::commoda:.e t.he growt.h over the ne>:t.
few years.
¥..r. S...-a::.son re-=:'':''e::s' i:. is ::i.:.llv s:'ë.f:'s intent 'to ::':"re. :::t __ lUS't a t.":":¡Le
process. We =:.:rrently have :.r:ree vacan::ies and due t.o a pen:::"!1g pr::¡mo:.i:;¡n
in:.er~ally, we ~:"ll s:::Jon have :o~r vacancies in the lanà developmen:. st.aff. he
1'2,-
Mi:1':.:;:.es
Ma=::.n 31, 1998
Page B
re=ently went ~hrough the list of Assistant Engineers. It tãkes two to three
m~r.~hs to get a new list certified. We are in the ?=~=ess of trying to hire aff
a C~vil Engineer list. We are determined to fill it. The proposed contract is
st=uctured basically to-supply us with the initial people that we need to carry
th"ough for 60 days and then beyond the 60 days, on a week-to-week basis,
depending on whether or not we have been able to hire.
Cou~cilmember Padilla stated what we are looking at ~n this resolution is simply
a -;.emporary measure. The overall fundamental policy issue about wha~ our
internal neeàs are going to be; what the capacity 0: the organization is to
handle the £mpact of multiple land use processes occurring simultaneously as the
eco~omy moves up, housing and construction takes off, and grading and permitting
ac::elerates to a level above what we have seen in the last couple of years. On
't.hat fundamental question, we began that discussion about a year ago. We
probably should recognize that discussion needs to take place, an analysis needs
to begin, and we grant to staff that unforeseen vacancies and exi~s occur, but
these particular types of measures will become less f~eguen~ly necessary because
the intent is that at some point we are going to need s'ta£f in the future.
Whether that be expanding our contingent of inhouse professionals or whether that
be ,looking at consulting in whole or in part. He wanted to aèd that he thought
tha~ 't.he fundamental question is something, given 't.he circumstances, that we as
a C~uncil anxiously await to see that analysis begi~.
Mr. Morris indicated that he believed we had done that analysis. What we are
't.ry~ng to inform the Council of is 't.ha't. if it weren ''t. for the aåditional
vacancies that occurred within the deDartment, we believed we could have handled
it as proposed. But these additional ~vacancies have creð't.ed a situð't.ion that has
cost more overall. We will continue to evaluate and ~ill l~~k ~t that as Dart
of the budget process. We are trying to provide Council and the developers ~ith
the most cost effective mechanism for processing the plans. We have looked at --,
and part of our projections are based on the àata that we have from the
developers. I't. is our intent to continue to evaluate that; it is not a static
process, it is one that continually evolves and as has occurred now, we are
reac't.ing to some changes in that process.
Councilmember Rindone stated it was his unders't.andino 't.hat this is a DroDosal :or
60 days and that staff is doing due diligence to go~out ~o hire pe~~anënt sta:f
as s~affing needs appear to be developing. It is s~a::'s in~ent ~o move towa=ås
obtaining permanent staff.
RESOLUTION 18943 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, heading read~ text waived.
Councilmember Moot suggested that staff might wan~ ~o look at whether that
consultant is working or is processing plans for one of the major äevelopers with
othe~ governmental agencies. If a particular consultant is processing maps for
ano't.her developer and they were doing a lot of maps !or that àeveloper, they
might not be an appropriate consultant to be doing that for Chu!a Vista since
they may be doing a project here in the City for ano't.her developer.
Mr. Swanson replied that not only will they not do any development plans with the
City, but we are also concerned if they are doing plans for that entity.
For~una't.ely, however, the consultant community seems to be broken up into two
major areas: those that tend to work exclusively for cities and those that tend
to work for the developer in processing of plans. So, we are looking at those
who are not processing plans with other cities.
Mayor Horton adàed that it is very important that we try to keep on tOp of this
issue. It is our responsibility to make sure that we have aàequa~e staffing to
aàdress the needs when the need arises, because we neeè to remember that
ultimately if we don't address these things immediately it may Cost us more in
the long run and the end p~oduct user is the one who is going to pay for this
which is the consumer or home buyer.
VOTE: RESOLUTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0.
/3______
MinL;":.es
.~Ç.rch 3J, ~998
Page 9
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
No i~ems were ?~lled.
OTHER BUSINESS
1ó. CITY ¥ANAGER'S REPORT(S) - none
lï. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
~ Ratification of a::rp:Jintment to the Otay '...·alley R::.ad P=oject. J..rea Conunit~ee:
Eè ~es=he (to :ill vaca~~y creat.ed by Commissioner Doria, whose ~e=m expires J~ne
30,2000).
MSUC (HortonjRindone) to ratify the appointment of Ed Wesche to the Otay Valley
Road PAC.
. Mayor Hort.on st.ated ~hat. t.here is a let.t.er on t.he dais :rom one of ~he
concerned parents from the EastLake Lit.tle League. Their concerns are that t.hey
don'~ have practice fields for their baseball ~eam. She referred -:.he letter back
to s~aff to bring a report back to see what. we can ào t.o help :õ=:litate their
nee::s. Maybe t.hey need to consolidate with one of t.he ot.her Lit.:.2-e :'eague t.eams.
Sid Morris, Assistant Cit.y Manager, stat.ed t.here is a ~etter =o~ing from ~he
Yo~th Sports Council on that. issue in respon~i~g t.o a va=iet.y of :.~e claims, no:.
only in this letter, but. earlier co=responãence.
~ 18. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Moot reported on the International Council for Local Environmental
Initiatives. Chula Vista is very prominent in that organization. There are no~
51 participating cities in ICLE1 and Chula Vista got mentioned in several
di::erent categories. He :elt that we can be very proud when you see a city of
160,000 population being mentioned ~ith cities like Portland, ~inneapolis, and
Chicago. Chula Vista is one of the founders and leading the way in so many ~f
the areas.
Councilmember Padilla requested an information item on the con=erns that Mr.
Maxwell expressed about the =hurch on East .. Stree":. and Paseo Ranchero.
Coun=ilmember Salas announced she had participated in and picked up trash for
about. 4 hours in the "1 Love a Clean Chula Vista" program t.hat was put together
by Building anà Housing and the Conservation Coordina~or. There were over 160
volunteers that showed up.
Councilmember Rindone made a referral to sta:f about the amount of graffiti in
the Hilltop area around "r" Street. It has been quite excessive a~d nothing has
been àone. He hoped sta:f would renew their efforts t.~ assist _.. gett.ing :.he
gra::iti removed.
ADJOURNMEI'.'T
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respec~fully submitted,
Beverly A. Authelet., CMC/AAE
Ci ty Clerk
/¥
bK~\\'\- ])
Ii; :~I '~' ,~ :~: ;:1 ::' :~r :g' :01 i ,~
, '~ 'ID.i I~ '~ "'"':.: 'ID.I I"'! I ,~~: I;!I I '0
'u' : :~' ::: ;: ': '0' ,M" ,:;: ~ IMI I ~
0"- 'tot 'IIr' ~ ,.,...: ~
~.~ ,* ~~I I ,_
:0..:.... I
... '-I 'ID ~ 'c '''I ,.,.... '0 0' 10' I
~ ::;'J :~ :~ ;~., ::"1 ::g: '::¡ ;=;: I~
' , .... lOCo ...,.... ,~, ,... '_ I '''''.0. _
I I, .~ .~I I~: ,~ ,~! ,~,~I I: 'I '~I '"
.- II .: I~I I .. I
!~ ~i i I ¡ i ¡ ¡ I- i i I ¡ I ;
I III' II' ''''I' ·1 ,a¡ ,a '" ,
, : II-!!!¡:S ~ i
, "I jl ,I II'~ '" ,
I i~¡~! II ¡ ! ; I I ø I
.' L I' I :g, '8 181 :g :.8/18 I'" 'I I' '''' I
, ;.' I.. ..I '... '.... II<)" I I"
I I'...! I"'; t"'. I..., ,_. It>,¡· I"':. I I I
, '<I" ' ,~ I 'I i ,~,~ '''' , I
' 1m õ ' I i I ,.. I
, Ie.> ~I I j , I I I I
j ii, ::¡::; I=:I .~ '.'~I' 1:;1 !~I I I i 0
, i' '....... t... ,.. IIn r... I: I I..
:~I ¡ ,..¡ i"'; 1";1 ,..¡ ',.:"1 ,...." ~ . I
1"'''1- 'tot I... I....' ,.., ,.1' '~I IN !:
,.','!I, , I I ' , I i'~ IJ'
,~I....I , I I --L
I /1' 10 IV) 1<> '<>1 ,<> 1<> 110 Ie Ie 0
10 I. ... ,_ '" ...,... .. ,_ ....
',", I'"' ~. ~I I~·I·· '" '" '''! ...
I i~l~ : I:; t I:; Il Î :: ~ :: I:; :I
,<> 'b <> ,<> 1<> <>.. <> 1<> '"
I I' '0 J. C ... C IQ _ 0 II::> C)
I ., ,- _.... ,- _ It) .... - N
I ~II"" --_ -1-'-
I ¡¡, I
11: i·
. ~ 'I
I "'
, -,
, C·
I ill 1:8 I~ ~ Igl I¡¡ I:;: '" Ig I:! '"
, 'ID !ID ... '.... If') ...;- 1_ 1.... :ø
iij '....~I I..: I"': I_I '''''~ I'" I.. e>l."':..
, I ¡~¡I .~¡ 1- ~ II ¡- r; - r ~
., I -'~" II I 'N 'N. N N
. ~I"'i I I '
·1 JI<'~' 'I
:; I' 'I
: 115,,! II I!
, . !S:c.! ,I ,I
, i. I" ~¡¡;I ;~I '~I II ¡~I '~'~ I'~I'~I ~
: !~I~i I ¡ II i : I I I I I
i II~! '~i ¡~ ~ Ii n rl':!: 11 '"
'Ell ! I , I I I
!.!! I i: ! I
, ,<, , " ,I I I"
, ,~; ,~¡ ~II '.~" '~I . 1<>1 'NI' iN
; I I~I 'I ': N - I I~
í i Ie" ¡I! ¡ I i
' I Ie I I " I I
! 15 II! , 1 ¡ I I I I
I !§¡¡ ·1 ~I I 'N ¡~I I~ I I ,'"
I · -', I· i 'I I I I
I .. CII I I I
i ! i !ÆÆ ¡ : I ! I ¡ ¡ I I
i.... II i-I ßI' :""1 ,- .... .... ¡.... I: I~ lID I_ :!'
I· II; - ! ; 'I' !
I 'C I I
, i ! I~I~ I ; ! I! I
i I II !~ I ! I I 'I I IN I IN. I II ~ I '"
, I~' , I ' I ' "
I 'I ¡~: ,¡ II ; i II II! ~
I ,:g¡ ¡,: I 'II I Ò
" , I I j Z
I,:!i) It!) I 1= - 't:: a::
..!! : .~ IZ':::I !.~ z w
,.. , ,~ I;: . ...- '" 10
IE 1 1- ... I I..!! IID'~ ...
= , I ,.'.- :t I", ;;;.. 10:
:Û}_I a: it:: ~ .Q I - a: 0
''¡j ¡;: IW ;~ I ~ r:~. ¡ W CD W
¡ D .g ,~ :: ic% t:: ~ :::: I:: E t; t: D. 10
~if,fii ¡~ ¡~I ¡~ it i Ii III s ~ ~ ~ ~ I~
mi..v::¡;iæl Iw ~~ ;~ ä ¡II) ,. II) -; ~: _ -g ':¡:
"'5i.i&:"E¡~I. ;s ,= !- ';: Ii! :I~ I~I:: 1< 18 Ii m I'"
tš:~'~;::; I~:~ :-i .; 1= .~ 2: W 0 l.e ,~..J ..J
õ'-' Þ.u.: II Ia: I ! ':' .:t:: D I t: ::I 'ii ~ I lID '0 "iii +<
'~-ii'<:' ,~I5' :EI II.I, ~ V 'I.I, , III), 1_ Iz 11:1 !V ,_ I-
~:~-.:::....I : ¡ iz '01 '0 IC Ic ,cl lal '0 0 la 10 0
(,):OU:;:: ,,...., IW '.... ,..,¡ I..; 1,:1 +'¿; 'oD II- !:3 I"': ,c.,¡ II- I~
¡-
......._2_ ______
./
EXHIBIT 1::/
EXHIBIT C - ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK (DETAIL)
The additional scope of work tasks have been arranged in a logical format and have been outlined
into major sections:
9.0 Additional Scope of Work (Proposed Contract Extension Work)
OVERVIEW
Due to the need for the consultant to provide additional work to obtain completed environmental
permits and project needs for a complete landscaping master and mitigation plan for the entire length
of Olympic Parkway, an extension of the project scope of work is necessary in order to have the
Olympic Parkway project proceed through the environmental process with the least amount of delay.
The additional scope of work proposed has been summarized below:
· A. Environmental Permitting Pro¡µ-am
The consultant will pursue and obtain wetland and endangered species authorizations, permits, for
the construction of Olympic Parkway. The additional work will involve the following tasks:
Task 9.1: Wetland Delineation and Habitat Impact Refinement.
This work will update the wetland delineation area along the roadway corridor from the
Sunbow site eastward. The wetland delineation will be incorporated into the permit
applications to the Resource Agencies. It will be prepared in accordance with the United
States Fish & Wildlife Services protocal for wetland delineation.
·
Task 9.2: Evaluation of Special Issues Associated with Roadway Design and Regional
Setting.
This task will evaluate the roadway and how it fits into the regional context of development
and demand and its utility as a circulation element, independent from adjacent development
and how tlùs roadway would dictate alignments of north-south roads. This task will consider
whether or not there are other practical alternatives to achieve the basic project purpose so
that environmental impacts are kept to a minimum.
Task 9.3: Wetland Mitigation Plan.
· The consultant will prepare a wetland mitigation plan to offset impacts associated with the
construction of Olympic Parkway. This task will select a mitigation site aJong the roadway
alignment and defme the boundaries of the mitigation area with the preparation of a planting
plan and typical plant layout for the mitigation area. An irrigation system concept plan
and written mitigation plan per the City standards and the Corps of Engineers standards with
cost estimate will also be prepared.
Task 9.4 (Optional): Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat and California Gnatcatcher Issues.
This task will address impacts to California Gnatcatchers and coastal sage scrub east of the
Sunbow deveJopment since these impacts are not authorized yet for the portion of Olympic
· Parkway east of Sunbow. Ultimately a biological assessment would need to be prepared to
evaluate the impacts to gnatcatchers and suggest mitigation measures. The United States
Fish & Wildlife Service would then issue a biological opinion, which would provide an
/0
assessment of the roadway project effects, outline the terms and conditions and authorize the
take of gnatcatchers and habitat.
Task 9.5: Environmental Permit Application Packages and Submittal.
The consultant will prepare permit application packages for submittal in order to obtain to
the regulatory agencies by the City of Chula Vista. Applications, notifications, and
supporting documentation will be submitted for the following processes:
A). Clean Water Act, section 401 State Water Qualiry Certification or Waiver;
B). Clean Water Act, section 404 Permit;
C). California Fish and Game Code, Section 1601;
D). Endangered Species Act, Section 7 Consultation, OR;
Endangered Species Act, Section J Oa permit (if needed).
Task 9.6: Provide Support Services in Permit Processing.
The consultant will work with the regulatory agency staff to keep the permit process moving
forward to resolution. This work is difficult to estimate the number of hours needed and will
be billed on a time and material basis with an amount not to exceed limits. Thus the Council
report includes $2,904 in additional funds requested above and beyond the $57,096 proposal
provided by the consultant to total $60,000. Support services scope of work includes all
tasks necessary to begin construction.
B. Landscape Master Plan
The consultant will expand the work they have completed to cover additional segments of Olympic
ParJ.:way to the west and to the east of the original boundaries. The consultant will also meet with
City staff to discuss and present the Master Landscaping Plan for the entire length of Olympic
ParJ...-way from I-80S to the Olympic Training Center and refme the mitigation plan.
Task 9.7: Data Collection.
The consultant will meet V\~th City staff to discuss project status and receive input and
direction on additional areas. The consultant will visit the site to review existing conditions
and photograph site for landscape planning purposes. The consultant wilL obtain and review
existing and proposed landscape concepts and themes for land developments adjacent to the
Olympic Parkway corridor.
Task 9.8: Prepare Comprehensive Landscape Master Plan.
The consultant will prepare the initial comprehensive landscape master plan, including the
mitigation plan, and construction cost estimate for the Olympic ParJ...'Way corridor and present
plan to City staff and make revisions as needed based on comments from City staff.
/7
_..__..._.,-------~----
REVISED AGENDA STATEMENT
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT /5'
Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: ResoJution J~..2'1.l Accepting the grading and wet utility bids
received and authorizing the EastLake Company to construct Olympic
Parkway improvements between Hunte Parkway and the Olympic Training
Center and receive credit or reimbursement against Transportation
DeveJopment Impact Fees
SUBMITTED BY: Dr,,,,,,,,f "'bli, W"')Y ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ bð ~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..xJ
The City Engineer received a Jetter dated September 28, 1998, from the EastLake Company,
requesting authorization to begin construction of roadway facilities identified in the City's
Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) list and
initiate the DIF credit process. The grading plans have been submitted and approved by the City
Engineer as of August 4, 1998.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the EastLake
Company to commence construction and initiating reimbursement or DIF credit proceedings in
accordance with the TDIF ordinance for the grading and wet utilities on Olympic Parkway
between Hunte Parkway and the Olympic Training Center.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not ApplicabJe
DISCUSSION:
On April 1, 1998, MichaeJ Hamer, Project Manager for the EastLake Company, sent a Jetter
(Exhibit" A ") to the City requesting authorization to construct the remaining portion of Hunte
Parkway from Clubhouse Drive to Olympic Parkway (East Orange Avenue) and Olympic Parkway
from Hunte Parkway to the Olympic Training Center. These street segments are respectively
identified as Project No. 21A and No. 29 on the City's Transportation Development Impact Fee
Capital Improvement Program (TDIF CIP) list included in the DIF report revision dated
November 9, 1993 (Exhibit "B"). City staff informed Mr. Hamer in ApriJ that he wouJd need
to obtain a minimum of three bids for the work invoJved before the projects couJd be authorized
and approved for TDIF reimbursement by Council.
The EastLake Company subsequently submitted another letter, dated September 28, 1998 (Exhibit
"C"), requesting authorization from the City to construct a portion of Olympic Parkway between
Hunte Parkway and the Olympic Training Center referred to as Project No. 29 in the City's TDIF
J 3'" /
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
erp (Exhibit "B"). The Hunte Parkway project (Project 21A) was dropped from this request,
since the project is still in design. The specific portion of this project which EastLake wishes to
construct is the grading and storm drain system from east of Hunte Parkway to the Olympic
Training Center.
Under TDIF ordinance procedures, a developer may request reimbursement or credit for the
construction of facilities identified in the TDIF project list. The ordinances provide that a
developer may request authorization from the City Council to construct one or more of the
transportation facilities listed in the ordinance. The total cost estimate for Project No. 29
contained in the DeveJopment Impact Fee Report as of January, 1994 is $5,104,000. The cost
for the currently proposed work is $831,145 for the grading contract and $276,387.35 for the
storm drain portion of the wet utilities contract (Exhibit "D"). The grading and wet utilities (i.e. ,
water and sewer utilities) construction for this portion of the project commenced at the end of
October 1998 and is anticipated to be completed by the end of February 1999. Construction of
all other street improvements, including landscaping, is anticipated to take place between February
and June 1999. The deveJoper has already received credit for grading work done in Olympic
Parkway immediately to the east of Hunte Parkway. Staff will come back to Council with
Eastlake's request for these subsequent phases after bids have been received.
The deveJoper will be eligibJe to receive TDIF credit for any grading within the future roadway
that may be used for the future street improvements. The deveJoper has aJready received credit
for a portion of grading work for Project No. 29, that portion of Olympic Parkway immediately
to the east of Hunte Parkway (Phase 2). Additionally, the developer will receive credit for
drainage facilities which are required for construction of the roadway.
It is anticipated that most of the major projects listed in the TDIF ordinances will be built by
developers and that developers will earn credits against future fees at the building permit stage.
ShouJd the credits from future projects not be enough to offset the developer's front-end expense
for a particular project, the City will reimburse additional monies to the developers at the time
that the City feels there are adequate funds to do so and if reimbursement will not delay needed
future projects.
The TDIF ordinance provides a procedure for issuance of credits or tender of reimbursement offe r
to developers. The deveJoper has complied with the proceduraJ requirements of the TDIF
ordinance. Per this ordinance a description and cost estimate of the improvements aJong with
other information and statements is required to be submitted to the City Council.
The following information has been submitted as required by the ordinance:
/S~~
-"---.----..-"---" .__._.,-~.._.
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
1. The letter dated September 28, 1998 to the City Engineer requesting that the City authorize
construction and reimbursement or credit for the construction of a roadway facility
identified in the City's TDIF project list (included as Exhibits "c" & "B", respectively);
2. The project description (Exhibit "B") was submitted along with the bonding estimate for
the portion of the project included in the current request. The cost estimates obtained from
the Jow bidders are included as Exhibit "D";
3. The EastLake Company has prepared and submitted grading and improvement pJans to
the City. The Jatest revisions to these pJans were approved as of August 4, 1998.
Easements and rights-of-way for the project have all been obtained as required by the
Director of Public Works.
All necessary permits and environmental clearances necessary for construction of the
project have been obtained by the EastLake Company. The EastLake Company has also
paid all required permit and plan check fees and posted any security which is necessary
for the project.
4. The City will not be responsibJe for any of the costs of constructing the project. All
funds to construct the project shall be advanced by the EastLake Company.
5. The TDIF ordinances require a developer to secure at Jeast three (3) qualified bids for the
work to be done. As discussed in their Jetter dated August 27, 1998 (Exhibit "E"),the
EastLake Company has secured five (5) qualified bids for the grading work but only two
(2) qualified bids for the storm drain work to be performed as part of their wet utilities
contract. The contracts have been awarded to the Jowest bidder in each case. Staff
recommends that two bids be considered acceptable for the wet utilities contract based on
EastLake's good faith effort to obtain the three bids required, which was substantiated by
correspondence from the firms that declined to bid, and because the bids obtained were
within five percent of each other. Any extra work or changes during construction shall
be justified and documented.
6. When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the EastLake Company
shall submit verification of payments made for the construction of the project to the City.
The Director of Public Works shall make the final determination on expenditures which
are eJigible for credit or reimbursement.
7. The EastLake Company will receive credit against required Development Impact Fees
at the time of issuance of building permits.
15--3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
FISCAL IMPACT: None to the City. The EastLake Company will advance all necessary funds
to construct the project and will receive a credit or cash reimbursement in accordance with the
provisions of Ordinance #2251 and as amended by Ordinances #2289 & 2580. The construction
cost estimates for the Olympic Parkway construction project totals $5,104,000 as contained in the
Eastern Area Development Impact Fee for Streets Report dated November 1993. Since the
developer will only perform the grading and construct the storm drain facilities for this project
at this time, the contractors' bid amounts for this work totals $1,107,532.35. The actual amount
of credit or reimbursement will be determined by the Director of Public Works and be based on
actuaJ final costs. Under the TDIF Ordinance, reimbursement will only be disbursed when the
City determines sufficient funds are available. The Development Impact Fee Report will be
modified to reflect the actual costs when the improvements have been compJeted. The developer
will pay all reJated City staff costs including those for inspection and administration of the TDIF
credit procedure.
Exhibits: A. Letter dated April 1, 1998 from Mike Hamer to City
B. TDIF CIP list included in the November 9, 1993 revised report
C. Letter dated September 28, 1998 from Mike Hamer to City
D. Lowest contract bid estimates
E. Letter dated August 27, 1998 from Mike Hamer to City and response
File No.: 0730-20-HX052
H:\HOMEIENGINEERIAGENDAIOL YMDlFl.EMC
Rev 12108/983:36pm
/5--'1
~
RESOLUTION NO. / <) c2 9,;...
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE GRADING AND WET
UTILITY BIDS RECEIVED FOR OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND
AUTHORIZING THE EASTLAKE COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT
OLYMPIC PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN HUNTE
PARKWAY AND THE OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER AND
HUNTE PARKWAY BETWEEN OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND
SOUTH GREENSVIEW DRIVE AND RECEIVE CREDIT OR
REIMBURSEMENT AGAINST TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
WHEREAS, the City Engineer received letters dated April
1, 1998 and September 2, 1998, from the EastLake Company,
requesting authorization to begin construction of roadway
facilities identified in the City's Transportation Development
Impact Fee (TDIF) Capital Improvement p;rojects (CIP) list, and
initiate the DIF credit process; and
WHEREAS, the projects for which authorization is
requested are included in the list of TDIF CIP projects generally
described as Olympic Parkway street improvements between Hunte
Parkway and the Olympic Training Center and Hunte Parkway between
Olympic Parkway and South Greensview Drive (CIP Projects 21A and
29) ( "proj ect "); and
WHEREAS, the grading plans for the proj ect have been
submitted and approved the City Engineer as of August 4, 1998; and
WHEREAS, easements and rights-of-way for the Project have
all been obtained as required by the Director of Public Works; and
WHEREAS, all necessary permits and environmental
clearances necessary for construction of the Project have been
obtained by the EastLake Company; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Ordinance 2251 and as amended
by Ordinances Nos. 2289 and 2580, a developer may request
reimbursement or credit for the construction of facilities
identified in the TDIF CIP List; and
WHEREAS, the developer is only requesting authorization
for the grading and the storm drain facilities ("wet utilities")
for this Project at this time, the contractors' bid amounts for
this work totals $1,107,532.35.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby accept the grading and wet utility
bids so received and authorize the EastLake Company to perform said
1
J S'<-;;---
work for the Project and receive credit or reimbursement for such
work, against the Transportation Development Impact Fees in
accordance with the conditions set forth in Section 4, Article II
of Ordinance 2251.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the actual amount of credit or
reimbursement will be determined by the Director Public Works,
based on actual final costs.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Cl__ ~'1-0L
John P. Lippitt, Director of John M. Kaheny, city Attorney
Public Works
H:\home\attorney\olympic2
2
JS~/
0Ä;//?t~
April 1, 1998 .II.
...
...
Elizabeth Chopp, Civil Engineer ~
Engineering Department THE
City of ChuJa Vista EASTLAKE
276 Fourth Avenue COMPANY, LLC
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Subject: Construction of Olympic Parkway
Dear Elizabeth:
This letter serves to request authorization to construe! the remaining portion of project
21A and project 29 of the Eastern Area Development Impact fees for streets.
Plans for this work have been prepared and approved by the City under work orders
PG-371 and EY- 328.
All required permits and environmental clearances have been obtained. The impact to
Salt Creek during construction has been authorized by the Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers nationwide permit.
We are in the process of providing performance bonds for the project.
Please could you advise me as to any further requirements that should be satisfied prior to
obtaining approval ITom the City Council.
I would like the opportunity to discuss procedure in order to facilitate the reimbursement
process on this project.
Sincerely,
~
Michael A. Hamer
Project Manager
MAH:jss ...'3456788
/ / '\ "0"
Enclosures /tS" ~
·0 "'.
~ ~\
~ ~
. .
F:\edcshare\hamer\wwdata\elíz.abethdlOpp.doc ;N
i::o
,001
\';;
~c'
~ <¡;
jç-? p> ..~"
. £'2' G'Z\.'Z 0"
, I
900 La.....e Avenue, Suite "J':; . Chulc Vista, California 9191<:1 . ìelephone (619) 421-0127 . =o::::simile (619) 421-1830
L.-
GH/ß/T8
TABLE 3
CAPITAL IMPRDYEME1I.'T PROJECTS
COST ESTL\lA TE SUMMARY
(AS OF JULY 1, 1992)
No. DIFStJeel Location Reviled RcmaIks
Cost
I State ROIIIt 125 Nonh San Miguel 10 Telegraph Canyon Road SO To SR-I25 DIP/CFD
2 SWc ROIIIt 125 South Telegraph Canyon Road 10 E.ut OIuge o To SR·I25 DIF/CFD
Avenue
3 Telegraph Canyon Road Pasco Dcl Rey 10 East of Pasco Ladera 3,452,000 W1dcJJiDg 10 6-1ane prime
3a Telegraph Canyon Road 1-805 lDIcrcJwJge Phase D 1.814,000 lDIcrcJwJge lmprovcmcD15 (Phase
DA is UDder CODSUUCûon)
4 Telegraph Canyon Road Phase 1 R1Jtiers 10 Eastlake Boundary o Project Completed
5 Telegraph Canyon Road Phase n Paseo Ladera 10 Apache Drive o Project Completed
6 Telegraph Canyon Road Phase ill Apache Drive 10 RUlgers Road 1,677,000 6-1ane major (under collSltllCûon)
7 EaS! "W Street 1·805 Interchange M odificaûons 3,780,000 Interchange ImprovcmeD15 (Phase I
completed)
8 EaSl "H" Street Eastlake Drive 10 SR-125 0 Project Completed
9 OIay Lakes Road Camino del Cerro Grande to Ridgeback 0 Project Completed
Road
10 OIay Lakes Road Telegraph Canyon Road 10 East Drange 4,574,000 Construction as 6-1ane prime (only
Avenue Phase I - 4 lanes included)
11 Bonita Road OIay Lakes Road 10 Central Avenue 370,000 Wide~ to 4-1ane major
12 Bonita Road Central A veDue to San Miguel Road 792,000 Widening 10 4-lane major
13 San Miguel Road Bonita Road to SR-125 1,574,500 Second Part of SR-125 DIF/CFD
14 EaSl "H" Street SR-125 to Mt. Miguel Road 0 Project completed
15 Proctor Valley Road Mt. Miguel Road to Hunte Parkway 5.377,000 Consuuction as 6-1ane prime
(East "} " Street)
16 EaS! Drange Avenue Oleander to Sunbow Eastern Boundary 6,266,000 Consuuction as 6-1ane prime
17 East PaJomar StJeel Oleander to Sunbow Eastern Boundary 6,782,000 Consuuction as 4-1ane major
JS-/"6
llIT:SBIBUXTONII'ItANSDIP.NAR -10- 110293
TABLE 3
CAPITAL L\írI"JYE\1E"ì PROJECTS
COST ESTi.:,aTE S'l!MMARY
(AS OF JULY 1, 1992)
No. DIP Street Location Revised Remarks
Cost
18 Telegraph Canyon Road Phase IV Easllakc I Eastern Boundary to 0 Project Campleled
Humc Parkway
19 East1ake Parkway Telegraph Canyon Road to Easllakc High 0 Project CampJctcd
Schoo] SOUIbcrn Boundary
20 HUIIIC Parkway Proctor Valley Road to Telegraph Canyon 4,395,000 ConstnICIion as 4-1ane major
Road
21 Humc Parkway Telegraph Canyon Road to Club House 0 Project CampJctcd
Drive
21a Humc Parkway Club House Drive to East Orange Ave_ 1.250,000 ConstrDClion as 4-1ane major
22 East Orange Avenue EasUake >¡¡rlcway to HUIIIC Parkway 6,356,000 ConstrDClion as 6-lanc prime
23 Pasco Ranchero Telegraph Canyon Road to EasI Orange 3.388,000 ConstrDClion as 6-1ane prime (only
Avenue Phase I - 4 lanes included)
24 EasI Orange A venuc Eastern Sunbow Boundary to EasúaJce 10,961,000 ConstnICIion as 6-1anc prime
Parkway
25 East Orange Avenue I-80S lII1cn:hange Modifications 4,064,000 1merchange improvementS
26 East Palomar Street Eastern Sunbow Boundary to Pasco 3,120,000 ConstrDClion as 4-1ane major
Ranchero
27 East Palomar Street I-80S Intcrchange 2,673,000 lII1crchange improvementS
28 Telegraph Canyon Road Humc Parkway to Wucs~ Road 3,114,000 ConstnICIion as 4-1ane major
29 East Orange Avenue Hume Parkway to Olympic Training Cemer . 5,104,000 COIIStI'UCÛon as 4-1ane major
30 Telegraph Canyon Road SR-I25 to Eastlalce Parkway 1,493,900 Widcllin¡; to 8-1ane prime
31 Eastlalce Parkway Pemon Succt to Telegraph Canyon Road 980,400 Widcllin¡; to 6-1ane major
32 EasI "H" Street 1-805 to Hidden Vista Drive 901,000 WIdcDing to B Ianos
33 Bonita Road OIay Lakes Road Intcnccùon 105,000 lII1cnccùon Improvcmcms
34 OIay Lakes Road EJmhum Drive Intcnccùon 70,000 Intersccùon improvementS
35 EasI "H" Street OIay Lakes Road Intersccùon 221,000 Intersccùon improvementS
36 Traffic SigJIaI System wide 138,000
Intcrconncction
/ S---- I
lM~1JXTON1TIlANSD1P.NAJl -11- 110293
,.._-,-,.__... -_.~-_.._-_._._._.
PROJECT NO. 21A
HUNTE PARKWAY
C~UB HOUSE DRIVE TO EAST ORANGE A VENtÆ
Project Description: Construct Hunte Parkway from Club House Drive to East Orange
Avenue as a four lane major street (80 feet curb to curb).
Improvements to include grading, pavement, drainage facilities,
curb, sidewalk, and street lighting.
Cost Estimate: $1,250,000
Project Location:
""
( "
, )
,..--, ~ ,
---J ,
, ,-J
\ ,
,--.. , ,
, .,
v'" . ,
... ,
,
,
,
,
L__
-..,
""",\or; /'
,
,
,
,
,
,,0. ,.J
.. T " :t-
iË I
,
. OW _""\ I
0 -- I
.
I -~~ \ I
- 0"....0£ \ t'
\ ,
\ I
, I
/5>/(/ V
LÞT,SB..t"X'TON rrRANSDIF .NAR -64- 052cm
----.----------..,--. "--..-.
PROJECT NO. 29
,
EAST ORANGE AVENUE
HUNTE PARKWAY TO THE OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
Project Description: Construct East Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the
Olympic Training Center entrance as a four-lane major street (80
feet curb to curb). Improvements to include grading, pavement,
drainage facilities, curb, sidewallc, landscaping, and street lighting.
Cost Estimate: $5,104,000
Project Location:
(^,
c:i , ')
a: ...__, ~ I
I --....J ,
: ¡J
\ ",,--" ,
\ ,,"" I
Y I
I
,
,
,
L__ .
--,
,-il
I
, '
I !
I
, ¡
,J I
¡
. . I
H ,
,
I
IØ ,
o
_ 'i
~ \ J
\ (
\ I
\ ,
\J
/5'>/) i
I
"~
.. bff/8/TC
September 28, ] 998
....
Mr. Clifford Swanson ....
City ofChula Vista ~
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 9] 9]0 THE
EASTLAKE
COMPANY, LLC
Re: Advance Construction of Development Impact Fees Projects
Request for Authorization to Construct a Development Impact Fee Project
Dear Cliff:
The EastLake Company is hereby requesting authorization from the City of Chula Vista
City Council to construct a portion of Development Impact Fee Project 29, East Orange
Avenue and Hunte Parkway to the Olympic Training Center (a.k.a. Olympic Parkway).
The portion ofthe project, which we now wish to construct, is the grading and storm
drain ITom plan station 86+25 to plan station] ]2+00. This will complete the grading and
storm drain for this project.
The EastLake Company previously completed the grading and storm drain for this project
between Hunte parkway and plan station 86+25. We received TDIF credits of
$208,701.00 for part of this construction per the attached letter ITom the City ofChula
Vista, dated April 8,1997. However, TDIF credit for the storm drain system installed at
that time has not yet been reimbursed. The EastLake Company will be requesting that
reimbursement in the near future separately ITom this application.
Please note that concurrent with this grading and storm drain construction, we will be
installing three waterlines within Olympic Parkway ITom Hunte Parkway to the Olympic
Training Center. Otay Water District will be reimbursing The EastLake Company for
those waterlines as part of their CIP program. Also, please be advised that we intend to
complete the surface improvements for this project within two years and will request
TDIF credit at that time.
Enclosed are the following, which, per Elizabeth Chopp of your department, is
information required for this application.
Detailed description of the project with a preliminary cost estimate:
Proiect Name: Olympic Parkway
Plans: Improvement plans prepared by Rick Engineering entitled "Plans for the
Improvement of East Orange Avenue ITom Hunte Parkway to Wueste
Road" Drawing No's 9]-57 thru 91-44.
Grading plans prepafed by Rick Engineering entitled "Grading Plans for
East Orange Avenue, Drawing No's 9]-43 thru 91-31.
/ý/ ;2 Facsimile (619)421-1830
900 lone Avenue, Suite 100 . Chula Vista. California 91914 . Telephone (619) 421-0127 .
.~
.-
Mr. Clifford Swanson
City ofChula Vista
September 28, J 998
Page Two
Preliminary Cost Estimate: Prepared by Rick Engineering attached for your
information.
Bid: Copy oflow bid by Signs & Pinnick (Grading) and Cass Construction
(Wet Utilities)
The grading plans for this project are approved by the City of Chula Vista. The
improvement plans for this project have been checked by both Otay Water District and
City of ChuJa Vista. Minor corrections are now being made per Otay Water District's
request, when completed both Otay Water District and City of Chula Vista will approve
the plans.
The EastLake Company agrees to secure all required permits, environmental clearances
necessary for construction of the project and to secure and dedicate any right-of-way
required for the project; The EastLake Company further agrees to coordinate with the
City of Chula Vista and Caltrans to facilitate inclusion of projects in State-Local
Transportation Partnership Program authorized under SB300 and SB2829. The EastLake
Company has permission ITom the Army Corps of Engineers to impact environmentally
sensitive portions of the project within Salt Creek under the terms and conditions of the
nationwide permit NW26.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience so that we may proceed with this
authorization. I look forward to working with you and moving ahead on this project.
Sincerely,
THE EASlLAKE COMPANY
~
Michael A Hamer
Project Manager
:sm
/S~/3
b#/ß/T P
SCHEDULE OF 'PRIG S
litem No Description Quantity U"lts Unit Price Total
GRADING
1 Mobilization 1 L:S. $12 000.00 $12,000.00
2 Clear & Grub 1 L:S. $17,000.00 $17,000.00
3 Saturated Aluvium 30,000 C;Y.
Removal $3.20 $96,000.00
4 Normal Aluvium 25,000 C:Y. $1.03 $25,750.00
Removal
5 Excavation & Fill Onsite 100,000 C'Y. $0.98 $98,000.00
6 Excavation & Export 60,000 C'Y. $0.98 $58,800.00
7 Silt Fence 1,320 UFo $2.20 $2,904.00
8 Sandbags 15,000 Ell $1.50 $22,500.00
9 Subdrain 1,190 u=. $16.50 $19,635.00
750 u-
10 ì1ghtllne Construction ,-
(Outline Drain) $12.00 $9,000.00
11 Develop Water Supply 1 L!;. $3,000.00 $3,000.00
,
12 Bonding 1 L.!5. $11,942.00 $11,942.00
STORM DRAIN site Finish 1 L.S. $65,000.00 $65,000.00
13 Brow Ditches 3415 LI=. $12.00 $40,980.00
14 Rip Rap 950 C:Y. $80.00 $76,000.00
15 10' X 12' RCS 345 C;Y. $523.00 $180,435.00
16 Head Wall 2 EA $19,000.00 $38,000.00
17 6M PCC Slab 344 81: $11.00 $3,784.00
18 Cut-off Walls 19 C;V. $285.00 $5,415.00
19 Spillway StructUre 1 L:;. $10,000.00 $10,000.00
TOTAL $796,145.00
---..- - optlò¡'iãi~PÍÌéë' ....------
20 Dewatering System to LB. $35,000.00 $35,000.00
be completed on a
T&M basis not to
exceed lumD sum
"""""'-
_&BaotOMol
S
,
, /.>rJ{ ,
,
SIGNS AND PINNICK INC.
p.o. BOX 945
El CAJON. CA 92022
TEL 619 421 18jO P (10 ~
--24'98IMON! 1025 EASTLm
. .. .
~.s:> eO~é!770/...J
SCHEDULE OF PR1C~
EAST OR"NGE AVENUE EY-J35
HI'1N'I1: PKWY~ '7J+(,o.'I'O OLnmC TRAfN1lt;G S'fA 1I2iOO
1!am; UrlltPriœ Iøi1! ,
KemNa ~ ~ I
I
SEWm J
1 11T Þvc (Gtavrty) 2,470 (F. 2/. 00 5'~B7V.Cö J
2 !'" PVt: (Gravity) 64 L=. Iq.(PO /,25'-1.</0 I
3 -Manhole s BICh /,9<;;0.0() /5,bcO.C()
4 ~. PVC laletal 1 e,ch 500.00 600 .CO
Subtotal (A-, 2'Z1.¢o .
Sewe,
STORM DRAIN
5 1!1"RCP 326 LF. 34 :7t> 11,3/2·'20
6 24" RCP 72 Lt. '-/£1.50 3. 204·Co
7 36"RCP 129 LF eO .60 /Q, 3'17 . '/0
8 <TRCP 259 LF Q/.7!> Z3,7G3·25"¡
9 48"RCP 1779 LF 9q.50 I L:L fO/Q,X:
-=--:.. .1~~~.
10 iype·...· co /'5 Eai~ 3, 000. OQ 1S;~.Có
11 ïype'S' Ittlet . ¡ .Ea<'h 3,.5QD. co 3/, Qo.QJ
12 ïype 'F" c..tch Be,in 2 Eac1 2. '/OO.CO ~ 2CO. ct:>
-
Subtalat I
Slcrm OÆn ~76"Z&7.~
'.ff"
POTABlE WATER 711 ZONE ,2 ?~..38;::~
(OP W127)
13 2"-wm.-Main (Cl150) 3943 IF 72. s5" 2.~,()(¿.{.h5
14 x SutIer1Iy Valve S Eact (P,310.OD 31,.950. Có
15 BI<Jw.ø f IS" " Eacr, 5,115:00 20, L/Go.Oð
15 EnQ Cap 2 Eac/I 1,105.06 2,210.00
17 Air ROIeose Valve 4' 3 Each ~, 730 . ct:ì ZO, No· CO
18 Connect 10 Existing 2 Each' 8,~50.fX) 0,QC:O.Q)
19 Dí=MecI @ ~1118 PIMy 1 LS. 5;oco.co .5,CX:O.CO
SubIotaI a7Z37¿j~
711 Zone
í~~
--.......""""'"
;Ç---/5
£rI/,8/T £
August 27,1998 ~
c .
..
Ms. Elizabeth Chopp ...
~
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue M
Chula Vista, CaJifornia 91910 rASrLAKE
COMPANY, LLC
Re: Olympic Parkway Wet Utilities Project
Dear Elizabeth:
Pursuant to our phone conversation regarding the possibility of having an insufficient
number of bidders available to submit a bid for the above-referenced project, following is
a list of contractors who were invited to bid:
TC Construction
Cass Construction
DGCI, Inc.
PrimeTime Construction
Civil Constructors, Inc.
All of the above contractors picked up our bid package along with plans, however only
two contractors, TC Construction and Cass Construction, have confirmed that they will
be bidding the project. Primetime and DGCI have definitely declined due to scheduling
conflicts. We are waiting for confirmation ITom Civil Constructors, Inc. regarding their
participation in this bid.
In the event that we end up with only two bid proposals, I would like to request that the
three bid requirement be waived due to the unprecedented number of development
projects currently under construction which has significantly reduced the number of
contractors available to perform the work.
I appreciate your consideration in this matter and look forward to hearing ITom you.
Sincerely,
THE EASTLAKE COMPANY
~¡v4 1í1(ttr- r
MichaeJ A. Harner
Project Manager
:sm /5~/J
900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100 . Chulo Visto. California 91914 . Telephone (619) 421-0127 . Facsimile (619) 421-1830
~~~
:-~=
~~~-=
CIlY OF
CHULA VISfA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBliC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
September 11, 1998
File # 0130-20-HX001
Michael Hamer
EastLake Company
900 Lane A venn::, Suite lOO
Chula Vista, CA 91914
REQUEST TO W A.IVE TIlREE-BID REQUIREMENT FOR OLYMPIC P ARKW A Y
We received yom letter dated August 27, 1998, requesting that the City of Chula Vista waive the
three bid requirement for Transportation Development Impact Fee (fDIF) reimbursement on the
construction of storm drain facilities for Olympic Parkway. We understand that you have requested
five bids for both Wet Utilities and Grading Contracts but that you only received two bids for the
Wet Utilities Contract.
As you are aware, Ordinance No. 2251, which established the IDIF, requires the developer to
obtain at least three qualified bids in order 10 receive authorization to construct a IDIF project. We
therefore requested that you submit written evidence that three :firms declined to bid on the wet
utilities project, a copy of the bids received from two :firms and the design engineer's estimate.
Authorization to construct the project and receive DIF reimbursement must be obtained from the
City Council, and this cannot be obtained prior to your proposed construction start date in
September. However, on the basis of the information we received, the Engineering Division will
reco=end that Council waive the three bid requirement for the storm drain portion of your Wet
Utilities Contract.
Yourfumis still required to com.ply with all other requirements of our IDIF Program. For example,
you will only receive IDIF reimbursement for the storm drain facilities required for the road without
inclusion of runoff at1ributable to upstream development.
If you have any questions rearding this letter, please contact Elizabeth Chopp, Civil Engineer, at
691-5258.
RD L. SWANSON
D PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER
IUHOMElENGlNEERIASM1DISl\OL YMBIDS.EMC / S-~ / ?
~ ';¡¡!
?:r~ I=:OJ..!.2Tblj\11J;"JeYlll ^ II! r:;~_^ _ r- ^J U;/:::\,ghll.1'LQ..1.Q.:'!.D.11£.1.Q..L£,Q...1.,..5D2-'___ -....--- ---"- - - -..-"-----
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /p
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: ResoJution 1931)... Accepting bids and awarding contract for
"Drainage Mitigation - Rienstra/Loma Verde Park in the City of Chula
Vista, CA (DR-121)" Project.
SUBMlTIED BY, Directm of "'lili, W",",4I ~
REVIEWED BY, Ci,> """'''D!2-- ~ ~ l (4/5.... V.,., Y~ßoX)
At 2;00 p.m. on October 21, 1998 in Conferen Room 3 in the Public Services Building, the
Director of Public Works received sealed bids for "Drainage Mitigation - Rienstra/Lorna Verde
Park in the City of ChuJa Vista, CA (DR-121)." The work to be done consists of installing
erosion controJ matting in and adjacent to the natural channel Jocated aJong the western boundary
of Rienstra Park, north of East Orange Avenue. The work also includes clearing, grubbing,
grading, installation of erosion controJ matting and hydro seeding.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve resoJution accepting bids and awarding contract
for the construction of "Drainage Mitigation - Rienstra/Loma Verde Park in the City of ChuJa
Vista, CA (DR-121)" to New Century Construction, in the amount of $21,860.00.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicabJe.
DISCUSSION:
The existing dirt channeJ adjacent to the two southernmost sports playing fields at Rienstra Park
is eroding and encroaching into the pJaying fields. After a preJiminary review of the situation, it
was decided to regrade the channeJ and install erosion controJ matting to prevent the channeJ from
further eroding. Funds for this project were budgeted in the FY 1997-98 Capital Improvements
Program (CIP) budget.
The original funding for this project, however, only allocated $2,700 for staff costs, as it was
presumed that the project would require a minimal design effort. Unfortunately, due to the severity
of the erosion and the need to provide the contractors with an accurate representation of the site,
it was necessary to do significantly more design work then was anticipated when the project was
budgeted. To date we have spent about $11,000 in staff costs (including surveying and
environmentaJ review document preparation) and we estimate that an additionaJ $3,700 will be
utilized for Construction Inspection costs and contingencies. Therefore, an additional $10,500 of
unreimbursed staff time will be needed in order to construct and complete the project.
J~ -j
-''"'-~...__..- '",'-
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
Coincidentally, the State of California Department of Water Resources (DWR) issued a check in
the amount of $38,000 to complete the reimbursement of the costs we incurred for the acquisition
of right-of-way for the TeJegraph Canyon Channel project. This project was completed in 1989
and was funded with City, State (DWR) and FederaJ funds. Reimbursement from the State has
been slow and dependant on fund avaiJability. The $38,000 reimbursement funds were deposited
into the GeneraJ Fund. The amount of $10,500 needed to construct the Rienstra/Lorna Verde Park
drainage mitigation project is more than covered by this unanticipated revenue.
Bids for this project were received from two contractors as follows:
Contractor Bid Amount
1. Lee P. Shellberg, d.b.a. New Century Construction- $21,860.00
San Diego, CA
2. T & S Construction - Valley Center, CA 29,991.00
Staff received excellent bids for the proposed work. The low bid, submitted by Lee P. Shellberg
is below the Engineer's estimate of $24,190.00 by $2,330.00 or 9.6%. Engineering staff verified
the references provided by the Contractor and their work has been satisfactory. Staff has
reviewed the low bid and recommends awarding the contract to Lee P. Shellberg, d.b.a. New
Century Construction of San Diego, California.
Disclosure Statement
A copy of the contractor's disclosure statement is attached as Attachment B.
Environmental Status
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project and has
determined that the project is exempt under Section 15302, Class 2 of the CaJifornia
EnvironmentaJ Quality Act (Minor Alterations of Existing Public Improvements or Public
Structures) .
Prevailing Wage Statement
The sources of funding for this project are Residential Construction Tax and Storm Drain Fee.
Contractors bidding this project were not required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed
by them for the work under this project. No special minority or women owned business
requirements were necessary as part of the bid documents. Disadvantaged businesses were
encouraged to bid through the sending of the Notice to Contracto rs to various trade pubJications.
Jj-;Z
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
FISCAL IMPACT:
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount $21,860.00
B. Construction Contingencies (15%) 3,300.00
C. Staff Costs (Design, Construction & Inspection)* 840.00
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $26,000.00
* In addition to this amount, $10,500 in-kind GeneraJ Fund contribution is required to cover the
staff costs for this project (anticipated to total $11,340).
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Drainage Improvements
227-2275-DR-121 (Storm Drain Fee) $13,000.00
600-6003-DR-121 (ResidentiaJ Construction Tax) 13,000.00
TOTAL FUNDS A V AILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $26,000.00
The above action awarding of the contract will authorize a total expenditure of $26,000.00 from
the budgeted CIP project. The additionaJ staff cost of $10,500 will be covered from the
unanticipated reimbursement revenues from State of California Department of Water Resources
received for reimbursement of City funds used to construct the TeJegr:;¡ph Canyon Flood Control
ChanneJ in the late 1980's. After construction, only routine City maintenance will be required.
Attachment
A - Contractor's Disclosure Statement
BVH:bvh
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \DR121113.BVH
File No: 073S-1O-DR-121
/~ -;3
RESOLUTION NO. /93/;2..
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR "DRAINAGE MITIGATION -
RIENSTRA/LaMA VERDE PARK IN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CA. (DR-121) "
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on October 21, 1998 in Conference
Room 3 in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public
Works received the following two sealed bids for "Drainage
Mitigation - Rienstra/Lorna Verde Park in the City of Chula Vista,
CA (DR-121).":
Contractor Bid Amount
1. Lee P. Shellberg, d.b.a. New Century $21,860.00
Construction - San Diego, CA
2. T & S Construction - Valley Center, CA 29,991.00
WHEREAS, staff received excellent bids for the proposed
work and the low bid, submitted by Lee P. Shellberg is below the
Engineer's estimate of $24,190.00 by $2,330.00 or 9.6%; and
WHEREAS, Engineering staff has reviewed the low bid and
recommends awarding the contract to Lee P. Shellberg, d.b.a. New
Century Construction of San Diego, California; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
reviewed the work involved in this project and has determined that
the project is exempt under section 15302, Class 2 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (Minor Alterations of Existing
Public Improvements or Public Structures); and
WHEREAS, the sources of funding for this project are
Residential Construction Tax and Storm Drain Fee and contractors
bidding this project were not required to pay prevailing wages to
persons employed by them for the work under this project; and
WHEREAS, no special minority or women owned business
requirements were necessary as part of the bid documents and
disadvantaged businesses were encouraged to bid through the sending
of the Notice to Contractors to various trade publications.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby accept the bids and award the
contract for "Drainage Mitigation - Rienstra/Lorna Verde Park in the
City of Chula Vista, Ca. (DR-121) to New Century Construction, in
the amount of $21,860.00.
1
/t~i
--~----
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to sign said contract
on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
H:\home\lorraine\re\DR121
2
/6-5'
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMEIIo'T ATTACHMENT A
~
_. .. au are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or fmancial interests, payments, or campaign contributions,
on all matters which wil1 require discretionary action on the pan of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official
bodies. The fOllowing information must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons having a fmancial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the Contract,
e.g., owner, applicant, Comractor, subcomractor, material supplier.
(Ilk
2. If any person" identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shar;ìj the corporation or owning any pannership interest in the pannership.
wA-
I
3. If any person" identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as
director of the non-profi organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve month? Yes _ No K.. If yes, please indicate person(s):
S. Please identify each and every person, including any agems, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
¿'r2~ )'4ol( bpro?
6. Have you andlor your officers or agents, in ~gregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the current
or preceding election period? Yes _ No yes, state which Council members(s):
" " " (NOTE: Attached additional pages as nee
Date: I ~I.l //11
Signature of Contractorl plicant
t-æ¿ SÆoI/~".... f'
Print or type name of Contracdirl Applicant
* Person is dqined as: . Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization,
corporation, estaIe, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city or country, city 11Illnicipality, district, or other political
subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
14 /1-1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /7
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: A) Resolution /93/3 Approving Final "B" Map for Chula
Vista Tract No. 97-02, McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One, Phase 1,
Unit 5, Accepting on Behalf of the Public the Public Streets Granted
on Said Map Within Said Subdivision, Accepting on Behalf of the
City of Chula Vista the Easements Granted on Said Map within Said
Subdivision, AcknowJedging on Behalf of the Public the IrrevocabJe
Offer of Grant of Fee Interest of Lots for Open Space and Other
Public Purposes on Said Map within Said Subdivision and
approving Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the Completion
of Improvements Required by Said Subdivision and Authorizing the
Mayor to Execute Said Agreement.
B) ResoJution /9 J ) i Approving Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreem nt for the Final "B" Map for Unit 5 of
ChuJa Vista Tract No. 97-02, McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One,
Phase 1 and authorizing the Mayor to Execute Said Agreement.
SUBMITIED BV, D"~"" of P""li, w"'~ ~
REVIEWED BV, Ci~ M,~g~~~ \ (41''''' Vo", V~_NoXJ
This item is to consider the approval of Final" "Ma~bdivision Improvement Agreement,
and SupplementaJ Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Unit 5 of the McMillin Otay Ranch
SPA One, Phase 1 (CVT 97-02).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the Resolutions approving the: A) Final "B"
Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Unit 5 of Tract No. 97-02; and B)
Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Unit 5 of Tract No. 97-02.
DISCUSSION: On June 3, 1997, by ResoJution No. 18686, the City Council approved the
Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 97-02, McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One. An
excerpt of the minutes of that meeting is presented in Attachment 1. On JuJy 14, 1998, the City
Council approved the Otay Ranch McMillin, Phase 1 Final "A" Map and the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement ("A" Map SIA) for that map by ResoJution No. 19079. An excerpt of
the minutes of that meeting is presented in Attachment 2. The Final "A" Map created
"superbJock" Unit 5 corresponding to Neighborhood R-22 of CVT No. 97-02.
/7- /
.. .-..
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
Final Map and Associated Aereements
The final map consists of the following:
86 4 (2.249 acres )' 13 .438
1) All open space 10ls are private and will be maintained by a Master Homeowner's Association.
The map (see Attachments 3) has been reviewed by the Departments of Public Works and
Planning & BuiJding and found to be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map.
All fees and/or cash deposits specific to this map have been collected in satisfaction of various
Tentative Map conditions of approval. In addition, approval of the map constitutes acceptance
by the City of all assignable and irrevocable general utility, emergency access, sewer, drainage
and generaJ access easements granted on said map. However, only an lrrevocabJe Offer of Grant
of Fee Title of the open space Jots is conveyed on the map, noting that Section 7050 of the
Government Code of the State of California provides that such offers may be accepted at any tim e
by the City Council. Said lots will remain in private property and will be maintained by a Master
Homeowner's Association.
Approval of the map constitutes acceptance on behalf of the pubJic of the following streets:
· Hollybrook Avenue
· ThistJewood Avenue
· BrambJewood Street
· Lone Ridge Street
· Mendota Street
McMillin has already executed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and has provided bonds to
guarantee the construction of the onsite public improvements. The Subdivision Improvement
Agreement and bonds are on file in the office of the City Clerk. The construction of all off site
improvements serving Unit 5 has been already secured in conjuntion with other final maps
previousJy approved by Council.
McMillin has already executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SSIA") for
the subject final map. The Tentative Map conditions of approval of CVT No. 97-02 are presented
in Attachment 4 (Resolution No. 18686). The conditions that are satisfied by the SSIA are: 1, 3,
4,6,7, 22c, 73, and 100b. These conditions, excepting Nos. 7, 22c, 73, and 100b are addressed
using typical language used in previous agreements. Following is a discussion on conditions No.
7, 22c, 73, and 100b:
/7~~
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
Condition Nos. 7 - (Conveyance Obligation). This condition stipulates that prior to the approval
of each FinaJ Map, the appJicant shall compJy with all applicable requirements of the Phase 2
Resource Management Plan (RMP).
Because the deveJoper does not currently own land for conveyance to the Otay Ranch Preserve
and the in-lieu fee is not in place, the SSIA requires the developer to deposit cash with the City
in the amount of $48,787.04 (22.146 acres of conveyance obligation X the average value of
$3,056 per acre determined in the appraisal) concurrent with the execution of the SSIA.
The developer further agrees to purchase Jand for conveyance to the Preserve, within 18 months
after approval of the agreement. If the developer does not buy land within the specified 18
months and/or the cash deposit is used by the City or the Preserve Owner Manager to purchase
or condemn land to meet the developer's land conveyance obligations, the deveJoper agrees to
provide for any difference between the actuaJ cost incurred by the City or the Preserve Owner
Manager and the cash deposit.
It shouJd be mentioned that McMillin is currently in escrow (see Attachment 6) to purchase
property that will be conveyed to the Preserve Owner Manager to meet the conveyance obJigations
for the entire McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One (approximateJy 200 acres). They are also
requesting that alJ cash deposits, submitted at finaJ map approval, be reJeased upon conveyance
of said preserve land.
Condition Nos. 22c and lOOb - (Pedestrian Bridges). These conditions require the developer
to enter into an agreement with the City in which the developer agrees to fund its fair share of the
cost of construction of the pedestrian bridges connecting Villages One and Five, Villages One and
Two, and Village Five and Six.
The developer has requested that a DeveJopment Impact Fee ("DIF") be established to [mance the
fair share of constructing the three pedestrian bridges. Tonight, Council will be considering the
first reading of the ordinance establishing said DIF . If approved by CounciJ and no legaJ
challenge is filed, the DIF will become effective 30 days after the second reading and adoption.
Because the Pedestrian Bridge DIF is not yet effective, the SSIA requires the developer to deposit,
concurrent with the execution of the Map SSIA, cash equal to $36,120 (86 Dwelling Units X the
estimated DIF amount of $420 per Dwelling Unit). The deveJoper acknowledges that if no DIF
mechanism for the pedestrian bridges is established for any reason, the City has the right to retain
the cash deposit to use for the construction of said pedestrian bridges and t hat the deveJoper shall
pay the City any difference between the Final Map's fair share of the actual total costs incurred
to construct the pedestrian bridges and the amount previousJy paid.
Condition No. 73 - (Community Parks). This condition requires the developer to pay
community park fee based on the fonnula contained in the PAD fee ordinance.
In satisfaction ofthis condition the agreement requires that prior to approval of each final "B" map
within Phase I, the developer agrees to pay PAD fees as detennined in the PAD fee ordinance based
upon a fonnula of I acre per 1,000 residents. /7-)
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
With respect to the final maps for Units 2 and 3, the deveJoper agrees to pay, in cash, the PAD fees
within 60 days of approval of the fmal map. In addition, the developer agrees to provide, concurrent
with the execution of this agreement, security to guarantee the payment of PAD fees. The developer
also agrees to pay interest, on the PAD fees, as required by the Municipal Code. The City may
withhold finaJ or interim inspection of units for which buiJding pennits have been issued and may
withhold issuance of additional building pennits or any other processing of entitlement on any
property or improvements untiJ the required fees have been received by the City.
The SSIA also specifies that the obligation to pay PAD fees will be waived if the developer and
City enter into an agreement (within 60 days of approvaJ of the finaJ map) for constructing the
Community Park.
FISCAL IMPACT: None to the City. The developers has paid all costs associated with the
proposed "B" Map and associated agreements. It should aJso be mentioned that City staff is
currently working with the applicant on a global approach regarding payment of PAD fees
between the Otay Ranch Company and McMillin. That agreement will be brought to Council on
January 1999.
Attachments:
Attachment Minutes of 6/3/97 (Resolution No. 18686)
Attachme Minutes of7/14/98 (Resolution Nos. 19079 & 19080)
Attach Unit 5 Final Map THS ITEM SCAr-llED
Attac Tentative Map Conditions of Approval StE~ Co 98-atO
Aua Developer's Disclosure Statement
#nent 6: Habitat Conveyance Letter
H:\H'fE\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\OT A YRNCH\113U5.LDT
Deçember9,1998
/7-f
RESOLUTION No. /93/3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING FINAL "B" MAP FOR CHULA
VISTA TRACT NO. 97-02, MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH SPA
ONE, PHASE 1, UNIT 5, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE
PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS GRANTED ON SAID MAP
WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THE EASEMENTS GRANTED
ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDMSION,
ACKNOWLEDGING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE
IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION OF FEE INTEREST
OF LOTS FOR OPEN SPACE AND OTHER PUBLIC
PURPOSES ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDMSION AND
APPROVING SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY
SAID SUBDIVISION AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista hereby [mds that certain map survey entitled Chula Vista Tract 97-02, McMillin Otay Ranch
SPA I, Phase I, Unit 5 and more particularly described as follows:
Lot 5 of Chula Vista Tract 97-02, McMillin Otay Ranch, SPA I,
Phase I, in the County of San Diego, State of California, According
to Map thereof No. 13605, filed in the office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County on July 28, 1998.
Area: 13.438 Acres No. Oflots: 90
Numbered lots:86 Lettered lots: 4
is made in the manner and form prescribed by law and conforms to the surrounding surveys; and that
said map and subdivision of land shown thereon is hereby approved and accepted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, said Council hereby accepts on behalf of the public
the pubJic streets to-wit: Bramblewood Street, Lone Ridge Street, Mendota Street, Hollybrook
Avenue and Thistlewood Avenue, all as shown on this map within this subdivision, and said streets
are hereby declared to be public streets and dedicated to the public use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby acknowledges on behalf
of the City ofChula Vista the Irrevocable Offer of a Dedication of Fee interests of Lots A, B, C and
D for open space and other public purposes, all as shown on this map within this subdivision, noting
that Section 7050 of the Government Code of the State of California provides that an offer of
Dedication shall remain open and subject to future acceptance by the City.
/7/l 1
---~. -
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts on behalf of the
public The Landscape Buffer Easements, Sewer and Drainage Easements and Pedestrian Access
Easement, all as shown on said map within this subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City ofChula Vista be and
is hereby authorized and directed to endorse upon said map the action of said council; that said
Council has approved said subdivision map, and that said public streets are accepted on behalf of
the public as therefore stated and that the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of the fee interest of said
lots be acknowledged and that those certain Landscape Buffer Easements, those certain Sewer and
Drainage Easements and that Pedestrian Access Easement, as granted hereon and shown on said
map within this subdivision are accepted on behalf of the City of Chula Vista as hereinbefore stated.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Clerk be and she is hereby directed to
transmit said map to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certain Subdivision Improvement Agreement
dated the for the completion of improvements
in said subdivision, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
t!.O 98-.ß1J1J, is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby
authorized and directed to execute said Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by Approved as to form by
& ~'W
John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works JO~aheny, City ~
H:IHOMEIENGINEERILANDDEV\OT A YRNCH\RES0216.LEC
J7/l~;Z
Recording Requested by:
CITY CLERK
When Recorded, Mail to:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, Ca. 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance
to a public agency of less than a fee interest
for which no cash consideration has been paid or
received.
Declarant
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
I
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 199__, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and McMILLIN OTAY
RANCH, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company formerly known as
MCMILLIN-D.A. AMERICA OTAY RANCH LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability
Company, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, California 91950,
hereinafter called "Subdivider" with reference to the facts set
forth below, which Recitals constitute a part of this Agreement;
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of
the City of Chula vista for approval and recordation, a final
subdivision map of a proposed subdivision, to be known as Chula
vista Tract No. 97-02, McMillin Otay Ranch, SPA One, Phase One,
unit 5 pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the
State of California, and in compliance with the provisions of Title
18 of the Chula vista Municipal Code relating to the filing,
approval and recordation of subdivision map; and
WHEREAS, the Code provides that before said map is finally
approved by the Council of the city of Chula Vista, Subdivider must
have either installed and completed all of the public improvements
and/or land development work required by the Code to be installed
in subdivisions before final maps of subdivisions are approved by
the Council for purpose of recording in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an alternative thereto,
Subdivider shall enter into an agreement with City, secured by an
approved improvement security to insure the performance of said
work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code, agreeing to install and complete, free of liens at
Subdivider's own expense, all of the public improvements and/or
land development work required in said subdivision within a
1
/7/!~}
definite period of time prescribed by said Council; and
WHEREAS, Subdivider is willing in consideration of the
approval and recordation of said map by the Council, to enter into
this agreement wherein it is provided that Subdivider will install
and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all the public_
improvement work required by City in connection with the proposed
subdivision and will deliver to city improvement securities as
approved by the city Attorney; and
WHEREAS, a tentative map of said subdivision has heretofore
been approved, subject to certain requirements and conditions, as
contained in Resolution No. 18686, approved on the 3rd day of June,
1997 ("Tentative Map Resolution"); and
WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for the
construction, installation and completion of said public improve-
ment work have been prepared and submitted to the city Engineer, as
shown on Drawings Nos. 98-926 through 98-933 on file in the office
of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing said public
improvements according to said plans and specifications has been
submitted and approved by the City in the amount of Seven Hundred
Ninety Eight Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Two Dollars and No Cents
($798,262.00) .
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS
FOLLOWS:
1. Subdivider, for itself and his successors in interest, an
obligation the burden of which encumbers and runs with the land,
agrees to comply with all of the terms, conditions and requirements
of the Tentative Map Resolution; to do and perform or cause to be
done and performed, at its own expense, without cost to City, in a
good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the
satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the public
improvement and/or land development work required to be done in and
adjoining said subdivision, including the improvements described in
the above Recitals ("Improvement Work"); and will furnish the
necessary materials therefor, all in strict conformity and in
accordance with the plans and specifications, which documents have
heretofore been filed in the Office of the City Engineer and as
described in the above Recitals this reference are incorporated
herein and made a part hereof.
2. It is expressly understood and agreed that all monuments
have been or will be installed within thirty (30) days after the
completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work, and that
Subdivider has installed or will install temporary street name
signs if permanent street name signs have not been installed.
2
J7A- f
3. It is expressly understood and agreed that Subdivider will
cause all necessary materials to be furnished and all Improvement
Work required under the provisions of this contract to be done on
or before the second anniversary date of Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
4. It is understood and agreed that Subdivider will perform-
said Improvement Work as set forth hereinabove, or that portion of
said Improvement Work serving any buildings or structures ready for
occupancy in said subdivision, prior to the issuance of any
certificate of clearance for utility connections for said buildings
or structures in said subdivision, and such certificate shall not
be issued until the City Engineer has certified in writing the
completion of said public improvements or the portion thereof
serving said building or structures approved by the City; provided,
however, that the improvement security shall not be required to
cover the provisions of this paragraph.
5. It is expressly understood and agreed to by Subdivider
that, in the performance of said Improvement Work, Subdivider will
conform to and abide by all of the provisions of the ordinances of
the City of Chula Vista, and the laws of the State of California
applicable to said work.
6. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
City of Chula vista, simultaneously with the execution of this
agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the city in the sum
of Three Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand One Hundred Thirty One
Dollars and No Cents ($399,131.00) which security shall guarantee
the faithful performance of this contract by Subdivider and is
attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof.
7. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
city of Chula Vista simultaneously with the execution of this
agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum
of Three Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand One Hundred Thirty One
Dollars and No Cents ($399,131.00) to secure the payment of
material and labor in connection with the installation of said
public improvements, which security is attached hereto, marked
Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof.
8. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
City of Chula vista, simultaneously with the execution of this
agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the city in the sum
of Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($16,800.00)
to secure the installation of monuments, which security is attached
hereto, marked Exhibit "C" and made a part hereof.
9. It is further agreed that if the Improvement Work is not
3
/7A-Ç
completed within the time agreed herein, the sums provided by said
improvement securities may be used by City for the completion of
the Improvement Work within said subdivision in accordance with
such specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option
of the City, as are approved by the City Council at the time of
engaging the work to be performed. Upon certification of
completion by the City Engineer and acceptance of said work by
city, and after certification by the Director of Finance that all
costs hereof are fully paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof
not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or
its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the
improvement security. Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any
difference between the total costs incurred to perform the work,
including design and administration of construction (including a
reasonable allocation of overhead) , and any proceeds from the
improvement security.
10. It is also expressly agreed and understood by the parties
hereto that in no case will the City of Chula Vista, or any
department, board or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of
the costs and expenses of the work aforesaid, nor shall any
officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be liable for the payment of any
sum or sums for said work or any materials furnished therefor,
except to the li mi t s established by the approved improvement
security in accordance with the requirements of the State
Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula
vista Municipal Code.
11. It is further understood and agreed by Subdivider that
any engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection,
materials furnished and other incidental expenses) incurred by City
in connection with the approval of the Improvement Work plans and
installation of Improvement Work hereinabove provided for, and the
cost of street signs and street trees as required by city and
approved by the city Engineer shall be paid by Subdivider, and that
Subdivider shall deposit , prior to recordation of the Final Map,
with city a sum of money sufficient to cover said cost.
12. It is understood and agreed that until such time as all
Improvement Work is fully completed and accepted by City,
Subdivider will be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and
any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer
lines within the proposed subdivision. It is further understood
and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all public improvements
for a period of one year from date of final acceptance and correct
any and all defects or deficiencies arising during said period as
a result of the acts or omission of Subdivider, its agents or
employees in the performance of this agreement, and that upon
acceptance of the work by city, Subdivider shall grant to City, by
appropriate conveyance, the public improvements constructed
pursuant to this agreement; provided, however, that said acceptance
shall not constitute a waiver of defects by city as set forth
4
)7/7 ~I
hereinabove.
13. It is understood and agreed that City, as indemnitee, or
any officer or employee thereof, shall not be liable for any injury
to person or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions..
of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to_
this agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the
City, its officers and employees, harmless from any and all claims,
demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because
of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or
employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement; provided,
however, that the approved improvement security shall not be
required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such
indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to
damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of
property from owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as
a result of the construction of said subdivision and the public
improvements as provided herein. It shall also extend to damages
resulting from diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow,
modification of the velocity of the water, erosion or siltation, or
the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the
construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of
plans providing for any or all of these conditions shall not
constitute the assumption by city of any responsibility for such
damage or taking, nor shall City, by said approval, be an insurer
or surety for the construction of the subdivision pursuant to said
approved improvement plans. The provisions of this paragraph shall
become effective upon the execution of this agreement and shall
remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the
acceptance by the City of the improvements.
14. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the City or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim,
action, or proceeding against the city or its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the
city, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning
a sUbdivision, which action is brought within the time period
provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the
State of California.
(NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE)
5
/7// / ?
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH, SPA ONE, PHASE ONE, UNIT 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set-'
forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA McMILLIN OTAY RANCH, LLC
By:
/
/ / :J -k JJ
Mayor ,---m P-¡M'4 7·, / ..èCC__
[Name] -
Attest: VP
[Title]
Beverly Authelet, city Clerk
Approved as to Form:
n 7&~
G~fJi(J)J ( '7
John M/.' aheny, City A~orney
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
6
/ ?,,,¡ -fš
>
STATE OF CALIFORNIA >
COUNTY OF San Diego >
On I)-I/O/if before me;
I -.
Dawn B. Mendoza, Notarv Public ,
personally appeared Thomas A. Fuller and Craig T. Fukuvama
,
personally known to me (¡q'qIPWN~¡j¡tQlrmlfJnlftJ.r¡mil~)q¡f¡~/¡\flml~/I.'l).flf/I)lto be the person(s)
whose name(s) Il!/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that \It"I$!I1/t/they
executed the same in h lg'fJ ltr/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by fliSVl4êl#their signature(s) on
the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. --------------1
l @DAWNš'-MÈÑDÒŽA-
,;il.ü. U 'Ii 27 /l1.LM/¡V___ ~ .~~ COMM.# 1125049 ~
U) 'i{::- ! NOTARV PUBLIG-CAUFOANIA ~
Signature z "~. SAN DIEGO. CA ...
. (J . ...... MY CO.....ISSION E (P'.RES J...N 30. 2001
>
STATE OF CALIFORNIA >
COUNTY OF >
On before me,
,
personally appeared
,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they
executed the same in hislher/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by hislher/their signature(s) on
the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
notary.slg /7/7---9
,.".'. -.--...-
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit "All Improvement Security - Faithful Performance
Form: Bond
Amount: $399,131.00
Exhibit IIBU Improvement Security - Material and Labor
Form: Bond
Amount: $399,131.00
Exhibit IIC" Improvement Security - Monuments
Form: Bond
Amount: $16,800.00
Securities approved as to form and amount by
j/~cn7lC-~~
. I City Attor y
Improvement Completion Date: Two (2 ) years from date of city
Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement
H:\home\attorney\sia\MCMillin.S
7
/7A ~/tJ
__.mm._
RESOLUTION NO. /93)1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FINAL uBI! MAP FOR
McMILLIN OTAY RANCH, SPA ONE, PHASE ONE, UNIT
FIVE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the developers of McMillin Otay Ranch, Spa One,
Phase One, Unit Five have executed a Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement (SSIA) in order to satisfy Conditions of
Resolution 18686 for Chula vista Tract No. 97-02.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Supplemental
Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract No. 97-02,
a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk as
Document No. L!ð 9S-,?5,;;¿ .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the city of Chula vista.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt ~~J¡;1~
Jotú'ií' . Kaheny
Director of Public Works City Attorney
C:\ReS\MCMillS.Sup
/7!f~/
~~-_.
.~ ."., - .'~ --, ....... ,_,_ "-h0.l h'--"--......;. r,.", ;_:...;,';F-'í..,NY
L ";< 1 4 1 "":::' ~. l":::
ATTACHMENT 3
97-02
_, TRADT ND- A I
r:f/ULÀ V IS J ~ -A Y RANCH sf'
'-' McMILLIN OJ' UNIT 4
PHASE I; I ,baD \
MAP ND. - "-
.~.( ntt:r
. \ 6 ~ -
7
LD7 D
\ ·D- '? lit "..:::::
\ ~S;
~ >,
ç: -:.-
:>;; C'> \ ~ ~'t1r::
(0 ~ , \ ~:r:.t-~
h) :::.. ...... i \~ 't1:...-(o
,,":, I , ""..' :<:: Cb:<::....
~.
......~~ ,
-. -... I \ 0"'<::>:.-
r--"" t;L"-,,;rr~ .. ::-;;"""
~r---'" - ,'-<::ti
:;;::-...(0 ~ I :...
....<::--! \ <::~~
"i :..: ...
\;) I
...."':--! 81 \ ~~:<::
.... ~::tj
...,:..: ! ~ \ ....::t::t::I
C) * I .
~~"i -... \ \\) Cb...
8 ~......
't¡~~ )þ ...... 1 I
" -I:>
<::t . \\)
t;) 611 ~ 8G 4S 1
. (o..¡, --..-
'1J"I ... tIp""'-
-:>..' .......
c., '" :J7
0- '"
Q.:¡ I
.... $?!I3S1
.,6T
.,,,... ..
~<o~<#$-
LoT 6
91-02
1flAC1 NIJ- -PA I
cf/ULÀ VISTAD1À t RANCH '" /IIi
McM1LL;j1p NO- /3bD5
SCALE: '.-2001
RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY McMILLIN OTA Y RANCH SPA I
'ML ENGINEERS- SURVEYORS . PLANNERS
5620 FRIARS ROAD, SAN DIEGO PHASE 1, UNIT 5
cA. 92110-2596 PHONE.. (619) 291-0707 CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CAUFORNIA
PRDJECT NWBER. 13126 C.v.T. 97-1J2
DATE· NOV-t:MBER 19, 1998 :::.~~=..~: /7ð-:L
"_·1__"
27-
....... "2
.. ._.._~- '--'-'-"-"--~-'-------'''-''''-
RECORDING REQUESTED BY: )
)
City Clerk )
)
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: )
)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
276 Fourth Avenue )
Chula Vista, CA 91910 )
)
No transfer tax is due as this is a )
conveyance to a public agency of )
less than a fee interest for which )
no cash consideration has been paid )
or received. )
)
)
)
Developer )
)
)
Above Space for Recorder's Use
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
FINAL "B" MAP FOR McMILLIN OTAY RANCH,
SPA ONE, PHASE ONE, UNIT FIVE
(Condi t ions 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 22c,
73, and 100b of Resolution No. 18686)
This Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
( "Agreement" ) is made this _ day of , 199 , by and
between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California ("City" or "Grantee II
for recording purposes only) and McMILLIN OTAY RANCH, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company formerly known as McMillin-D.A.
AMERICA OTAY RANCH, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company,
( "Developer" or "Grantor"), with reference to the facts set forth
below, which recitals constitute a part of this Agreement:
RECITALS
A. This Agreement concerns and affects certain real property
located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly described on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Property").
The Property is part of a master planned development commonly known
as the McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One, Phase One Project. For
1
/7ß-,2.
purposes of this Agreement the term "Project" shall mean
"Property".
B. The City has approved, by Resolution No. 18686
("Resolution"), a Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as
Chula vista Tract 97-02 ("Tentative Subdivision Map") for the·
subdivision of the Property subject to certain conditions as more-
particularly described in the Resolution. The conditions are
attached hereto as Schedule "1".
C. Developer has applied for a final map for a portion of
the Property, more specifically known as unit 5. City is willing,
on the premises, security, terms and conditions herein contained to
approve a final map for Units 5 as being in substantial conformance
with the Tentative Subdivision Map described in this Agreement.
Developer understands that subsequent final maps may be subject to
the same security, terms and conditions contained herein.
D. The following defined terms shall have the meaning set
forth herein, unless otherwise specifically indicated:
a. "Final Map" means final map for unit 5 of the
McMillin otay Ranch, SPA One, Phase One as described on Exhibit
UAII .
b. "commencing construction" means when a construction
permit or other such approval has been obtained from the city or a
construction contract has been awarded for the improvement,
whichever occurs first.
c. "complete construction" means when construction on an
improvement has been completed and the City has accepted the
improvement.
d. "guest builder" means those entities obtaining any
interest in the Property or a portion of the Property after this
Final Map has been recorded.
e. "Owner" or "Developer" mans the person, persons, or
entity having a legal or equitable interest in the Property, or
parts thereof, and includes Developer's successors-in-interest and
assigns.
f. "PFFP" means the SPA I Public Facilities Financing
Plan adopted by Resolution No. 18286, amended on October 6, 1998 by
Resolution No. 19201 and as may be amended from time to time.
g. "RMP 2 Phase 2" means the otay Ranch Resource
Management Plan, Phase 2, approved by the City Council on June 4,
1996, as may be amended from time to time.
2
/7[]-Y
h. ""A" Map Agreement" means the Supplemental
Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the McMillin Otay Ranch SPA
One, Phase One "A" Map adopted by Resolution No. 19080.
i. "First "B" Map Agreement" means the Supplemental
Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the McMillin Otay Ranch SPA
One, Phase One, units One (1) and Four(4) adopted by Resolution No.
19246.
NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants, terms
and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as set forth
below.
1. Agreement Applicable to Subsequent OWners.
a. Agreement Binding Upon Successors. This Agreement
shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors,
assigns and interests of the parties as to any or all of the
Property, as described on Exhibit "A", until released by the mutual
consent of the parties.
b. Agreement Runs with the Land. The burden of the
covenants contained in this Agreement ("Burden") is for the benefit
and Burden of the Property and the City, its successors and assigns
and any successor in interest thereto. City is deemed the
beneficiary of such covenants for and in its own right and for the
purposes of protecting the interest of the community and other
parties public or private, in whose favor and for whose benefit of
such covenants running with the land have been provided without
regard to whether city has been, remained or are owners of any
particular land or interest therein. If such covenants are
breached, the City shall have the right to exercise all rights and
remedies and to maintain any actions or suits at law or in equity
or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breach to
which it or any other beneficiaries of this agreement and the
covenants may be entitled.
c. Developer Release on Guest Builder Assignments. If
Developer assigns any portion of the Project to a guest builder,
Developer may request to be released from Developer's obligations
under this Agreement, that are expressly assumed by the guest
builder; provided Developer obtains the prior written consent of
the city to such release. Such assignment to the guest builder
shall, however, be subject to this Agreement and the Burden of this
Agreement shall remain a covenant running with the land. The city
shall not withhold its consent to any such request for a release so
long as the assignee acknowledges that the Burden of the Agreement
runs with the land, assumes the obligations of the Developer under
this Agreement, and demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City,
its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement as it
relates to the portion of the project which is being acquired by
the Assignee.
3
/7ß-Y
d. Partial Release of Developer's Assignees. If
Developer assigns any portion of the Project subject to the Burden
of this Agreement, upon request by the Developer or its assignee,
the City shall release the assignee of the Burden of this Agreement
as to such assigned portion if such portion has complied with the
requirements of this Agreement to the satisfaction of the City and ..
such partial release will not, in the opinion of the City,-·
jeopardize the likelihood that the remainder of the Burden will not
be completed.
e. Release of Individual Lots. Upon conveyance of a
residential lot to a buyer of an individual housing unit, Developer
may have the right to obtain a release for such lot from the
Developer's obligations under this Agreement, provided Developer
obtains the prior written consent of the city to such release. The
City shall not withhold its consent to such release so long as the
City finds that the Developer is in compliance with the terms of
this Agreement and that such partial release will not jeopardize
the City's assurance that the obligations set forth in this
Agreement will be performed.
2. Condition No.1 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction
of Condition No. 1 of the Resolution, Developer hereby agrees, to
comply with the requirements and guidelines of the Parks,
Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, PFFP, Ranch Wide Affordable
Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan, and the Non-
Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, as may be amended from time to
time, and shall remain in compliance with and implement the terms,
conditions and provisions of said documents.
3. Condition No.3 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction
of Condition NO.3 of the Resolution, Developer agrees that if any
of the terms, covenants or conditions contained within the
Resolution shall fail to occur or if they are, by their terms, to
be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions
fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms,
the City shall have the right to deny the issuance of building
permits for the Project, 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 ten (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
within a reasonable period of time.
4. Condition No.4 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction
of Condition NO.4 of the Resolution, Developer hereby agrees, that
Developer shall comply with all the applicable SPA conditions of
approval.
4
/7ß-~
-- . ---_._.~----~--- - -- -- ..--
5. Conditions No.6 - (Environmental). In satisfaction of
Condition No.6, the Developer agrees to implement all applicable
mitigation measures identified in EIR 95-01, the CEQA Findings of
Fact for this Project and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
6. Condition No. 7 - (Environmental). In satisfaction of
Condition No.7, Developer agrees:
a. Cash deposit. Developer understands and agrees that
mitigation of the environmental impacts caused by development
within the Project, requires conveyance of land to the Preserve
Owner Manager or the payment of an in-lieu fee, in accordance with
the requirements of the RMP Phase 2, and other related documents.
Developer does not currently own land required to be conveyed to
the Preserve Owner Manager, but wishes to obtain approval of the
Final Map before an In-lieu fee has been adopted by the City.
Therefore, Developer agrees to deposit cash with the City in the
amount of $48,787.04 ("Cash Deposit") concurrent with execution of
this Agreement. (The City agrees to retain the Cash Deposit in a
separate fund account in accordance with the provisions contained
in this paragraph.) The Cash Deposit represents an estimate of the
cash equivalent of the Final Map's conveyance obligation that is
identified in the RMP Phase 2 (15.964 acres of conveyance
obligation X the average value of $3,056 per acre determined in the
appraisal) . Developer understands and agrees that Developer's
conveyance obligation is calculated by including development areas,
streets, open space lots, paseos, pedestrian parks and slope areas
shown on the Final Map.
b. Purchase Land. Developer further agrees to use its
best efforts to purchase real property, identified in the
Conveyance Plan of the RMP Phase 2 ("Land"), within 18 months after
the date of this Agreement, in an amount equivalent to the Final
Map's conveyance obligation, identified in the RMP Phase 2 and as
may be amended from time to time. upon the request of the
Developer, City agrees to place the Cash Deposit, into an escrow
account for the purchase of the Land within 20 days of Developer's
request; provided, however, the City has approved the purchase of
the Land as complying with the criteria of the RMP Phase 2.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer understands and agrees
that if the City so determines or is required by court order or by
some other state, federal or local agency to use the Cash Deposit
to purchase real property or to deliver said funds to the Preserve
Owner Manager to satisfy the Final Map's land conveyance
obligation, the City shall not be required to place the Cash
Deposit into the escrow account. If this should occur, the
Developer shall no longer be required to use its best efforts to
purchase the Land.
c. Payment of Any Difference. If the Developer does not
buy the Land within 18 months after the date of this Agreement
5
/7ß-~
and/or Cash Deposit is used by the City or the Preserve Owner
Manager to purchase or condemn real property to meet the
Developer's land conveyance obligation for the Final Map, the
Developer agrees to pay the difference between the cOsts incurred
by the City or the Preserve Owner Manager, including administrative
costs, escrow and attorney fees, and the Cash Deposit that has been
provided by the Developer.
d. Fee Title. If Developer purchases the Land,
Developer agrees to deliver, no later than 18 months after the date
of this Agreement, fee title to the Land to the City and County of
San Diego as joint tenants approved by the Preserve Owner manager,
and free and clear of liens or encumbrances, except for easements
for existing public infrastructure and easements for planned public
infrastructure as permitted in the RMP Phase 2.
e. Maintenance. The developer further agrees that any
Land to be conveyed by the Developer for the Otay Ranch Preserve
shall be maintained by the Developer until such time as the city,
County and Preserve Owner Manager accepts the Land.
7. Condition Nos. 22c and lOOb - (Pedestrian Bridges). In
satisfaction of Condition Nos. 22c and lOOb of the Resolution,
Developer acknowledges and agrees that by the provisions of this
paragraph, city is not waiving developer's obligation as set forth
in the "A" Map Agreement and that City retains the right to require
Developer to provide cash or security to guarantee the pedestrian
bridges as more particularly set forth in the "A" Map Agreement.
Developer further acknowledges and agrees that the "pedestrian
bridge" concept is an integral element of the otay Ranch's village
Design Plan. Developer has requested that a Development Impact Fee
("DIF") be established to finance the construction of the
pedestrian bridges. In partial satisfaction of Condition Nos. 22c
and 100b of the Resolution, developer hereby agrees that concurrent
with execution of this Agreement, the Developer shall provide the
City with cash equal to $36,120.00, which is the amount equal to
the estimated DIF amount of $420.00 times the 86 dwelling units
contained within the Final Map. For purposes of this paragraph,
"dwelling unit" refers to a numbered lot on the Final Map. This
represents the Final Map's fair share of the cost of construction
of the pedestrian bridges connecting Villages One to Two, villages
One to Five, and Villages Five to six. If a DIF mechanism is
adopted by the City Council which is less than $420.00 per dwelling
unit, once the statutory period for challenging the DIF has expired
without a challenge to the DIF, the City agrees to refund the
Developer the difference between the cash paid by the Developer as
provided herein and the actual DIF requirement for the Final Map.
If the amount of the DIF is more than $420.00 per dwelling unit,
Developer agrees to pay the difference between the higher DIF
adopted by the city and the amount paid herein. Developer may pay
said difference prorated with each building permit remaining to be
6
/7ß-)
issued for the Final Map or should no further building permits be
required for the Final Map, payment shall be in total within five
days of City's request for payment. Developer further understands
and agrees that the City may use the funds so collected to refund
any developer who constructs the pedestrian bridges.
Developer acknowledges that if no DIF mechanism is established
for any reason, the city has the right to retain the cash deposit
to use for the construction of said pedestrian bridges and that
Developer shall pay the city any difference between the Final Map's
fair share of the actual total costs incurred to construct the
pedestrian bridges and the amount paid herein. Developer further
understands and agrees that the city may use the funds so collected
to refund any developer who constructs the pedestrian bridges.
Developer understands and agrees that subsequent final maps
within the Property may require further compliance with Condition
Nos. 22c and 100b including paying a like amount in accordance with
the provisions of this paragraph or bonding for said pedestrian
bridges.
8. Condition No. 73 - (Community Parks) . In satisfaction of
Condition No. 73 of the Resolution, the Developer agrees to pay PAD
fees for a community park based upon a formula of 1 acre per 1,000
residents, in accordance with the formula established by the Park
Acquisition Development Ordinance, Municipal Code section 17.10 et
seq. ("PADO" ) or enter into an agreement to satisfy their parks
obligations.
a. Payment within 60 Days. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, with respect to the Final Map, Developer agrees to pay,
in cash, the PAD fees for the community park based upon a formula
established by the PADO of 1 acre per 1,000 residents ("PAD Fees"),
no later than 60 days after the Final Map has been approved by the
City council. Developer has provided the City concurrent with
execution of this agreement, an improvement security or a letter of
credit, from a sufficient surety approved by the city and in a form
approved by the City Attorney, to guarantee Developer's payment of
the PAD Fees within 60 days. Developer acknowledges and agrees
that if the PAD Fees are not paid within the time agreed herein,
the sums provided by the improvement security or the letter of
credit may be used by the City to fulfill Developer's PAD Fee
obligation.
b. Interest Payment. In accordance with Municipal
Code Section 17.10.100, Developer further agrees to provide the
City with an interest payment, on the PAD Fees, equal to the
following; commencing from the date of Final Map approval for the
Project, at the City's average earning rates, computed and
compounded quarterly, experienced by the City on its average
investments, as determined by the City ("Base Interest Rate") for
the first 60 days after said map approval, and thereafter at the
7
17[J -~
----_._~._-_.~--
Base Interest Rate plus two percentage points until paid, together
with any attorney fees and costs incurred in enforcing this
provision.
c. withhold Building Permits. Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, City may withhold final or interim
inspection of units for which building permits may have been issued-
and may withhold issuance of additional building permits,
certificates of occupancy, if applicable or any other processing of
entitlement within the Final Map, until the required fees are
received by the city, including the interest payment.
d. Park Construction Agreement. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, should City and Developer enter into a Park Construction
Agreement or similar agreement regarding Developer's park
obligations, which is adopted by City Council on or before 60 days
after the Final Map has been approved by the City Council,
Developer will be relieved of its obligation to pay PAD fees as
described above and shall comply instead with such Park
Construction Agreement.
9. satisfaction of Conditions. City agrees that the
execution of this Agreement constitutes partial satisfaction or
satisfaction of Developer's obligation of Conditions: 1, 3, 4, 6,
7, 22(c), 73, and 100b of the Resolution. Developer further
understands and agrees that the some of the provisions herein may
be required to be performed or accomplished prior to the approval
ot other final maps for the Project, as may be appropriate.
10. Unfulfilled Conditions. Developer hereby agrees, unless
otherwise conditioned, that Developer shall comply with all
unfulfilled conditions of approval of the Tentative Map,
established by the Resolution and shall remain in compliance with
and implement the terms, conditions and provisions therein.
11. Previous Agreement. The Developer acknowledges that
nothing in this Agreement shall supersede, nullify or otherwise
negatively impact the terms of the "A" Map Agreement and the First
"B" Map Agreement. This Agreement affirms and reflects the terms,
conditions and provisions of the "A" Map Agreement and the First
"B" Map Agreement and of the Tentative Map 97 - 02 conditions
applicable specifically to the Final Map for the Property.
12. Recording. This Agreement, or an abstract hereof shall
be recorded simultaneously with the recordation of the Final Map.
13. Building Permits. Developer understands and agrees that
the City may withhold the issuance of building permits for the
Project, should the Developer be determined by the city to be in
breach of any of the terms of this Agreement. The city shall
provide the Developer of notice of such determination and allow the
Developer with reasonable time to cure said breach.
8
/7ß-¡
14. Miscellaneous.
a. Notices. Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement
or by law, any and all notices required or permitted by this
Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either party
shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served, delivered, and
received when personally delivered to the party to whom it is-
directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business days have
elapsed following deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or registered
mail, return receipt requested, first-class postage prepaid,
addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. A party may
change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving
written notice of such change to the other party.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Attn.: Director of Public Works
Developer:
McMillin Otay Ranch LLC
2727 Hoover Avenue
National city, CA 91950
(619) 336-3672
Attn: Robert A. Pletcher
A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph
by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the
manner provided in this paragraph.
b. Captions. Captions in this Agreement are inserted
for convenience of reference and do not define, describe or limit
the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms.
c. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the
entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter
hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements,
understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect.
This Agreement is not intended to supersede or amend any other
agreement between the parties unless expressly noted.
d. Preparation of Agreement. No inference, assumption
or presumption shall be drawn from the fact that a party or his
attorney prepared and/or drafted this Agreement. It shall be
conclusively presumed that both parties participated equally in the
preparation and/or drafting this Agreement.
9
/7ß~/?J
e. Recitalsl Exhibits. Any recitals set forth above
and exhibits attached hereto are incorporated by reference into
this Agreement.
f. Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences
litigation for the judicial interpretation, reformation, _
enforcement or rescission hereof, the prevailing party will be
entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to
reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The
"prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded
substantially the relief sought.
(NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE)
10
/7ß-/1
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
FINAL "B" MAP FOR McMILLIN OTAY RANCH,
SPA ONE, PHASE ONE, UNIT FIVE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set
forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA McMILLIN OTAY RANCH LLC
Mayor
Attest:
[Title]
Beverly Authelet, city Clerk By:
Approved as to Form: /, / ^" "')
r7:71t;·¿;r¡;;-1:-:7 ,7 7tJJ¿ ?'f''!-
~~ c t4,/, [Name]
John . Kaheny, ci~torney VP
[Title]
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
H:\Home\Attorney\SSIA\McMill.5
11
/?/J-/;L
>
STATE OF CALIFORNIA >
COUNTY OF San Diego >
On 1)-//0 Jqg before me, .
..
Dawn B. Mendoza, Notarv Public ,
personally appeared Thomas A. Fuller and Craig T. Fukuvama
,
personally known to me ~llImm~lmlf)fI/l.nflmiø!ff¡~fþ.Çml¡t;fNjø#øfJfI)lto be the person(s)
whose name(s) III/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that W_,i!iltithey
executed the same in I\.i\!fflilr/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by IliSl'l\itiftheir signature(s) on
the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. f@~¿~
'I
Signature fJ¿tl ¿U¡'l. .:2) nú~~ ~ 'I' NOTARY PUBLK;.CAUFORNIA ~
~... ~AN DIEGO. CA --.
,..:~~~~.:x~~J~~ ~1-J
--------
>
STATE OF CALIFORNIA >
COUNTY OF >
On before me,
,
personally appeared
,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s)
whose name(s) islare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they
executed the same in hislher/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by hislher/their signature(s) on
the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
notary.slg J7fJ-/3
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit "A" Legal Description - unit 5
_.
12
17(]-) 0/
EXHIBIT A
Lot 5 of Chula Vista Tract 97-02, McMillin Otay Ranch SPA !, Phase
! , in the County of San Diego, state of California, According to
map thereof No. 13605, filed in the office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County July 28, 1998.
/78-/3
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /í/
~ Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution ) 93;> Authorizing the issuance of Encroachment Pennit No.
PE-44l for construction of two entry monument signs proposed for the Otay
Ranch Subdivision Jocated at the intersection of Telegraph Canyon Road and
Paseo Ranchero
SUBMITTED BY: onoc"" "fPobb, Wm"'~ zj[;)v
REVIEWED BY: City -- VR- 'riJ ______ \ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ NoX)
Otay Project, LLC. a California Lirnited Liability Company, owners of the Otay Ranch Subdivision
are proposing to construct two entry monument signs along Telegraph Canyon Road and Paseo
Ranchero frontage. The frontage area is located within a City drainage easement and an assignable
and irrevocable general utility easement. According to Section 12.28 of the Municipal Code, any
pennanent structures built within any easement, such as pennanent monument signs require City
Council approval utilizing the encroachment pennit process.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the subject resolution authorizing the City
Engineer to issue Encroachment Pennit No. PE-441 and direct the City Clerk to record said
resolution and pennit.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None
DISCUSSION:
Entrance monuments for subdivisions and businesses are commonly placed within street right-of-
way, City owned open space land or easements. In each case, staff has reviewed detailed plans
showing locations and elevations of the proposed signs or monuments to insure that signs do not
create traffic hazards with respect to sight distance restrictions.
This encroachment pennit includes an indemnity clause holding the City, its agents and employees
harmless from damages resulting from the construction and maintenance of the entry monuments
belonging to Otay Projects, LLC.
On October 26, 1998, staff received a copy of a letter from the Otay Ranch Company requesting an
Encroachment Pennit (Exhibit C). The letter noted, and staff concurs, that the proposed Monument
Wall is consistent with the approved Village Design Plan document for the main Ranch entry in
SPA 1. The applicant believes that the Encroachment is necessary for the visibility of the monument
and entry walls.
)g-//
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
The City's standard encroachment pennits contain the necessary maintenance, removal and hold-
harmless clauses. The encroachment pennit protects the City from maintenance problems and
liability for damages and/or bodily injuries arising from the perfonnance of the work connected with
the monument signs. The cash bond required for the pennanent encroachment will help reinforce
the encroachment removal clause.
According to Section 12.28.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, a Council resolution must
authorize the issuance of this encroachment pennit.
FISCAL IMPACT: Otay Project, LLC. A California Lirnited Liability Company has paid a $250.00
application fee for processing the Encroachment pennit and deposited $1,205.00 to cover City
inspection costs for the proposed monument wall signs and submitted a cash bond in the amount of
$4,300.00 with the City on November 13, 1998.
Attachments: Exhibit "A" ~ Locator plat
Exhibit "B" - Encroachment Permit PE~441
Exhibit "C" - Letter from Otay Project, LLC.
H:\HOMEIENGINEERIAGENDAIPE441A.BFS
/~rcJ--
__"_.__...u_·"" --_..--~._._...."_-.._---.---_..__.._._-
RESOLUTION NO. /93/5
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PE-441 FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ENTRY MONUMENT SIGNS
PROPOSED FOR THE OTAY RANCH SUBDIVISION
LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF TELEGRAPH
CANYON ROAD AND PASEO RANCHERO
WHEREAS, Otay Project, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company, owners of the Otay Ranch Subdivision are
proposing to construct two entry monument signs along Telegraph
Canyon Road and Paseo Ranchero frontage; and
WHEREAS, the frontage area is located within a City
drainage easement and an assignable and irrevocable general utility
easement; and
WHEREAS, according to Chapter 12.28 of the Municipal
Code, any permanent structures built within any easement, such as
permanent monument signs requires city Council approval utilizing
the encroachment permit process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby authorize the issuance of
Encroachment Permit No. PE-441 for construction of two entry
monument signs proposed for the Otay Ranch Subdivision located at
the intersection of Telegraph Canyon Road and Paseo Ranchero.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
directed to record this resolution and permit.
Presented by Approved as to form by
~-~
John P. Lippitt, Director of Jo~ny, City A torney
Public Works
H:\home\lorraine\rs\PE441.enc
)(J/)
~
, ,
0 EXHIBIT "A"
...
I
~
¡¡¡ ~ ~ ~ -
~~-
:;;i ~-----.
~
¡::j
I
60 0 60 120 180 ~
~ I I I ___
SCALE 1· = 60' ~
---
~Oþ.~
~'<O~ t:"'c""'A"'iM~JJT - 3' 1~1i
--- C,
~ ~G~þ.,?y.. F'Ras~N6 WAI../..
.:J-'L ENCROACHMENT -
--- \~\.,:
~ 6' HIGH FREESTANDING WALL
DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO THE CITY
OF CHUIA VISTA PER DOC. REC.
¡.\",E.tI'I ;E.!>I1 04/23/1990 AS FILE NO.
90-180522, O.R.
Cfl.O,.,c ",O!>ll! . \
E.!>I, ¡.\\G¡.\ ß ASSIGNABLE AND
,4 , IRREVOCABLE GENERAL
UTILITY EASEMENT PER
13592
'''' ~ G ~~
, t.tI'I O\!>I
, C¡.\'" 51Þ.!>I
Cfl.°þl tfl.E.t. rr<
E.!>I, ¡.\\Gt1 E. C
:3 101\'1 fl.E.C,
tJ5.E."'~E.fI. OO~·
tlÞ-GE. \j\~þ. F\\.E.!>I .
ofl,Þ>! C¡.\1!1Jo 990 þS fl.. t.E.
0~!Z:3!~5ZZ, 0· ~~ pE.fI. -'0 --- -.
90~ ,8 #10 'ËØ'" þS F\\.E. ~
~G~\.tll\.~41'9980'fI.· ----
GoIE.~E.C. 6~88&5" fI. DOC. ~
OOC' ,998~ t.tI'I pt: E. !>10, "fJ
!>IO' €pE.'" þS F\\.
,.:1- 998 fI. %
o£'ll Pl.!', 0·'
5\ 6 &5 ' \ '-1
fl.E.C' ~o:388
,998 \%
/~/i
, J
".".-------,,-..-.--.. --.-- ---
[) 5'·3"
.J -~ ..",,-
:..E :..,E. I
.......---.. " N~~
--- " 81 :!'T'fP,
/-" )0 ~ MDNUMEtf"- 5Aërt:~ A~_ ~~~:JN~, CONCRIE ElOCr
w+- t , :ONSTRUCTìON BY cmiTPAC70~
I II ·:TA~ om:~:· RUB2L::, :C'}. :;-" Mill. AN~
;~. X n 'MAX FAC~ )IMENS:ON OR [Ql!IVAlHi",
-\ I, A'/AILA-BLE FROM MO!E~~ 5:JllDERS SUPP~Y (760: 59,,4
./
J : -
"'v-----/ " JJ ·~TAH DESERT' LE[)GE~ S70NE WITH Ar¡ AVE
THICKNESS OF 4". MH;.l.lNGiH OF 12" AND
" /- J MAX. LENGTH OF 3D', AVAILA~LE FROM
[] MODERN BUILDERS supP~' ~76D) 5gì·4~70
J :.:J SIGNAGE BY OTHERS ITO!E INSTAlLED BY CONTRACTOP.~
8 .lJ CONCRETE FOOTING SIE STEE~ SIZE AND
PLACEMENT BY CONTRA::10~ (SEE STRUCTURAL
ENGINEER'SGALCULATiONSroRRECOMMENDAT1ON)
, 'I_II t=! I t:::: -' i ::::11'-' :lJ COMPACTED SUBGRAliE mE SOILS REPORT FOR
'~
PLAN VIEW - r- I t::::¡T:=¡~ REGOMMENGATIONJ
CORNER SECTlOI'I ELEVATION :.2.l fiNISH GRADE (SEE (JRAIJING ?LANS BY CIVILENGINEERì
NOTL CORNER lEDGER SiOMESHA1.l
BE GllSToM GIJTTO mAiWUKD CORNERS, NOTr:; AlL fOUR SIDES T:J E~ VENEERED WITH STON~
GROUT COLOR SHALL MATCH STDNECDLDR. SET RUBBLE
MAXIMIZE VERTICAL RE~!~: GROUT JOINTS SHALL BE AS
MIN!MALASPQSSIBLEAN;JSHALlBERAKEDBAC!\.
ENTRY MONUMENT (j
J~---3
-------------..... ..-
-
B El L::I~ -I
c:
:::c
I"T'1 ..,.,
-"""T'1 = -"'"T'1 = o "-' en en>
'-'::c = '-'== 0-1 -- -0
""0-1 ""0-1 ",,0 o~
=:s:;> =:s:;> 0"" I"T'1;þ
- ~ - ~
~3:o ~3:o ::om n 1
m:;: I"T'1
_Om _Om -I:J> :z ~ ..
, 0 en , oen m,..... 4'+ -I
.þ ,..., ,..., .þ1'T'l1'T'l "'" ,..... i
0'0== 0'0 ::0 = ,.....
.....""-1 '-'=-1 0=
= = <:> = o=:¡
~"",..... _~:::c
en <= m en _ <= ""'-I V>
r'T";:::c I'T'I,....."" C'> rn fT1 "0 i
moe;) mOlD 0::0 C'> ,
0""'''''' om,..... Bj@ -I =
m== m=1'T'I 0 1+
-1"-',,-, -I en- -1m
2:::cn-i >en> == 2
,.....<=0 r=c::;;= <=0
1D"'t:J2 ID""'- ~en "-.
__"'t:J"'" --""''''''' -0 en t
,..... ,.....- ,.....,.....:J> 0..." VARIES SEE PlAN ::r .'
0-<> C'>-<"" = :::c
, <: , ,..... "",:;: c: I
m '-' > '-' m
- - -<:J> en"'"
:z ,..... ,.....
:J> 0""" -»
"" 00 °0
-f ,..... 2= I"T'1~ I
1""1 -I,..... »
::::c ::0-< n
>- I"T'1
-< C'> 2
-I -I
0
:E :::c
::r> ¡
r- ,:..-,...
r- BEJ B B
:;:.0:: ..." = (") 1""1 "'" C'> I
I'T'IO ·zr-o 1
;Þ - 2 I
,..... C'> C'>;s: ~:J>2 ,...,
"""0 en 0"", -C'>C'> ,......
~ ""m= ,
02 :s:;> m:s:;1'T'I I"T'1 ;
2 (") ~ 3:(") mm-l <: ,
r- - = 1""1-1 ~:Z1"T1 =::; I
-<~ :J> 2m en-l..." I
_m 0 00 0
en :J> I'T'I >en "'t:J "" 0 :z: i
I'T'IO -1= r--<o
rn rn C;; -"", >(")-1 I
0.:'" I'T'I O~ ""02
rn-l I'T'I ~= cn",,~ I·:'~·f-·g~;:~"·m.
~<= "'" :J> ö::ri~
,..... 0
-= > rn ::0>.....
r-...,
<!::> 2 C;; =(")rn
en -1-
r- 0 m moen
(") ~ "'" I'T'I C'>=-I
, > -< ° m
.... C"> C'> en :S:;-m
-1""1 0 3:~r- i
2 :S r- mmen
-I ,..... en 2cnN i
~ I'T'I :::c °-lrn I
0 2 I'T'I ~::c>
I'T'I ~ "'" -<=2
en 2 0 0C'>0 I.
:::c 2 -I
0 0 I'T'I -I - <=
..., 1""1 = -'
= ..."
- 0 > I>' ..
= ,.....
,
1
1
i
,
J~/þ ..
,,--."
r~"-
- ...'.....
- .- -- ---.-.
Recording requested by and EXHIBIT "B"
please return to:
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box J087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
[ X] This document benefits
permirtee. Recording
fee required. t (This space for Recorder's use, only) t
Affects Assessor's Parcel No(s) 641-080-01 C.V. File No. 071040-PE-441
AUTHORIZATION FOR
ENCROACHMENT ON CITY PROPERTY
Permit No. PE-441
Pursuant to Chapter 12.28 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, permission is hereby granted by the City of
Chula Vista (hereinafter "City") to: OTA Y PROJECT. LLC. A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY (hereinafter "Permittee") whose mailing address is 11975 EI Camino Real, Suite 104 San Diego,
CA 92130, to do work within a portion of a drainage and general utility easement belonging to the City of
Chula Vista subject to the terms and conditions contained in this permit ("Permit").
I. City Prooertv
City's property ("City Property") affected by this permit is described as follows:
Drainage Easements to the City ofChula Vista per Doc. Rec. 4/23/1990 as File No. 90-180522 and
Assignable and Irrevocable General Utility Easement per Map No. 13592.
2. Benefitted Pr0.pertv
The property benefitting from the grant of this permit is the Otay Ranch SPA I Village I and is
described as follows:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot "B" of Map No. 13592 and a portion of Parcel 12 of Parcel Map
No. 17901
ADDRESS: 10000 Telegraph Canyon Road
3. Permitted Encroachment
Permittee has requested this Permit with respect to City Property for the following purpose
("Encroachment"):
Page 1 /lJ/?
.-_._.~---
Installation and maintenance of a sign in a form and at a location approved by City as more
particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
4. Grant of Permit
Permission is hereby granted Permittee by City to install the above-mentioned Encroachment on the
City Property at the location specified in accordance with the following terms and conditions:
a. The Encroachment shall be installed and maintained in a safe and sanitary manner by
Permittee as determined by City.
b. Encroachment shall, in no way interfere with the maintenance of street trees or operation of
any existing utility, including but not limited to water meters, CATV and telephone pedestals,
public storm drain and sewer lines. Any costs arising from changes of or to any City
property or facility due to the Encroachment shall be the sole responsibility of Permittee.
c. Maintenance, removal or relocation of Encroachment shall be the sole responsibility of
Permittee, and/or Permittee's lessee, should there be any, at no expense to City.
d. Encroachment shall conform to all standards and specifications as stated in the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
e. Permittee is to call Underground Service Alert (One call mark-out service) at 1-800-422-4133
a minimum of two working days prior to any excavation being done in the public right-of-
way, including post holes or footing excavations.
f. Permittee shall apply an anti-graffiti material to the Encroachment of a type and nature that
is acceptable to the Director of Public Works.
g. Permittee shall immediately remove any graffiti from the Encroachment.
h. If, after notice from the City, Permittee fails to immediately remove any graffiti, City shall
have the right to remove graffiti or paint the Encroachment to cover over graffiti at
Permittee's sole cost, including reimbursement for City staff time, at full cost recovery, and
the cost of materials.
I. Permittee shall not allow Encroachment to block the existing course of surface drainage to
the extent that it may endanger the public or the properties surrounding Permittee's property
or cause pounding of water.
j. Permittee shall post a cash bond in the amount of four thousand three hundred dollars
($4,300.00) for future removal or relocation of encroachment.
This permit is revocable by City upon thirty (30) days written notice to Permittee, and upon written notice,
the installation must be removed or relocated, as and when specified by the City Engineer, at Permittee's cost.
If Permittee fails to remove or relocate Encroachment as directed, City may cause such work to be done and
the cost thereof shall be deducted from the cash bond as referenced in 4 G) above. Permittee shall pay the
difference between the total cost of removal or relocation and the total bond deposited. It is further agreed
that if any part of Permittee's Encroachment or Permittee's rights under this Permit should interfere with the
future use of the City's property as determined to be necessary by the City in its sole distinction, in the
Page 2 ¡g----;r'
interests of public health, safety or welfare, upon City's request, the encroachment must be removed or
relocated at Permittee's expense and Permittee's rights hereunder shall terminate.
Permittee shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and
employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation
attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the Permittee, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or
others (including third parties) in connection with the installation or maintenance of the Encroachment, except
only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City, its officers, or
employees. Permittee's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability
incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same
proceed to judgment or not. Further, Permittee at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City,
defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Permittee's
indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Permittee.
Permittee shall acquire and maintain in effect comprehensive general liability insurance in a form and in
coverage amounts approved by the City's Risk Manager. Insurance shall be issued by an California admitted
carrier with a Best's rating of A-V or better. City shall be named an additional insured by appropriate
endorsement.
The undersigned Permittee hereby accepts this Permit upon the terms and conditions stated herein and agrees
to comply with all stated terms and conditions and with all applicable laws, including any applicable provision
of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
In the event of a dispute arising as to the terms or interpretation of this permit, the City Engineer shall resolve
said dispute in his sole and unfettered discretion, reasonably applied.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
Permit approved by:
Date:
Clifford L. Swanson
Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer
(City Clerk to attach acknowledgment.)
Page 3 )2"'7 / /g../O
PERMITTEE:
Signature: Date:
(Notary to attach acknowledgment.)
Ap.vroved as to form:
City Attorney
NOTE: Permittee is to submit a check or money order payable to County of San Diego eqULlI to the total of
$7. ()() for the first page and $3. ()() for each page thereafter, including notary acknowledgments for all
signatories. .
.., (For office use only) ..,
Encroachment has been constructed and is in compliance with the attached sketch.
Signed Dated
(Inspector)
(Signature Page for C.V. File No. 0710-40-PE-441)
H:\HŒv:Œ\ENGINEER\PERMITS\PE441,BFS
Page 4 /gr r/O
EXHIBIT "e"
THE OTAY RANCH" COMPANY
October 26_ ] 998
Mr. Cliff Swanson
City Of Chula Vista
Engineering Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Application for Encroachment Pennit
Otay Ranch SPA 1 Village 1 Entry Monument
Dear Mr. Swanson:
Please accept for review this application for an encroachment pennit at the intersection of
Telegraph Canyon Road and Paseo Ranchero. The encroachments consist of entry walls within a
public storm drain easement, as shown on the attachment exhibit "A".
The encroachment is required for the visibility of the monument and entry walls for the
main Ranch entry in SPA 1 per the approved Village Design Plan.
The cost estimate for work within the easement is as follows:
Item Ouantity Unit Cost Total Cost
3' Freestanding Wall 195 SF $20.00 $3,900.00
6' Freestanding Wall 240 SF $20.00 $4,800.00
14' Entry Monument 2 ea. $10,000.00 $20,000.00
(8' square)
Total $28.700.00
Our estimate for demolition of the walls and monuments at 15% of the construction cost
is $4300.00.
The legal description for the site is: Lot B orc.V.T. 96-04, Map No. 13592
Thank you for your help with this matter. Please call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
TIffi~RANCH COMPANY
Chuck Cater
Project Manager
11975 EI Camino Real, Suite t04· San Diego, CA 92130 J~ --- J1
Tel. 619-259-2934 . Fax. 6 t 9-259-4364
E-mail. ahartin@otay.com
....-.-...-. .u_.__,...,..... _ ___,__~_.__._______.u_
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ItemÆ
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /9.J / J Amending the City's Master Fee Schedule and
Establishing New Green Fees at Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course
SUBMITTED BY: D;"""', of P,bI" W'"'P ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~~ ~ ...-z (4/5th Vote _ Yes ..x No)
American Golf Corporation, the golf course lessee, is requesting a Green Fee adjustment as
authorized by the lease agreement approved by the City Council in November 1984 (Attachment
A). The Agreement allows the Lessee to adjust the Green Fees to be similar to comparable golf
courses once per year. The current Green Fees have been in effect since December 18, 1995.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At the August 20, 1998, Parks and Recreation
Commission meeting, the Commission endorsed (5-0) the fee increase. The Commission also
recommended that the weekday 9-hole rate be discontinued and only allow weekend 9-hole play
in early hours on the back nine (Attachment B).
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution to amend the City's Master Fee Schedule
as recommended by the Department and adjust the Green Fee rates effective January 1, 1999.
DISCUSSION:
American Golf submitted a fee adjustment request on April 28, 1998 (Attachment A). In
accordance with the lease agreement, the City has the right to review and approve Green Fee
rates. Green Fee rates may be comparable to those charged by other public golf courses in San
Diego County. The proposed rate fee increases were posted at the Pro-Shop four weeks prior to
the July 16 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. In addition, the golf course manager
presented American Golfs fee proposals to the Men's and Women's Golf Clubs at their general
membership meetings. Both clubs had no objections or concerns since the increases are
reasonable.
/1~/
Page 2, Item _
Meeting Date 12/15/98
The following chart summarizes the current rate(s), the rate(s) proposed by American Golf, and
staffs recommended rate(s):
Dept.
Weekdav Current Pro Dosed Recom.
Resident - 18 Hole $15.00 $16.50 $16.50
Non Resident - 18 Hole 20.00 21.00 21.00
Resident - 9 Hole 9.00 10.00 9.50
Non Resident - 9 Hole 11.00 11.50 11.50
Resident - Twilight 10.00 11.00 10.50
Non Resident-Twilight 12.00 12.50 12.50
Resident-Super Twilight 9.00 9.25 9.25
Non-Res. Super Twilight 9.00 9.25 9.25
Resident Senior 7.50 8.25 8.25
Resident Senior Ticket 40.00 45.00 45.00
Ticket Fee 1.00 2.00 1.00
Dept.
Weekend Current ProDosed Recom.
Resident - 18 Hole $18.00 $20.00 $20.00
Non Resident - 18 Hole 26.00 29.00 28.00
"Resident - 9 Hole 11.00 12.00 11.50
"Non Resident - 9 Hole 14.00 14.50 14.50
Resident Twilight 12.00 13.00 12.50
Non Resident Twilight 15.00 15.50 15.00
Resident Super Twilight 11.00 12.00 11.50
Non-Res. Super Twilight 11.00 12.00 11.50
("9-hole rate available for early mornings On back nine only.)
Justification for Staff Recommendation:
Staff believes that American Golfs proposed rate increase in the weekday and weekend rates are
reasonable with a few exceptions (noted in bold numbers on the above rates). Staff recommends
raising the weekend 9 hole resident rates 50¢. In addition, staff recommends a $2.00 increase in
the weekend non-resident 18 hole rate versus the $3.00 proposal. This is consistent with the $2.00
increase proposed for the weekend resident 18 hole rate. Secondly, at the request of the
Department, American Golf has not requested any fee adjustments in the past three years due to
the hotel-resort proposal and the major capital improvements to the golf course that were under
discussion. Until this proposal was completed, the Department believed any new rate increase
would contribute to golfers' concerns.
/9-;L
Page 3, Item _
Meeting Date 12/15/98
The Department supports the increase in the Senior Monthly Card Program from $40 to $45. This
fee has not changed since 1990, while the Senior Yearly Card Discount Program that provides a
50% Green Fee discount has increased whenever a fee adjustment to the resident 18 hole rate
is granted. At the August 20 meeting, American Golf withdrew their request to increase the daily
fee to $1.50 because of seniors' concerns and its minimal affect on golf course revenues. The
Department has no objections to American Golfs request to keep this fee at the same rate.
I! should be noted that when this item was reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission,
consideration was given and approved to eliminate the 9-hole rate. American Golf and staff have
subsequently reviewed this item and believe it would be inappropriate to remove it from the fee
structure. The Department and the Golf Course operator are in agreement regarding retaining the
9-hole rates during the weekdays. Nine-hole play will be limited to early mornings on the back nine
and late afternoon hours. Eliminating the 9-hole rate would be a hardship to golfers who desire to
play only 9 holes.
American Golf has reviewed the Department's recommendation and has no objections.
San Diego County Green Fee Comoarison:
The following Green Fee rate survey of public golf courses in the vicinity of Chula Vista were used
as comparable golf courses. The chart illustrates Chula Vista's resident 18-hole rate will continue
to be the lowest and the nonresident rate is the fourth lowest.
COMPARABLE RATE SURVEY
Golf Course Weekday 18 Hole Weekend 18 Hole
Chula Vista Resident $16.50 $20.00
Chula Vista Nonresident 21.00 28.00
Bonita 18.00 26.00
Coronado 20.00 20.00
Rancho San Diego (Ivan) 24.00 37.00
Rancho San Diego (M.V.) 21.00 34.00
Balboa San Diego Resident 17.00 19.00
Balboa San Diego Non Resident 30.00 35.00
Torrey Pines San Diego Resident 20.00 22.00
'Torrey Pines San Diego Non Resident 47.00 52.00
Mission Trails 22.00 31.00
Average Fee (excludes C.V.) $24.33 $30.66
'(If Torrey Pines - Non Resident rate is eliminated from the comparison survey, the average for
weekday would be $21.50 and weekend would be $28.00.)
Caoitallmorovements at the Golf Course:
The following is an update of completed projects for the Chula Vista Golf Course done August
1997 through July 1998.
/~- 3
~ - --------------------------
Page 4, Item _
Meeting Date 12/15/98
Facility/Buildings
- Entire outside banquet facility painted; September 1997.
- Banquet parking lot re-surfaced; May 1998.
- New counters and carpet in pro shop; 1997.
- New fixtures in pro shop; 1997.
- 19th Hole painted inside; 1997.
- Pro shop painted; 1997.
Golf Course
The current golf course conditions reflect an improved on-going maintenance schedule that
delineates the tee boxes, fairways, and greens areas by mowing grass at a shorter height. Bunker
quality has improved due to equipment modifications providing a more consistent sand quality.
Greens quality have remained consistent due to hand watering with domestic water and on-going
monitoring of salt levels. Golf course management has emphasized regular course audits and has
paid close attention to details from a golfer's perspective. The following projects were completed
in 1998:
- #11 green completely reconstructed with new drainage.
- #9 bridge repaired.
- Driving range net repaired.
- Upgraded, or replaced amenities, i.e., tee markers, ball washers, hazard markers.
- Restrooms painted.
- Constructed forward tee box on #18.
- Installed Gypsum tank for improving well water quality on #13.
- Constructed protective enclosure for Gypsum tank and pump station that is less visually
obtrusive.
- Completed fence repair on #14.
- Fairways re-sodding project in progress.
- Trees trimmed and on-going maintenance schedule in place.
1999 CIP Proiects
The following projects are scheduled for FY 99:
- Construct permanent crossing on #14 to improve cart access and help prevent closure
during inclement weather.
- Completely rebuild #15 green
- Install domestic water lines for back 9 greens.
- Repair net over channel on driving range.
- New carpet, lights, and paint in banquet facility.
- Reconstruct #12 bridge.
The Department is evaluating the agreement's "maintenance standards" to insure they are current
industry standards for a "good" municipal golf course. American Golf has expressed a willingness
to work with staff to establish the new maintenance standards and include them in their work
program.
J~~f
Page 5, Item _
Meeting Date 12/15/98
Communitv Involvement
In addition to the above CIP projects, American Golf has been very involved with the Chula Vista
. Boys and Girls Club's annual charity golf tournament. American Golf has helped raise over
$35,000 the past four years by donating the golf course, providing merchandise for raffle prizes,
etc. "San Diego Jr. Golf' and "Women on Golf Day" are the two other major community events
sponsored by American Golf to promote golf in the Community.
Five Year CaDitallmDrovement Program
The City and American Golf will develop a five year Capital Improvement Program to address major
needs of the golf course, I.e., new central irrigation system, new cart path throughout the golf
course, etc. Funding for these improvements is being explored. One scenario under consideration
is for the City to issue a Certificate of Participation and have American Golf guarantee the
amortization through increased minimum payments to the City, and increases in green fees. Once
the five year CIP is developed, along with a funding program, a complete report will be submitted
to Council for approval.
FISCAL IMPACT: The new Green Fee increases will produce an estimated $10,000 to $13,000
in additional revenue for the City based on a projected 98,000 rounds of golf.
Attachments: (A) Request from American Golf for Fee Adjustment
(B) Minutes, August 20, 1998 Parks & Recreation Commission - Excerpt NOT SCANNED
113DISK\AMERIGOLF .113
/'
/9/' .)
RESOLUTION NO. /93/t
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE CITY'S MASTER FEE
SCHEDULE TO ESTABLISH NEW GREEN FEES AT THE
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE
WHEREAS, the current green fee schedule for the Chula
vista Municipal Golf Course took effect December 18, 1995; and
WHEREAS, American Golf Corporation, the golf course
lessee, is requesting a green fee adjustment; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending a green fee schedule
effective January 1, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission, at its
August 20, 1998 meeting, endorsed the fee increase.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby amend Chapter VIII of the
city's Master Fee Schedule to establish new green fees at the Chula
vista Municipal Golf Course effective January 1, 1999 as set forth
below:
Weekday Rates Current Rate New Rate
18 Hole Resident $15.00 $16.50
18 Hole Non-Resident 20.00 21.00
9 Hole Resident 9.00 9.50
9 Hole Non-Resident 11.00 11.50
Resident Twilight 10.00 10.50
Non-Resident Twilight 12.00 12.50
Resident Super Twilight 9.00 9.25
Non-Resident Super Twilight 9.00 9.25
Resident Senior 7.50 8.25
Resident Senior Ticket 40.00 45.00
Ticket Fee 1. 00 1. 00
1
/9/,Þ
Weekend Rates Current Rate New Rate
18 Hole Resident $18.00 $20.00
18 Hole Non-Resident 26.00 28.00
9 Hole Resident** 11.00 11.50
9 Hole Non-Resident** 14.00 14.50
Resident Twilight 12.00 12.50
Non-Resident Twilight 12.50 15.00
Resident Super Twilight 11.00 11.50
Non-Resident Super Twilight 11.00 11.50
**9-hole rate available for early mornings on back nine only
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt , Director of Y
Public Works
H:\home\lorraine\rs\greena fees
2
)9--7
ATTACHMENT A
:-~...-
~-:< 'h~ '.::~: ¿ U "~~? E21C
ioi'¡j,'1 ,,'; ~
' ! ~ -., 1~9P
-- .... c:
American Golf CorporationÐ ---------------
April 28, 1997
1\1r. Jess Valenzuela, Director
Dept. Parks, Recreation and Open Space
City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Jess:
American Golf is pleased to submit the following plan for Capital Investment in the Chula
Vista Municipal Golf course.
1. AGe will invest 1.5 million dollars in the course for irrigation, cart paths, channel
work and any other mutually agreed to capital improvements.
2. The City of Chula Vista will reduce the percentage rent to AGe to 10% on fees, carts,
and range and 5% on lessons, merchandise, and other income for a period of ten years.
After that ten year period the rent will return to the percentages stated in the contract.
3. The City will grant AGe a J 5 year lease extension beyond the current term of the
lease.
4. The attached rate schedule will go into effect upon completion of the improvements
with a plan being put into place to insure yearly increases
Also, for AGC to consider moving forward with this proposal we believe it necessary for
the City to move forward with rate increases for 1998. The rates at the course have not
increased since 1994 for residents. I have attached a proposed 1998 rate schedule for
your revtew.
/c¡-~
;:;;0,(;01-,,)1 ':)ffice ~,:r:' :::euj.;meJiar; :> i";, Long B,,;s<:~. ':a¡:fGrr'!iJ 90804., T8iephor.e i3~C) 494-CCL..1 ~;.X (3101 492·~3-3
This proposal is not intended to constitute a binding lease agreement an is simply a
statement of AGe's intent as to the matters set forth herein. This proposal does, however,
outline the most salient terms and conditions of a Lease Amendment AGe would
contemplate executing with the City.
This proposal is subject to AGC's evaluation and verification of such information and
AGe Board approval.
Jess, I hope this proposal presents a viable alternative for Chula Vista golf course and the
City of Chula Vista. Please call me to discuss any questions that you may have.
~~¡
~~jÄ ~
Tom Frost, Regional Vice PresidentlR.O.E.
American Golf
/9/ /
1998 Chula Vista Golf Course Proposed Rates
WEEKDAY Current Proposed
Resident 18 15.00 16.50
Non-Resident 18 20.00 21.00
Resident 9 9.00 1000
Non-Resident 9 11.00 11.50
Resident Twi. 10.00 J 1.00
Non-Resident Twi. 12.00 J2.50
Resident Super Twi. 9.00 9.25
Non-Resident Super Twi. 9.00 9.25
Resident Senior 7.50 8.25
Resident Senior Ticket 40.00 45.00
Ticket Fee 1.00 2.00
Junior Monthly Pass 25.00 25.00
WEEKEND
Resident 18 18.00 20.00
Non-Resident J8 26.00 29.00
Resident 9 11.00 12.00
Non-Resident 9 14.00 14.50
Resident Twilight 12.00 13.00
Non -Resident Twi. 15.00 15.50
Resident Super Twi. 11.00 12.00
Non Resident Super Twi. 11.00 12.00
* The resident rates at Chula Vista have not increased since October of 1994.
/9--/!J
COMPARABLE RATE SURVEY
Wkday 18 Wkend 18 Wkday Twi. Wkend Twi
Bonita 18.00 26.00 12.00 J6.00
Coronado 20.00 20.00 1000 1000
Rancho S.D (Ivan) 24.00 37.00 16.00 21.00
(MY) 21.00 34.00 16.00 21.00
Balboa (City) 16.00 J8.00 9.00 9.00
(County) 23.00 26.00 13.00 13.00
(Non Res) 29.00 34.00 J7.00 17.00
Torrey (County) 29.00 31. 00 11.00 11.00
(Non Res) 46.00 51. 00 25.00 25.00
Mission Trails 22.00 31.00 15.00 22.00
Average Fee 24.80 30.80 14.40 16.50
/e:; ~ / /
. .-"-...-.
U':', U"'¡'/ ':'0 l.-.l.'Io.l. UQ."'¡'v 1.-_õ...J. U..L,:,...,¡,...I-r..,¡,.....,¡,U ~il~~~ rl.~l.~ ~~DLl.~ Ll.D I.f!J uu"':
Minutes ATTACHMENT .L
Park & Recreation Commission August 20, 1998
b. Request by American Golf for a Greens Fee Increase
DirectDr Palmer stated that the reason that this item is before the
Commission again is that any action they support must be passed by four
votes.
Deputy Director of Parks Foncerrada reported the City of San Diego has
recently dropped their County resident rate, leaving only a San Diego City
resident and non-resident rates.
Bob Jodice. of American Golf. reported that his organization has
reconsidered the issue of Senior rates and has decided to put the 50 cent
ticket fee increase aside and leave the rate at $1. The monthly ticket fee will
increase from $40 to $45- Mr_ Jodice went on to report his company has
recently invested between $5,000 and $6,000 in sodding projects. There
has also been an increase in non-resident play.
Commissioner Cochran recommended that the "9 hole" rates and "twilight
rates" be reassessed. In his opinion the only place for a "9 hole" rate would
be the weekend morning on the back nine. This would simplify the fee
structure. American Golf supported this recommendation.
Commissioner Rude reported that the restroom next to the Pro Shop has
flooded twice in a row. Mr. Jodice reported that the sump pump outside of
that area has been the source of this problem. A new pump has been
installed. American Golf intends to look at the entire area next year to
determine a long-term solution.
Ray Cayla, 112 H Street, Chula Vista, stated that he would have liked the $1
ticket fee eliminated entirely, but was satisfied at the elimination of the .50
ticket fee increase_ He would like to see the $1 fee eliminated when
American Golf comes before the Commission with their next fee increase
request
Mr. Cayla also reported that joggers running through the golf course and the
parking lot pose a serious safety problem. He suggested that a protective
fence be erected along the first and second fairway and some alternative
way devised for joggers to go around the parking lot. Mr. Foncerrada
suggested a new path for joggers around the parking lot would solve the
problem.
MSUC (CochranlRude) the Parks and Recreation Commission endorses the
proposed rates with the reduction of the Senior surcharge to $1 and the
elimination of weekday nine-hole rates.
2 19--/;2 DRAFT
.~. "',n"""","""" ,,,,_,,,,,,___,,,.,,., "~"'..'..._". ;",.',"_:,;:·,·.-."-:=.~,=-.",:""",,,,·.,~_'.'Y.,",."";(,"':r~,,'>,,",.~--"",,,,,,,,,,.','."".',""",_,,,,,,",,,.. ~,_,.~.", w-._·____._. '_'_.'~~"~.,'.'" _... '"r"__ ___" ,~._ _m...__,..._,.__
-..-.....----
ITEM NUMBER: 020
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 19;¿9ép
ORDINANCE NUMBER: ~//J
OTHER:
CONTRACT: CO 98 -0253
CONTRACT/RESOLUTION DATE: /':</15"/98
,
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE WAS CONTINUED FROM
(DATE): ðée. c8 1998
AGENDA PACKET WAS SCANNED ON (DATE): })rÇ C!. OB /998
THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO (DATE):
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION (TITLE OF CONTRACT, ORDINANCE, RESOLUTION, ETC):
12éSOLU r /O"J ,q¡J¡J/20 i/~,ð 5'-0
~A~O/X/~~~
¡J/,)AAAAßtJ~/ ~~ ry cI.£UA/ ~
and ßAv1/1A~~ ~.
---
~/ßJ?_ .~1Áf~~ ~, ancL ~C~/3t!,
(1 ~./ ~ 4f'A/)/.-(./'Þ¿,
~éJ-Ò
- ---------,-. --------,---_.~_._-_.__._.-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item21
Meeting Date 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /'1;J I ';;:uthorizing the issuance of Encroachment Permit No.
PE-445 for construction of a potable water line within a City drainage and
sewer easement for McMillin Otay Ranch, SPA One, Phase One, Unit 5 by
Otay Water District
SUBMITTED BY: D""'lmofP.bli, WO",! tf;lv\
REVIEWED BY: City ManagerpK ~ __ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ NoX)
Otay Water District (OWD) is proposing to install a water line on a City sewer and drainage
easement to be granted on the McMillin Otay Ranch, Spa I, Phase I, Unit 5 final map. This final
map will be presented to Council for approval at the December 15, 1998 Council meeting. The
property is located north of East Palomar Street, between La Media Road and Santa Cora Avenue.
In order to provide a water loop for the proposed deveJopment, Otay Water District has requested
the City to grant an encroachment permit to allow a water line to be installed within said sewer and
drainage easement. According to Section J2.28 of the Municipal Code, this request must be
approved by the City Council.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the subject resoJution authorizing the City
Engineer to issue Encroachment Permit No. PE-445 and direct the City Clerk to record said
resolution and permit.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: No Board or Commission actions are
required in this case.
DISCUSSION:
Recently, McMillin Otay Ranch submitted plans to construct a duplex complex on Jot 5 of the Chula
Vista Tract 97-02, Map 13605. This 13.438-acre parcel is located east of La Media Road, and west
of Santa Cora Avenue. In order to provide a water loop for the deveJopment, a second water line
coming to the site is needed. OWD wishes to locate this second water Jine within a proposed 20-foot
wide sewer and drainage easement that will connect to La Media Road. This is the only feasibJe
location for the water Jine. Rick Engineering Company has proposed a stainless steel line to be
located in the middle of the 20 foot easement, between the sewer line and the storm drain line.
.:2/ -I
,-_..,_.._.~"--~._--_._._--
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/98
With the conditions pJaced on the encroachment permit, the placement of the water line will not
hamper City crews' access to the sewer and storm drain utilities within the easement and will allow
maintenance to take place as usual.
The encroachment permit includes an indemnity clause holding the City, its agents and employees
harmless from damages resulting from the construction and maintenance of the water line beJonging
to OWD. The following conditions of approvaJ have been imposed on this encroachment permit:
1. Encroachment shall be installed and maintained in a safe and sanitary manner by
Permittee as determined by City.
2. Encroachment shall in no way interfere with the maintenance of or operation of th e
existing storm drain line and sewer line. Any costs arising from changes of or to
any facility due to the Encroachment shall be the soJe responsibility of Permittee.
3. In the event that the future construction, operation or maintenance of the City's
drainage or sewer shall cause the rearrangement, repair or reconstruction of the
Permittee's faciJities, the same shall be performed by Permittee or by any other party
with the consent of Permittee at the cost of Permittee to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
4. In the event that the future construction, operation or maintenance of the Permittee's
Facilities shall cause the rearrangement, repair or reconstruction of the City's
facilities, the same shall be performed by Permittee or by any other party with the
consent of Permittee at the cost of Permittee.
The permit has been signed and that signature notarized by OWD and is now ready to be issued. The
permit will be recorded and run with the land.
FISCAL IMPACT: Due to the construction and maintenance responsibiJities falling on the
Permittee, there is no direct costs to the City, except for the processing of this permit.
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Plat showing encroachments NOT SCANNED ~
Copy of Encroachment Permit PE-445 (,<J.f£ (!.ð 9B -.;< S~
Engineering Department File No. 0710-40-PE-445
c2J~;2
. \
v
\
-"-"-------------
RESOLUTION NO. /9;31 ?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PE-445 FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF A POTABLE WATER LINE WITHIN A
CITY DRAINAGE AND SEWER EASEMENT FOR McMILLIN
OTAY RANCH, SPA ONE, PHASE ONE, UNIT 5 BY OTAY
WATER DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Otay Water district is proposing to install a
water line on a city sewer and drainage easement to be granted on
the McMillin Otay Ranch, SPA One, Phase One, Unit 5 final map; and
WHEREAS, in order to provide a water loop for the
proposed development, Otay Water District has requested the city to
grant an encroachment permit to allow a water line to be installed
within said sewer and drainage easement; and
WHEREAS, said request does not fall within the scope of
the types of encroachments that may be authorized by the city
Engineer without first being approved by Council; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 12.28 of the
Municipal Code, Council must authorize the issuance of the permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby authorize the City Engineer to
issue Encroachment Permit No. PE-445 for construction of a potable
water line within a City drainage and sewer easement for McMillin
Otay Ranch, SPA One, Phase One, unit 5 to Otay Water District
subject to the following conditions:
1. Encroachment shall be installed and maintained in a
safe and sanitary manner by Permittee as determined
by City.
2. Encroachment shall in no way interfere with the
maintenance of or operation of the existing storm
drain line and sewer line. Any costs arising from
changes of or to any facility due to the
Encroachment shall be the sole responsibility of
Permittee.
3 . In the event that the future construction,
operation or maintenance of the City's drainage or
sewer shall cause the rearrangement, repair or
reconstruction of the Permittee's facilities, the
same shall be performed by Permittee or by any
other party with the consent of Permittee at the
1
c1/~ ;3
cost of Permittee to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
4. In the event that the future construction,
operation or maintenance of the Permittee
Facilities shall cause the rearrangement, repair or
reconstruction of the City's facilities, the same
shall be performed by Permittee or by any other
party with the consent of Permittee at the cost of
Permittee.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
directed to record said resolution and permit.
Presented by Approved as to form by
~~~
John P. Lippitt, Director of Jo . Kaheny ~y
Public Works Attorney
H:\home\lorraine\rs\encroach.per
~ (!{) 98-c259
Þ
2
c1/-Þ(
.~, --.-...----
Recording requested by and
please return to:
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
[V'] This document benefits a
Public Agency; no recording
fee required. n (This space for Recorder's use, only) n
Affects Assessor's Parcel No(s). C.V. File No. 071O-40-PE44S
AUTHORIZATION FOR ENCROACHMENT IN CITY EASEMENT
Permit No. PE-445
Pursuant to Chapter 12.28 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, permission is hereby granted by
the City ofChula Vista (hereinafter "City") to: OTA Y WATER DISTRICT, a Joint Powers Entity
pursuant to Government Code 6500, (et seq.) (hereinafter "Permittee") whose mailing address is
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, Spring Valley, CA 91977, to do work within a portion of
a 20-foot sewer and drainage easement granted to the City of Chula Vista.
All terms and conditions of this permit as to the Permittee shall be a burden upon Permittee's land
and shall run with the land. All conditions apply to Permittee and all his/her/their heirs, assigns,
successors or transferees.
Whereas, the Permittee has requested the permission from City to encroach on said City's
easement adjacent to and for the direct benefit of the following described property:
ADDRESS: McMiIlin Otay Ranch, SPA I, Phase I, Unit 5
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 5 OF CHULA VISTA TRACT No. 97-02, McMILLAN OTAY RANCH
SPA I PHASE I, IN THE CiTY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF No. 13605, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN
DIEGO COUNTY, JULY 28,1998.
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED to do the following work with the inclusion of
conditions contained herein:
Construct and maintain a water line within City's 20-foot sewer and drainage
easement for McMillin Otay Ranch, SPA One, Phase One, Unit 5 as shown on the
attached plat (See attached Exhibit "A").
(hereinafter "Encroachment. ") c1/~ ç
Page I
____________________n____
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, and other good and valuable
consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows:
Permission is hereby granted Permittee to install the above-mentioned Encroachment on the City's
easement described above in accordance with the following conditions:
1. Encroachment shall be installed and maintained in a safe and sanitary manner by Permitte e-
as determined by City.
2. Encroachment shall in no way interfere with the maintenance of or operation of the
existing storm drain line and sewer line. Any costs arising from changes of or to any
facility due to the Encroachment shall be the sole responsibility of Permittee.
3. In the event that the future construction, operation or maintenance of the City's drainage or
sewer shall cause the rearrangement, repair or reconstruction of the Permittee's facilities, the
same shall be performed by Permittee or by any other party with the consent of Permittee at
the cost of Permittee to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
4. Jn the event that the future construction, operation or maintenance of the Permittee's
Facilities shall cause the rearrangement, repair or reconstruction of the City's facilities, the
same shall be performed by Permittee or by any other party with the consent of Permittee at
the cost of Permittee.
This permit is revocable upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Permittee, and upon such
notice, the installation must be removed or relocated, as and when specified by City, at
Permi ttee' s cost. If Permittee fails to remove or relocate Encroachment within the period
allotted, City may cause such work to be done and the cost thereof shall be billed to Permittee
who will pay on demand. The City agrees to use its best efforts to condition future private
development which necessitates the relocation or removal of Gtay's facilities to bear the costs or
such relocation or removal.
Permittee shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed
officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense
(including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the Permittee, or any
agent or employee, subcontractors, or others (including third parties) in connection with the
execution of the work covered by this agreement. except only for those claims arising from the
sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Permittee's
indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by
the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same
proceed to judgment or not. Further, Permittee at its own expense shall, upon written request by
the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or
employees. Permittee's indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent
declaration by the Permittee.
Permittee hereby agrees to and shall defend City, its elective and appointive boards, officers,
agents and employees against any claim, and in any suit or proceeding, at law or in equity, for
damages caused, or alleged to have been caused, by actions taken or alleged to have been taken
Page 2 :2./-¿
under this permit by Permittee directly or by his/her/their agent(s), contractor(s), or agents or
employees of same. Permittee further agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless City, its
elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees, as indemnitees, for any claim, suit
or proceeding submitted, brought or instituted against City as a result of actions tak en, or alleged
to have been taken, under this permit, including, but not limited to, any asserted liability for loss
of or damage to property or for personal injury, including death.
The undersigned Permittee hereby accepts the foregoing Encroachment permit upon the terms and
conditions stated herein and agrees to comply with all stated terms and conditions and with all
applicable laws, including any applicable provision of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. It is
further agreed that if any part of Permittee's Encroachment or Permittee's rights under this
Encroachment Permit should interfere with the future use of the City's easement, it must be
removed or relocated at Permittee's expense and such right shall be terminated as and when
indicated by City.
In the event of a dispute arising as to the terms or interpretation of this permi t, the City Engineer
shall resolve said dispute in his sole and unfettered discretion, reasonably applied.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
Permit approved by:
Date:
Clifford 1. Swanson
Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer
(City Clerk to attach acknowledgment.)
PERMITTEE:
Signature: Date:
Title:
(Notary to attach acknowledgment.)
Page 3 d-)~ ?
._......'.......,......... . . .. ... ..... ............................w.w.-.w.....".....·.·. ............... ·.·.·.·.·.w.·.·.w.·., .........., ·.·.·.....·.·.·.·.·.·.·...w.·.·.·... ............................................... ..................... ................... .. ... ..... .... ··.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.w.·.·...·.·...·.·...·.·.·.····
.... (For office use only) ....
Encroachment has been constructed and is in compliance with the attached sketch.
Signed Dated
(Inspector)
c2/- ¿;V
[ft\HOME.ENGIt>:EERILANDDEV10TA YRNCHIENC216.LEC] Page 4
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
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 information must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons having a fmancial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the Contract,
e.g., owner, applicant, Contractor, subcontractor. material supplier.
2. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or pannership, list the names of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the pannership.
3. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as
director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Comminees, and Council within the past twelve month? Yes _ No _ If yes, please indicate person(s):
S. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the Ciry in this matter.
6. Have you and!or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1 ,000 to a Council member in the current
or preceding election period? Yes _ No _ If yes, state which Council members(s):
* * * (NOTE: Attached additional pages as necessary) * * *
Date:
Signature of Contractor! Applicant
Print or type name of Contractor! Applicant
* Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization,
corporation. estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city or country. city municipality, district, or other political
subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a uni2 ) --7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item .2:;""
Meeting Date 12\15\98
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: TO NOTICE ACCEPTANCE AND
APPROPRIATION OF LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK
GRANT FUNDS.
/! RESOLUTION 1'13/Y ACCEPTING $269,739 FROM THE
1998 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT AND
APPROPRIA TI NG SAID FUNDS FOR THE FOLLOWING
PURPOSES: $30,000 HIRING, $10,000 DRUG COURT, $20,000 IN
OVERTIME, AND $209,739 FOR EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT.
ß RESOLUTION / <7.JICj AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF
POLICE TO UTILIZE (REPROGRAM) SAVINGS RESULTING FROM
THE COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOR ADDITIONAL
UNSPECIFIED pCER SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES.
SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police ~
REVIEWED BY: City ManagerD\2.-- ~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes.x. No_)
The Police Department has recently received notice of a 1998 Local Law Enforcement
Block Grant (LLEBG) Award in the amount of $269,739 from the Bureau of Justice
Assistance (BJA). These funds were allocated to the Police Department based on a three-
year average Part 1 Violent Crimes. Part 1 Violent Crimes are murder and non-negligent
manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault as reported by the FBI.
Acceptance and appropriation of these funds requires a public hearing per stipulations of
the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council accept the $269,739 in Local Law Enforcement
Block Grant funds and amend the FY 98-99 budget and appropriate funds as follows:
1) $10,000 to fund a drug court for the South Bay; 2) $20,000 for proactive enforcement;
3) $30,000 for salary and benefits of a Communications Equipment Technician;
4) $209,739 for equipment procurement and 5) Authorize the Chief of Police to utilize
(reprogram) savings resulting from the competitive procurement process for additional
unspecified officer safety equipment and supplies.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant
requires a local advisory board approval of the use offunds prior to disbursement. A local
advisory board consisting of the specific composition required by the grant was set up to
review the grant application. The local advisory board recommends approval of the Local
Law Enforcement Block Grant disbursements as proposed. The local advisory board is
-1), -/
Page...£........ Item _
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
comprised of one representative from the following agencies:
Local Law Enforcement Agency - Rick Emerson, CVPD
Prosecutor's Office - David Greenberg
Court System - Judge Jesus Rodriguez
School System - Lowell Billings
Non Profit - Pam Smith
BACKGROUND:
The Omnibus Fiscal Year 1997 Appropriation Act, Public Law 104-208 provides for funding
under the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program, established within the Bureau of
Justice Assistance (BJA) to local law enforcement agencies. The City of Chula Vista is
eligible to receive an award of $269,739 under this program. Funding may be used for
seven purpose areas, which address a wide variety of activities from increasing personnel
and equipment resources for local law enforcement to developing and supporting programs
to enhance effective criminal justice processes. The program's goal is to provide local
jurisdictions with opportunities to reduce crime and improve public safety through the
implementation of diverse strategy, hiring, training of additional local law enforcement
officers, paying overtime, procuring equipment and establishing or supporting drug courts.
Grant Reauirements
The $269,739 grant allocation has a 10% ($29,971) local match requirement. Staff is
recommending the local match be appropriated from the new State appropriation for local
law enforcement. The LLEBG funds must supplement and not supplant. The funds must
be used to reduce crime and improve public safety through activities such as hiring,
training, and employing new local law enforcement officers and support staff as well as
procuring equipment, and technological advances directly associated with local law
enforcement.
DISCUSSION:
The Police Department and advisory board recommend use of the funds in the following
manner:
Local Law Enforcement SUDDort - $50,000
. Appropriate $20,000 for proactive enforcement to be done on an overtime basis.
. Appropriate $30,000 for salary and benefits of a Communications Technician.
;};2-..2-
------...--
Page ---ª-... Item _
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
Eauipment Procurement
Appropriate $209,739 for procuring equipment, additional technological advances related
to basic local law enforcement functions.
· Mobile Command Post/Tactical Unit $75,000 - This unit will be used for field
operations including the amphitheater, special events such as the Fourth of July,
emergencies and disasters, DUI checkpoints, special operations such as multi-agency
task forces and gang sweeps, etc. The mobile command post/tactical unit provides an
off-site facility for police services as well as serve as a temporary detention facility while
in the field. Currently, on numerous occasions, the department has borrowed San
Diego Police Department's mobile command post. However, the availability is limited
and often there are scheduling conflicts due to San Diego Police Department's need
to use their mobile command post on operations common to both agencies (I.e., Fourth
of July).
· Three (3) Undercover Vehicles $45,000 - The department is proposing to purchase
three replacement undercover vehicles in the amount of $15,000 each to be used for
undercover vehicle operations. The funds to maintain and fuel the vehicles are
included in the department's FY 98-99 budget.
· COMSA T Equipment/Automation $25,000 - Police staff is currently working on
development of a single, direct model to integrate crime statistics and crime solving
strategies. In short, it is an accountability model where the policing process flows from
data. It's not just about keeping track of crime and the department's response; but, a
tool of instilling a particular set of values in fighting crime. The cities of Baltimore and
Los Angeles have implemented similar programs (COMSAT and Fast Track). We
believe implementation of a similar program in a mid-size city like Chula Vista will have
a greater impact and result in measurable crime solving efficiencies and accountability.
Staff is proposing to use the $25,000 allocation to purchase equipment which will
automate the process. The equipment will include computers, screens, a projection
system and software.
· Body Armor/ Raid Vests - $20,000 - An estimated 40 vests are in need of
replacement. Staff is proposing to use $20,000 to replace the vests which have
reached the 5-year life cycle. The Police Department and the POA have worked
closely to develop a replacement schedule that is acceptable to both. Additionally, the
department is in need of purchasing raid vests for special operations. The department
intends to set up a bank of raid vests to used by department personnel.
· Program Audits/Evaluation, $5,000 - These funds will allow the department to audit
various functions. Currently the department is working with SANDAG to evaluate both
its ABC Program and the Problem Solving Partnership Program. This process has
been useful in determining a program's effectiveness. The department proposes to
continue this process and begin an auditing/evaluation cycle which will ultimately review
)J-)
Page 4, Item _
Meeting Date 12\15\98
each function in the department.
· MDC's and Related Equipment $20,000 - As part ofthe CAD/MDC projects, all patrol
units were outfitted with mobile data computers and related software. No spares were
purchased at the time of the project implementation. In order to maintain our existing
system, various spares are necessary for temporary replacement of equipment while
out of service. Staff is proposing $20,000 for the purchase of additional mobile data
computers and related equipment such as keyboards.
· Report Writing Stations $10,000 - As part of the CAD/MDC project four report writing
stations were made available for patrol officers to process their police reports. Our
experience to date has been that during certain shifts and peak times the number of
computer stations available is insufficient to meet the demand. Additionally, community
service officers need access to computers to process reports.
· Intoximeter $6,000 - We have received notice from the vendor that our existing
intoximeter is not year 2000 compatible. Furthermore, the vendor has indicated the
intoximeters cannot be retrofitted to resolve this issue. As a result, the vendor will
provide each agency with a trade-in amount. Our existing intoximeter is over seven
years old and has a useful life of 10 years. Our cost benefit analysis concludes that the
best option at this time is to trade-in the existing intoximeter for a new one which will
cost about $6,000.
· Radar Units $3,739 - The department is proposing to purchase two new radar units.
Existing radar units in the department are old and deteriorating. The radars would be
used in traffic enforcement operations.
Drua Courts
Staff is recommending the appropriation of $1 0,000 for the purpose of establishing a Drug
Court in the South Bay. This program provides intense follow-up monitoring and
assistance to those who qualify for other than standard incarceration. The program exists
in other parts of the County and is being implemented in South Bay as well. Monies would
be used for those arrestees from our City who qualify for this highly structured program.
Success rates in other programs indicate that this has a positive vane to our community.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Communications Technician
The grant will pay the first year's cost ($30,000) of a Communications Technician's salary
and benefits, subsequent years will be paid for by the General Fund. The position is
necessary in order to maintain the mobile data computers and 800 MHz system. The
position was approved by Council during the FY 98-99 Public Works Operations budget.
~2 -If
Page 5, Item _
Meeting Date 12\15\98
Proactive Overtime
Staff is treating this as a one-year block grant allocation. Upon exhaustion of these funds
overtime accounts will return to their original budgeted levels.
EauiDment Procurement
The $209,739 allocation for equipment procurement will be used for one-time equipment
purchases. There are no reoccurring costs proposed as a result of procurement of
equipment.
Drua Courts
This is a one-time $10,000 allocation to support the South Bay Drug Court Program.
Attachment: 1998 Grant Funding Proposal
J:\USRIADMINlSCSIA 113S\9BLLEBG. WPD
))/~
--.".----..-----
1998 GRANT FUNDING PROPOSAL
COPS MORE '98
'98 STATE COPS FUNDING $710,679
$ 365,3aS.30 Application Pending
Local
Match
$191,417 CIVILIAN PERSONNEL
&
AUTOMATION
I
Local I
Match I
$29,971 I
I I Alternative:
Lab Certification
Civilian Range Master
Civilian Evidence Techs
Ice Automation
Safety
Equip.
three (3)
Undercover
Vehicles
$45,000
Mobile Command Post! Comstat FEDERAL'98
Tactical Unit
$75.000 Equipment! LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
Automation BLOCK GRANT
$25.000
$269,739
Comm.
Equip.
Tech.
$30,000 989rantpm5 11·30·98
RESOLUTION /tJ/r
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA ACCEPTING
$269,739 FROM THE 1998 lOCAL lAW
ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT AND
APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS FOR THE
FOllOWING PURPOSES: $30,000 HIRING;
$10,000 DRUG COURT, $20,000 IN OVERTIME
AND $209,739 FOR EQUIPMENT
PROCUREMENT
WHEREAS, the Police Department has received 1998 Local Law
Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) award in the amount of $269,739 from the Bureau of
Justice Assistance (BJA) ; and,
WHEREAS, these funds were allocated to the Police Department based on
a three-year average Part 1 Violent Crimes; and,
WHEREAS, Part 1 Violent Crimes are murder and non-negligent
manslaughters, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault as reported by the FBI; and,
WHEREAS, the funds will be used for hiring of the Communications
Technician ($30,000), supporting the South Bay Drug Court ($1 0,000), proactive overtime
($20,000) and equipment procurement ($209,739); and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on December 15,1998
to notice use of the LLEBG funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby accept $269,739 for the Local Law Enforcement from the Bureau of
Justice Assistance (BJA) to pay for personnel ($30,000), support the South Bay Drug Court
($10,000), proactive overtime ($20,000) and equipment procurement ($209,739).
Presented by: Approved as to form by:
Richard P. Emerson . Kaheny
Chief of Police . y Attorney
)2/)~/
RESOLUTION /9 J /9
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO
UTILIZE (REPROGRAM) SAVINGS RESULTING FROM THE
COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOR
ADDITIONAL UNSPECIFIED SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND
SUPPLIES
WHEREAS, if savings result from competitive procurement process for the
1998 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant, it is recommended that the Chief of Police be
authorized to utilize savings for additional unspecified officer safety equipment and
supplies; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby authorize the Chiefof Police to utilize (reprogram) savings resulting from
the competitive procurement process for additional unspecified safety equipment and
supplies.
Presented by: Approved as to form by:
Richard P. Emerson
Chief of Police
H:\SHARED\Clerk\98LLEBG2. WPD
:22ß ~ /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 23
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: TO NOTICE USE OF FY 98-99 COPS FUNDING
PER CITIZENS OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY FOR LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
1 RESOLUTION /7'.3,) ¿? ACCEPTING $365,388.30 FOR LOCAL
LAW ENFORCEMENT FROM THE STATE BUDGET TO PAY FOR
POLICE PERSONNEL ($191,417) AND RELATED EQUIPMENT
PROCUREMENT ($174,971.30).
ß. RESOLUTION ) 9 ;J,) / AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE
TO UTILIZE (REPROGRAM) SAVINGS RESULTING FROM THE
EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOR ADDITIONAL
UNSPECIFIED OFFICER SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~
(4/5ths Vote: YeslL No_)
The FY 98-99 State Budget was adopted appropriating $365,388.30 to the City of Chula
Vista Police Department as a result of Assembly Bill 3229, Brulte. This bill allocates State
money to police departments for purposes stipulated by the Citizens Option for Public
Safety (COPS) Program.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council hold a public hearing to notice use of COPS
funding to pay for "front line police services"; 2) that the Council adopt the resolution
accepting $365,388.30 from the State Budget for police services and related equipment;
and 3) that Council authorize the Chief of Police to reprogram savings resulting from the
equipment procurement process for additional officer safety and resources.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The State appropriation requires a
regional oversight committee approval of the funds prior to disbursement. In response an
oversight committee was established in San Diego County. The committee recommends
approval of the State local law enforcement funds as proposed. The San Diego oversight
committee is comprised as follows:
Municipal Police Chief Richard P. Emerson
County Sheriff William Kolender
District Attorney Paul Pfingst
County Administrative Officer Lawrence Prior III
City Manager James Bowersox, City of Poway
)]-/
Page L , Item_
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
BACKGROUND:
During FY 96-97 the State appropriated funds for Local Law Enforcement services per
AB3229, Chapter 134, statutes of 1996. In accordance with this legislation, the State has
once again appropriated funds to local law enforcement agencies. This is the third year the
City of Chula Vista Police Department is a recipient of these funds. The City of Chula
Vista's proportionate share of these funds is $365,388.30. These funds are to be deposited
in the city's Supplemental Local Law Enforcement Fund (SLESF) and used for front line law
enforcement personnel and equipment needs as prescribed by AB3229. Use of these
funds must supplement and not supplant. These funds have a 25% (twenty-five percent)
in-kind contribution requirement, thus resulting in no additional impact to the general fund.
The allocation of future funds is subject to State budget appropriations.
DISCUSSION:
The Chula Vista Police Department recommends that the City Council accept the State
allocation and approve use of the funds for personnel and equipment costs related to the
expansion to the "front line police services" as stipulated by the Citizens Option for Public
Safety (COPS) Program.
· Range Backstop $70,000 - This containment system protects shooters and range
personnel from fragmentation and ricochet bullets. Bullets are captured intact, and
range maintenance, as well as lead recovery becomes an easy, low cost operation.
· Local match for the new Local Law Enforcement Block Grant $29,971 - The
1997-98 LLEBG grant had a 10% ($29,971) local match requirement. As in previous
years, staff is recommending the local match requirement be paid by the State's
appropriation. A total of $269,739 was awarded by the Department of Bureau of
Justice Assistance (BJA) these funds were allocated to the Police Department based
on a three-year average Part 1 Violent Crimes. The Police Department is proposing
to use the local match requirement to purchase additional officer safety equipment.
· Ergonomic Dispatch Stations $35,000 - The department is in need of purchasing
ergonomic dispatch stations for the Dispatch Center. Ergonomic státions would
enhance the communications center's productivity as well as correct deficiencies in
the current dispatch system. There are currently six dispatch stations. The estimated
cost per station is approximately $5,000.
· Roll call/ECC Briefing room and equipment $20,000 - Due to existing space
needs, the department recently converted the roll call room to house the Family
Protection Unit. Roll call was moved temporarily to the Emergency Command Center
(ECC). Due to the existing configuration of the ECC and a loud ventilation noise, roll
calls have been temporarily conducted in the department's auditorium. The
:23 -2
Page L , Item_
Meeting Date: 12/15/98
department is proposing to install a portable wall in the auditorium in an effort to
establish a permanent room for roll call and ECC. These funds will be used to pay
for any construction costs as well as upgrading of equipment in the auditorium and
ECC to improve exchange of information during patrol roll calls.
· Security card system $15,000 - The existing security system in the Police
Department requires an individual at the point of entry to enter a code in order to
enter the facility. As a result of continuous separations from service, the code often
needs to be changed. However, the existing equipment which allows us to change
the code is inoperable. As a result, the current security system is ineffective. The
department is proposing to purchase a security card system which will allow the
department to deprogram cards when necessary. The cost of the system is estimated
at $15,000.
· Office equipment $5,000.30 - Staff is proposing budgeting of $5,000.30 for the
purposes of acquiring office equipment, such as ergonomic chairs, dispatch head
sets, transcription units, keyboards, etc.
· COPS More 98/oca/ match $191,417 - Staff is proposing to use the balance of the
Local Law Enforcement state appropriation to offset the 25% local match requirement
of the COPS More '98 grant. The COPS More '98 grant is a grant that will allow us
to both civilianize sworn positions throughout the department and redeploy sworn staff
to the field as well as automate our evidence tracking system and interface our
automated booking system with various systems in the department. Award of this
grant is still pending. Chula Vista was not selected in the first round of agencies
funded to receive the COPS More '98. We anticipate announcement of the second
round offunding some time in January of 1999. In the interim, staff proposes to have
the local match be set aside from these funds in the amount of $191,417 for the
purpose of offsetting the local match requirement if the grant is awarded. In the event
the grant is not awarded to the City of Chula Vista, the Police Department proposes
that the $191 ,417 be used to fund lab certification, civilian range master and evidence
technician as well as enhance automation throughout the department.
FISCAL IMPACT: Acceptance ofthe funds would make $365,388.30 available for local law
enforcement needs (described above). These funds are proposed to be used to offset the
third year's local law enforcement block grant local match requirement, purchase a range
backstop, security card system, office equipment, outfit a roll call/EOC Briefing room and
COPS More local match. These funds have a 25% in-kind contribution requirement; thus,
no additional impact to the general fund. Consistent with grant requirements, the funds are
recommended to be used to supplement local law enforcement and not supplant.
Attachment: 1998 Grant Funding Proposal
J:\USRIADMIN\SCSIA113S\COPSFUND.WPD
;23-;3
. --" --..----..---..----....-
1998 GRANT FUNDING PROPOSAL
COPS MORE '98
'98 STATE COPS FUNDING $710,679
$ 365,388.30 Application Pending
Local
Match
$191,417 CIVILIAN PERSONNEL
&
AUTOMATION
I
Local I
Match I
$29,971 I
1 I Alternative:
Lab Certification
Civilian Range Master
Civilian Evidence Techs
Ice Automation
Safety
Equip:
three (3)
Undercover
Vehicles
$45,000
Mobile Command PosV FEDERAL'98
Tactical Unit Comstat
$75.000 EquipmenV LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
Automation BLOCK GRANT
$25,000
$269,739
9Sgrant.pm5 11-3()-98
-------,---.--
RESOLUTION /93,,20
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING
$365,388.30 FOR LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT FROM THE STATE BUDGET
TO PAY FOR POLICE PERSONNEL($191 ,417)
AND RELATED EQUIPMENT ($174,971.30)
WHEREAS, the FY 98-99 State budget was adopted appropriating
$356,388.30 to the City of Chula Vista Police Department as a result of Assembly Bill 3229,
Brulte (Chapter 134) ; and,
WHEREAS, said bill allocates state money to police departments for
purposes stipulated by the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Program; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on December 15,1998
to notice use of COPS funding to pay for "front line police services".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby accept $365,388.30 for Local Law Enforcement from the State budget
to pay for police personnel ($191,417) and related equipment ($174,971.30).
Presented by: Approved as to form by:
~Þt;l~~)
Richard P. Emerson /)6hn M. Kaheny
Chief of Police / City Attorney
H:\SHAREDlCLERK\COPSFUND. WPD
J3/9~/
RESOLUTION /9.3 ;¿ )
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING
THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO UTILIZE
(REPROGRAM) SAVINGS RESULTING FROM
THE COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT
PROCESS FOR ADDITIONAL UNSPECIFIED
SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
WHEREAS, if savings result from competitive procurement process for the
1998 State appropriation per Citizens Option for Public Safety, it is recommended that the
Chief of Police be authorized to utilize savings for additional unspecified officer safety
equipment and supplies; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chulà
Vista does hereby authorize the Chief of Police to utilize (reprogram) savings resulting from
the competitive procurement process for additional unspecified safety equipment and
supplies.
Presented by: Approved as to form by:
Richard P. Emerson n M. Kaheny
Chief of Police ity Attorney
H:\SHAREDlClerk\COPSFUN2. WPD
-2313-1
COUNCil AGENDA STATEMENT
Meeting Date
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: OTAY VALLEY ROAD NAME CHANGE
RESOLUTION ) '7.2 ¿, ~HANGlNG THE NAME OF THE SEGMENT OF OT A Y
VALLEY ROAD FROM 1·805 TO BRANDYWINE AVENUETO OTAY VALLEY ROAD/AUTO
PARK DRIVE S
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director Ú, '
Planning and Building Director
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ NoX)
BACKGROUND:
On Marth 26, 1996, the Redevelopment Agency requested that staff investigate a proposal submitted by the Auto
Park dealers to change the name of Otay Valley Road to Auto Park Drive (or something sioülar) from 1·805 east.
Staff studied a number of issues associated with this request and developed several alternative solutions which
are described below. Staff recommends renaoüng only a segment of Otay Valley Road east of 1-805 to
Brandywine Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City colØlcil hold the Public Hearing, and approve the following three actions:
1. Rename the segment of Otay Valley Road from 1·805 to Brandywine Avenue to "Otay Valley Road/Auto
Park Drive" subject to City Council approval of final cost of same;
2. Defer changing the leg of Otay Valley Road extending south into the City of San Diego until Otay Ranch
and the extension of Paseo Ranchero are further along;
3. Defer consideration of changing the name of Otay Valley Road west of 1·805 and east of Brandywine.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
A public forum was held on June 13, 1996 at the Otay Community Center. Presentations were also made to the
Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee on July 15, and the Otay Valley Regional Park Citizens Advisory
Convnittee on August 16 of that year. Corrments received at these meetings raised concerns about the cost and
inconvenience for businesses located On Otay Valley Road, and the historic significance of the current name. In
addition, concerns .!Nere received from owners of property in the eastern territories which will eventually be
acwb'f-l:he eastward extension of Otay Valley Road.
~ J-Lj" /
- -----".----.-.-- - ......_..._..._____ . _____._._._.._..____u__
Page 2, Item _
Meeting Date 11/17198
On March 10, 1998, the Agency held a workshop On the Otay Valley Road area at which staff was again directed
to process the name change. The auto dealers continued to request a name change due to the cOnfusion caused
by the number of road names in the area with "Otay" in them, the cOnnotation of being far south in the market
area, and the lack of advance identification signs north and south of Otay Valley Road On 1-805. A name change
including the name "Auto Park" would address these issues. A name change without "Auto Park" would address
the first two issues. Better identification could be an advantage to the City, increasing sales spending
development and, consequently, tax revenues from the auto park. However, the name "Otay" does have historic
significance in the region, identifying the Otay River, surrounding valley and the Otay Ranch to the east.
The Otay Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee voted to recommend changing the name of Otay Valley Road
to Otay River Valley Parkway. In doing so, they indicated that the road follows the Otay River Valley which has
been designated as a regional park.
The Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee discussed the name change at their meeting of October 26, 1998,
but made nO formal recommendation.
The Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the name change On October 28, 1998 and, following
much discussion, voted 7 to 0 recommending the following:
1. That Otay Valley Road be changed to Main Street all the way to proposed SR·125 so that the road will
have the same name from 1-5 to SR·125;
2. The segment of road between 1-805 to Brandywine Avenue will have an "overlay" name and be known
as Main Street/Auto Park Drive;
3. The north-south segment of Otay Valley Road be renamed Paseo Ranchero, as it will eventually tie into
the existing street with the same name.
The report to the Planning Commission is included as Attachment 1.
DISCUSSION:
Any name change for Otay Valley Road would involve the modification of freeway signs On 1-805, signs along Otay
Valley Road both east and west of 1·805, and could require affected businesses currently located on Otay Valley
Road to change their address identification. Thus, there would be some expense and inconvenience associated
with any name change.
ANALYSIS:
The primary reason for considering a street name change at this time is that there is no immediate exposure for the
auto park from 1·805 because billboards and reader signs are not permitted by C altrans north or south of Otay Valley
Road. Staff is recommending to change the segment of Otay Valley Ro ad between '·805 and Brandywine Avenue to
"Otay Valley Road/Auto Park Drive". By taking this approach, the concerns of the auto park dealers are addressed,
yet the historic name remains.
~ :2 L/- ;2
.
Page 3, Item _
Meeting Date 11/17/98
In addition, the effect on addresses is minimal. The staff recommended name change affects only those addresses
in the quarter mile east of 1-805. It is assumed that mail addressed to Otay Valley Road will continue to IE
delivered to those sites even after the change to the dual designation.
In light of the complexity of the other remaining issues noted above and the north/south connector, staff
recommended to the Planning Commission that these not be addressed at this time. The Planning Commission
recommended that it would be better to resolve all of the issues nOW rather than a more incremental approach as
proposed by staff.
FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impacts from the staff recommended street name change is the cost to install
new street name signs.
The cost to change street name signage would include approximately eleven (11) Caltrans signs on the freeway
and offramps, and City street name signs. The extent of Caltrans costs are dependent upon whether existirg
signs can be overlayed, or new, larger sign boards required. The change of names proposed would result i1
changing the freeway signs which now read "Main StreetlOtay Valley Road" to "Otay Valley Road/Auto Park
Orive" which should not require replacement of existing sign boards. Thus, costs should be at the lower end of
the estimated range of $20,000 to $200,000. Exact costs will not be known until Caltrans has been advised of
the new street names and inspects each sign to be changed. The cost of replacing the City street name sigrs
which would have to be replaced including approximately 36 illuminated and eight regular panels should not exceBl
$ 5,000. Staff will return to Council once the full fiscal impact of this action is determined.
Although the Auto Park dealers have indicated that they would contribute to the cost of changing the signs, the
amount has not been determined.
(FK) H:\HOME\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\11·17·98\OTVRNAME.CHG [November 6. 1998 (4:55pm ]
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Planning Commission Agenda Statement dated 10/28/98
21 Davies Enterprises Letter dated 10/27/98
31 October 28, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes
~ d- (---5
- ...___n___..______....____....______·_______
TIllS PAGE BLANK
~ ;¿ý/(
/~
RESOLUTION NO. /9.26· V Y oJ d-
RESOLUT'ON OF THE C'TY COUNCIL OF THE CrTY OF . ~ t?
CHULA VISTA CHANGING THE NAME OF OT A Y V ALLEY ~
ROAD BETWEEN 1-805 AND BRANDYWINE A VENUE TO
OTAY VALLEY ROAD-AUTO PARK DRIVE
RECIT ALS
WHEREAS, the street which is the subject matter of this resolution is
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by thjs reference, and commonly known as Otay Valley Road; and
WHEREAS, on March 26, 1996 the City's Redevelopment Agency directed that
a street name change for the east/west segment of Otay Valley Road between
1-805 and Brandywine Avenue to Otay Valley Road-Auto Park Drive be brought
forward to Council for consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator determined that this project is
exempt from environmental review under guidelines found in Section 15061 (b)3
of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on October 28, 1998 and voted 7-0 to approve: (1) that Otay Valley Road be changed
to Main Street all the way to proposed SR-125 so that the road will have the same
name from 1-5 to SR-125; (2) the segment of road between 1-805 to Brandywine
Avenue will have an "overlay" name and be known as Main Street/ Auto Park Way
Drive and (3) the north-south segment of Otay Valley Road be renamed Paseo Ranchero
as it will eventually tie into the existing street with the same name; and
WHEREAS, the City set the time and place for a hearing on said road name change and
- notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City, in accordance with City policy, to the
property owners of the affected portion of Otay Valley Road at least ten days
prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely November
17, 1998 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City
Council and said hearing was thereafter closed.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence on the proposed name change before the Planning
Commission at their public hearing held on October 28, 1998 and the minutes and
resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding.
d¥- I .'
"
H :\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\Ovrnc\9902CC.RES
.,"i;t,
----_.._----_.__.._-_...._,._-_.~._--_._._~- - ---_._-------~._----
Resolution No. -
Page #2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT based on all reports, evidence and
testimony presented with respect to the road name change, the City Council finds that the
proposed change will benefit property owners in the vicinity of Otay Valley Road and hereby
renames the portion of Otay Valley Road between 1-805 and Brandywine Avenue "Otay Valley
Road'Auto Park Drive". This name change shall not take effect until staff analyzes, submits
for City Council consideration, and obtains City Council approval of the cost for such name
change.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning and Building
.<' .2y.--Z
H :\HOfoolE'\PLANNING\MARTIN\Ovrnc\9902CC.RES
,I
h 000000&&&&\--
" MaW 0
San Diego's Water Park"' "
November 14,1998
Fred Kassman - Project Planner
Community Development Department
Chula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula VistaCA 91910
Dear Mr. Kassman
Weare sending this correspondence to express White Water Canyon's
agreement with the Planning Commission's recommendation to rename
portions of Otay Valley Road.
We would like to be on the record as having no problem with the name
Otay, but feeling strongly the road should have one name all of it's length
through Chula Vista now and in the future. One street name is important to
our ability to direct guest to White Water Canyon as simply as possible
whether they are traveling on 1-5, 1-805, or future 125. The change to Main
Street would seem to serve us while affecting the least number of residents
and businesses. One name for the length of the street would also help reduce
confusion for emergency services.
IfPaseo Ranchero will be the name of the road traveling from H Street in
Chula Vista to the southern city limit now and in the future White Water
Canyon would indorse this as well. The simpler the directions to White
Water Canyon the better.
White Water Canyon sees no negative impact on our business resulting from
adding - Auto Park Drive to the portion from 1-805 to Brandywine Avenue
and would be in favor ofthis change.
d.1- .3
Time is of the essence to White Water Canyon in this matter. We would ask
the decision to change the names be made prior to mid January 1999, with
implementation occurring prior to mid April 1999. This would mitigate the
effects of an address change on our 1999 season advertising campaign. The
sooner this inevitable change takes place the less impact the change will
have on our guest trying to locate White Water Canyon.
Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions you may
contact me through our office. I will be out of town this week.
Sincerely
Glenn Davidson
General Manager.
d~-~
~--.__",_'-'-
ATTACHMENT 1
PLANJ\'ING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: 4
Meeting Date: 10/28/98
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Otay Valley Road Name Change Between I-80S
and Brandywine A venue
On March 26, 1996, the Redevelopment Agency requested that staff investigate a proposal
submitted by the Auto Park dealers to change the name of Otay Valley Road to Auto Park Drive
(or something similar) from I-80S east. As follow-up to the Agency's direction, staff has focused
on renaming the ponion of Otay Valley Road east of I-80S to Brandywine Avenue (see
Attachment A). However, a number of other relevant issues are addressed so a clear picture of
the issues is available to the reader.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission hoJd the Public Hearing, consider the
testimony of staff and the public and recommend the following three actions:
1. Rename the segment ofOtay Valley Road from I-80S to Brandywine Avenue "Otay ValJey
Road-Auto Park Drive. "
2. Defer changing the leg of Otay Valley Road extending south into the City of San Diego
until Otay Ranch and the extension of Paseo Ranchero are further along.
3. Defer consideration of changing the name of Otay Valley Road west of I-80S and east of
Brandywine until the road is extended out to SR-125.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
As of the writing of this report, the proposed name change was scheduled to be discussed by Ota y
Valley Road Project Area Committee discussed at their meeting of October 26, 1998. A verbal
report of that discussion, and any recommendation resulting therefrom, will be given on October
28, 1998.
A public forum was held on June 13, 1996 at the Otay Community Center. Presentations were
also made to the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee on July 15, and the Otay Valley
Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee on August 16. Comments received at these meetings
raised concerns about the cost and inconvenience for businesses located on Otay Valley Road, and
the historic significance of the current name. In addition, negative comments were received from
owners of property in the eastern territories which will eventually be accessed by the eastward
extension of Otay Valley Road.
On March 10, 1998, the Agency held a workshop on the Otay Valley Road area at which staffwas
again directed to process the name change. The auto dealers continue to request a name change
due to the confusion caused by the number of road names with "Otay" in them in the area, the
connotation of being far south in the market area, and the lack of advance identification signs
north and south of Otay Valley Road on 1-805. A name change including the name "Auto Park"
.J!Þ-?- 02 tf - 2
. -. ..-- ...-..- _._.._------~-_.._--._- ._-_....__.--,---------------_._---~-------._. ------ .
OlaY Valley Road Name Change Item )\;0. 4, Page NO.2
10/28/98
would solve all of these problems. A name change without "Auto 'Park" would address the first
two issues. Bener identification could be an advantage to the City, increasing sales and,
consequently, taX revenues from the auto park. However, the name "Olay" does have historic
significance in the region, identifying the Olay River, surrounding valley and the Otay Ranch to
the east.
DISCUSSION:
Any name change for Otay Valley Road would involve the modification of freeway signs on 1-
805, signs along Otay Valley Road both east and west of 1-805, and require businesses currently
located on Otay Valley Road to change their address identification and marketing materials. Thus,
there would be expenses and inconvenience associated with the name change.
What to Name the Road
Changing the name of Otay Valley Road involves a number of issues, as discussed below:
· The Auto Park dealers would like to have the name "Auto Park" included in any change.
· The various developers of the Olay Ranch do not appear enthusiastic about the major
entryway to their new projects being named "Auto Park Drive" (or something similar).
They will soon be promoting all of their projects using the name "Olay Ranch" as a fonn
of identification similar to the use of the name "EastLake."
· The Otay Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee voted to recommend changing the
name ofOlaY Valley Road to Olay River Valley Parkway. In doing so, they indicated that
the road follows the Otay River Valley which has been designated as a regional park.
· Businesses in the area east of 1-805 will be inconvenienced and suffer the expense of
having to change their addresses on all identifying' materials including letterhead,
brochures, etc. This can be expensive for large, international businesses such as Gold
Coast En"aineering, IT Racing, and Nypro. There are also business and residences west
of I-80S where Otay Valley Road extends 2,000 feet to meet (and briefly parallel) Main
Street. Businesses located here and addressed on Otay Valley Road include a retail center ,
service station and the Otay Valley Inn.
· There is some concern over favoring the auto dealers. Changing the name to identify the
Auto Park does not help the Amphitheater, Water Park or any other business or attractions
Jocated (or to be located) in the area. To the extent that the name change complicates
directing people to these facilities from 1-5, 1-805 and SR-125, it may in fact, be a
hindrance .
EA1ent of the Road Name Chan~e
There is an issue concerning what section of OlaY Valley Road will be changed and, consequently,
how many names the roadway will have from Bay Boulevard wep 1-5 to proposed SR-125, a
/i/-~ .2'/-
Otay Valley Road Name Change Item !'<o. 4, Page !'<o. 3
10/28/98
distance of about eight miles. Currently, Main Street extends eaStward almost to 1-805 where
Otay Valley Road begins. Otay Valley Road continues eastward for several miles to the former
corporate boundary where it rurns south, crosses the Otay River and runs into the City of San
Diego to Datsun Street. A connecting road is planned north of the river from Otay Valley Road
to proposed SR-125, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles. Beyond SR-125, the name of the road
may identify the proposed university or become an extenSion of Hunte Parkway which eventually
runs to the north. Thus, ifOtay Valley Road east of 1-805 is changed to, say, Auto Park Drive,
the various names of this anerial could include the following:
1. Main Street from west of Bay Boulevard to Otay Valley Road;
2. Otay Valley Road from Main Street to 1-805;
~ Auto Park Drive will continue eastward to SR-125, or, due to protests from developers,
".
this segment may be called Otay Ranch Road (or something similar);
4. From the intersection with the north/south connector, the segment running south into the
City of San Diego will either be called Otay Valley Road or Paseo Ranchero; and
5. University Drive or Hunte Parl..-way from SR-125 east and then north (see Attachment A
and Attachment B).
Needless to say, other changes would also have to take place both east and west of I -805 in order
to make this approach workable. In addition, Paseo Ranchero, planned to extend from the north
and tie into Otay Valley Road where the latter turns to the south, raises the question as to how
many names the north/south connector will have.
Such a combination of road names is not recommended due to the confusion it causes for the
public and emergency services. In order to minimize confusion, a number of business owners and
staff would like to see the number of names minimi7ed. Thus, Main Street would be one of the
logical choices. However, Otay Valley Road would still exist both west of 1-805 (where it
parallels Main Street) and south of the bridge (both the Amphitheater and Water Park are
addressed on Otay Valley Road) into the City of San Diego.
ANALYSIS:
The primary reason for considering a street name change at this time is that there is no immediate
exposure for the auto park from 1-805 because billboards and reader signs are not permitted by
Caltrans north or south of Otay Valley Road. An option that staff believes would address this
concern would be to change Otay ValJey Road to a hyphenated name, Otay Valley Road-Auto
Park Drive, from 1-805 to Brandywine Avenue. By taking this approach, the concerns of the auto
park dea!ers are addressed, yet the historic name remains.
In light of the complexity of the other remaining issues noted above and the north/south
connector, staff is recommending that these not be addressed at this time.
2Y-1
_ ___J~__.. .____'_._ __ _~.__."··M_______··__"_·"_·"·_____·
Otay Valley Road Name Change Item No.4. Page !'io. 4
lO/28/98
CO~CLUSION:
In consideration of the foregoing information, staff has concluded that the followin g is an interim
so]ution:
1. Rename the segment of Otay ValJey Road from I-80S to Brandywine A venue "Otay Valle y
Road-Auto Park Drive. "
2. Defer changing the leg of Otay Valley Road extending south into the City of San Diego
until Otay Ranch and the extension of Paseo Ranchero are further along.
3. Defer consideration of changing the name of Otay Valley Road west of I-80S and east of
Brandywine until the road is extended out to SR -125.
H'IHOMElPLANNfNG\MARTIN\OVRNa9902PC.RPT October 23. 1998
~Lj-/t/
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-99-02
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE RENAMING OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD BETWEEN 1-
805 AND BRANDYWINE AVENUE TO OTAY VALLEY
ROAD-AUTO PARK DRIVE
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on March 26, 1996 THE City's Redevelopment Agency directed that
a street name change for the east/west segment of Otay Valley Road between
1-805 and Brandywine Avenue to Otay Valley Road-Auto Park Drive be brought
forward for consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator determined that this project
is exempt from environmental review under guide.lines found in Section
15061 (b)3 of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, in order to render a recommendation to
the City Council on this matter, set the time and place for a hearing on said road
name change and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given
by its publication in a newspaper Df general circulation in the City and its mailing
to property owners within _ feet of the effected portion of Otay Valley Road
at least ten days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
7:00 p.m. October 28, 1998, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue,
before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, from the facts presented to the
Planning Commission, the Commission has determined that the road name change of
Otay Valley Road between 1-805 and Brandy Avenue to Otay Valley Road-Auto Park
Drive is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Area and all other applicable Plans, and that the public necessity,
convenience, general welfare and good planning practice support the approval.
BE IT FURTHER.RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission recommends that
the City Council adopt a resolution approving the road name change in accordance
with the findings contained in the attached City Council Resolution No. _.
And that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property
in the affected area along Otay Valley Road and the City Council.
H:IHOMEIPLANNINGIMARTINIOVRNC\9902PC.RES
!lY-//
. "~Æ.___~ _...________ -- _._.__._-~---_._._._,.._..._-_.._.....,-_.__.-
Resolution No. PCM-99-02
Page No. 2
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 28th day of October 1998 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Patty Davis, Chair
ATTEST:
.
Diana Vargas, Secretary
H:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\OVRNC\9902PC.RES
:(1~/Á
THIS PAGEBLAN1<.
-
Ji-/- ) Y
----- - -- --~----
- .-.._._-~*-.._---_._.- ---
THIS PAGE BLANlC
JL/-/f
o~. ~,¡,., .,,~\\\) ~
''U. '/. p.;.;.....-'
,%,'0..>9 \)í~'{~ ~
o· ~-
ó'J).. ~
0' . G §.
<: "C
..
o
a:.
>-~
W ",0 N .
=-!!; 0 .
J~ C)z ~c.." ~ ~
fa mOl.
~ ~- '" ~
~ .... O::r -
'" ..... « ." ü _
-.;; ...Õ, ~c.. C
3: ... s:: . "C ..
'~-1Ii/1l (J .2 ~ g> ~ ~ G)
'5 >. cc-- CD ~ E
w c..~ ü) § __ =>
- =", ~ Z
~ CII ~ ~_ "CLn W ~
-= L._ reo.. C:::o :: ....
-* ..S! >. "S >. >.r:J:J 1.1. (,)
--- ........ - CO ..c.-=: Q)~
-- Z Z ..0- Üc =", -
o en ::I ctlQ) "V
TBMX'ffl ¡:: [0 õE >", _
.'-- ~ Q, J- - E >-'" W
æ E-c 1:::- rD~ Z _
(,) c..CU __0 -CI) ....
: ::J W « E üU Oce 0 ......
oW.... ~ Z
~ ë;; ~ .... ....itj
o CD... U OCð
W =:J W WW ..
a.... go ~ ""1:J ""10:: ~
.- - - a:: Q) ~8: ~8 ð
_I' i - - a: Q, en IX:.s Q,< Q.< U)
- - I -- 0 _
' -: ~ t--
< - ,- ~ e =
_ _---... a:...-
, _.! I 2 ..._
- ' . . 3AV 3NlMAONVlfll , ::>« =.. ..
,/. ~ - -- . r- -----' r = -
--, - ,. -/ =
-, ~ .' --,_.1 a.
- - -" - I I
-', -' - ...
'. ,..__ _:: .~v.ij3~Nffii~~/
'" , I~~
- "'.. -
- ' CD
--. - - _ g09 31VlSij31NI 16'
-'--- -- --- - --- ---- c.
-- - - ~
'1 ,_. \ "'1. _
-,Jo' ,", [", _
- -'01 I _ .... N
.-- - " ;-.c:! r Õ
- .-¡:¡. ~, I
. .-- .." -- "-', . -
'-" - .' .,~ ',.' '-'..... -< ....,..
,; .' .--.....-- -, + -"'
/ ~·l . - - ~
- -- >- , to:!
. - --. I ~I..-O_ , N
- J ."' - oj i -'.__ 0
- --. """;-'_A__\~. Iii E
,-. no" '."-', I ' i [
..-/,' , -;" ,',11'" ¡ ~ I: E
-''', ,L...J ----- I
-- . i- -1_': .s
--- -- - ~ - -- I , ! =:J -'--.J ~
. ,---' -L -'. - I· I õí
'" "J L. t,)
-------/ ~ - ". .-.=-':;;, I ~ .1 ~
'. '2' _
~~.~; , <:r ~
-, .~ .. p ! ~ "&
- - a: '"
~, , ~
-~ I 0 c:
. -" I I . I Z CO
~. I ~
I ã)
E
2~-/S ~
. _.._-~._~._..._"-
. ...... -,,_._--
~
III
- - .............. ' '. ti. .
.,... ---- :;~,. Ys ............. >-C¡ t
; JYfl1f1i ~........ W ~i!: â CO
,... ........ C) ~~ ~ s
-- --- Z'. . . _
r ~o'_o_
'" .... -< ~ c.. 0-
' _0, ~"".
'" ... C' C a::...
r u.~ ~,¡ E
'1:: >. .!2"¡:: CD :J
W &..!! !!? æ "" Z ~
~ III ïã 5_ '001) ~ (,)
-= ....::::> (t Q. C::o u:
ct .e >. ""5::::- >.~ ...
as ~._ CÞ- ,,,
.. "i- ~c: =c::
ZZcnO'-'=:InlQ) ...
Q OOõE:>~W_
... 0.._ ~ >."'"
~ I- E"i ~§ _arceD 5 c:r
¡¡¡ W Co E uu '" z
w W < III '" ..
c .¡.; c 1-2: ....(1)
b a: :!! @~ @ffi w
W L. :J CD -,:::::¡ a~ -'
a..... :if'" 00. a::Q l)
g; en II:.S! g;~ 0.< '"
,
N
'"
C>
III
c-
o::>
'"
-
~
~. ~
~. ~
'"
~ ~
~. ~
-- - - - .... -- - ii: ::¡
.- \\QÞ!) 0
o~./~~'2-_ \j\~~~) g,
"\~ . ~ E
$ ~ ~
J ., "' '"
.... ~'" ~
.= °
~ -
-- III
~ .= U
~ ~ 0
= ;::::
< In
.E
)"'" < J: ~
Q ~ ~
"< Q,. II: ~
~ ¡; 0 1:
§! ~ Z -E.
2 ø
~ E
~ °
õ ~
.ë
.11/ -/~
10'28/98 . cU IJ: 02 FAX 619 691 5líl CHöLA VISTA E~GI~EERI~G
OCT-29-98 WËD 11 : 14 DAVIES ENTERPRl::S:~:::i ....4:1. ~L3.z
ATTACHMENT 2
DAVIES ENTERPRISES
4501 oroy Valley Aaad . Chula Vista, CA 91911 . (819) 421-4601 . Faz (819) 421-5132
- -
Pl:lat.tt~ brand fax Iran.millal mama 7671
'þ \J ,.....
c.p e...
,.J,,,,,,",",
10-27-913 D.'
0
.. '\1 SI.....I
C.i:t;y .PlaJU~ing CoJTU'lÙ.ssion
278 I'ourth Ave.
CIl...la. Vista, Ca.
Re; C¡¡¡se #PGM:-99-02 proposal to rename otay Valley Roe~ Eûst of
1-805.
Doar Members of the Planning Commission;
I l~vo e~»~c5sed my vie~s on this subject at moetings In tohe past
and have written -Co you previou8ly ",bout it. Allov me to express
lIlY '~,houghts onoe more for the record.
The ~treet nama of Otay Valley Road and Main Street haB been
þ,roken for as long ;¡s I can reJllelllber. It has been confusing to
people and should be corrected. This is your chance to fix it!
From all 1;110 input and rocoOJIIlllendations made, nono 5ee~ to fix the
proble¡n, only prolons and oxacerl,at.e it. Great amounts of ti~e
and energy are baing uaed here witb only tho Auto deale~s' i.nt.er-
ests in mind_ The cOJrlØluni toy has Sllffered v:\.1;h 1.his "split road
no.."e" for YAal"S, and now the recomDlendat.ion :!IOCIIII' to be to add
more to the already cumbersome ,,'liree'!;. name.
While I lIlay 11ko 'tb.. Otay Valley Road name, the scnsible ¡;Qlut-:ion
is to do a~ay ~ith Otay Valley Hoad as a nalll" (oxcept where it
loops <south of Main street Weet of 1'·805), anel replaoo it "'''I:.h
Main Strøøt. Wh:i1e Main Street. maY no'!'. have the glamour o~ Ot;..y
Valley Rd_ or Rivor ParkYay etc., Main Stvcet won't get co~tused
with any other streot" in Chula Vista. Main S1::r.e",t is (and 'Ile
all hope will continue to be), ODe of Chula Vista's moar. commer-
cial Qirø8S.,.. the naœe "Main Street" suit:!' it.
Don't con:fuse uewcamø;.:s to Chula Vista vi t.h a differcllt street
k)Bllle for the same st.E'eo~ a't overy free\lay exit! Fix it!
Don't wait l1.nt:l.l !IIore ne., busine&ses on OtGY Valley Rd. aro faced
with a naMe change at a Inter date.... right :now very few busi-
nesses aro affected! Fix it!
DOD't make a "'telDpOrary .. name chanSe only to have bU3ine~3e3
change street names asain later! l!"lx 1 t. !
21/- / ?
.--- . .·.·~._.w·_.__~_·__··___ .----..----
10·28/98 WED lJ." fAX 619 691 ¡'. CtlLk\ ~l~!A t~~!~CL^~~U "'t... ~ ~ "
Ul..:T-:.t.:e--;:.ð; wED 1. 1. :!~ DHV.I.. __ ENTER~~15E$ .Z~ ~~~Z ,....IDZ
.-
DAVIES ENTERPRISES
4501 Olay Valley Rood· Chulq Viera, c:A 9191 I . (eHI) 421-4501. fQx (819) 421.5132
I~ t.he sole intent of this change is to provide the e,uto denle%"s
with freeway recognition. . ., m~ I .sugges~ that the addition of
"/Auto Parl",'a,," ~o Ha1n Stro~t .ill certainly be more accommodat-
ing to the freeway sicnago than that of "Main Stree1'./Otay Vallay
Rd_/Auto Pl1xkway"_
"nough time hw5 been spent on this.... it's been brokan long
enough_ .. . FIX IT!
~"lY;
~
ThOOl..... V. Davies
Property Manager
¡
,
,
t
I
:2i/-/~
MINUTES OF THE ATTACHMENT 3
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m. Public Services Building
Wednesday, October 28,1998 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
ROlL CAW MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Present: Chair Davis, Commissioners Aguilar, Ray, Willett, Tarantino, and
Thomas, and O'Nejll
Staff Present: Robert Leiter, Director of Planning and Building
Martin Miller, Acting Senior Planner
Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development
Fred Kassman, Redevelopment Coordinator
Richard Whipple, Associate Planner
Ann Moore, Assistant City Attorney
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair Davis
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
1. Bob Leiter, Director of Planning reported that staff is recommending that items 1,2, and 3 be
continued to November 4, 1998 based On the unexpected change in status of the Otay Tarplant
from a candidate species to a threatened species under the Federal Endangered Species Act,
and allow staff time to prepare an addendum to EIR 97-03 to address the change in status.
MSC (Willett/Ray) (7-0) to continue these three items to the meeting of November 4, 1998.
Motion carried.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Otay Valley Road Name Change between I-80S and Brandywine
Avenue
Background: Fred Kassman, Redevelopment Coordinator gave a historical perspective on the
naming of Otay Valley Road and stated that the area was originally inhabited by the Diegueño
or Kumaiyey Indians and they established a village at the end of the South Bay and named it
Otay. Otay is an Indian word meaning either a level knoll, a bushie place, or a place of reeds,
which is descriptive of the area. In the mid 19th Century the area, under the ownership of
Mexico was granted to the Doña Magdalena Estudillo family as Rancho de Otay. Later under
:<~- Ie;
_"_.'.0..__ . _._.m. --- ------- -- -- -~-,--------_...._._.
Planning Commission Minutes - 2- Wednesday, October 28, 1998
the ownershjp of Mary Birch, it became known as the Otay Ranch. Early land uses were
ranching, farming, mining and dumping. With urbanization of the area, a number of roads
were construded and were called Otay Valley Road, Otay Mesa Road, and Otay Lakes Road.
Urbanization brought industrial and residential land uses to the area, and later land uses
included commercial, which the Redevelopment Agency was effedive in bringing out there
the Chula Vista Auto Park, Coors Amphitheatre and Whitewater Canyon Water Park.
Recent development in the area includes: the City of San Diego's residential development
south of the Otay River; Olay Ranch developing to the east; and the Cities of Chula Vista and
San Diego and the County of San Diego are planning a regional park in the area which will
follow the Otay River Valley to the Reservoir.
There are multiple confliding issues because of the different types of land uses. The Auto Park
clearly needs identification from the freeway and the amphitheatre and water park would like
simplicity and consistency in directions and would like to have the same name whatever it is,
at I-80S, 1-5, and SR-12S.
The multiple street names with the word "Otay" in them, have become confusing to find for
people who are not familiar with the area.
The new developing communities are concerned with their image and the idea of having a
road named Auto Park Way, leading into a major new developments, has not been well
received.
There is concern with the use of multiple names for a section of roadway, which is problematic
and creates confusion for newcomers to the area, emergency response and to the Post Office.
Finally, the expense of installing the signs could be as low as a few thousand dollars if only a
few letters are changed and the size of the sign remains the same, or it could be exceptionally
high if the size of the sign is increased.
Staff has explored various alternatives which included changing the name to Otay Auto Park
Drive, River Road, River Park Way and Main Street.
Staff is recommending an interim alternative which deals only with the sedion of Otay Valley
Road from 1-805 to Brandywine Avenue and is proposing to rename that segment Otay Valley
Road-Auto Park Drive. This addresses some of the identification concerns that the Auto Park
has, however, it does not eliminate the confusion issues, as well as changes in the area as
development occurs, which will eventually need to be addressed.
Martin Miller, Ading Senior Planner, stated that the Planning Department received a letter from
Mr. Tom Davies recommending that Otay Valley Road be renamed Main Street for the entire
length of Otay Valley Road.
.2 '1/ e2.o
Planning Commission Minutes - 3· Wednesday, October 28,1998
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission recommend to the Cjty Council the
following three actions:
1. Rename the segment of Otay Valley Road from 1-805 to Brandywine Avenue "Otay
Valley Road-Auto Park Drive";
2. Defer changing the leg of Otay Valley Road extending south into the City of San Diego
until Otay Ranch and the extension of Paseo Ranchero are further along; and
3. Defer consideration of changing the name of Otay Valley Road west of 1-805 and east
of Brandywine until the Road is extended out to SR-125.
Commission Discussion:
Commissioner Aguilar asked what staff meant by "interim solution".
Mr. Kassman responded that the name change to Otay Valley Road-Auto Park Drive from 1-805
to Brandywine is permanent for that segment, however, the entire road name change will need
to be considered incrementally as issues arise with build out of the area and the construction
of SR-125.
Commissioner Ray asked what the high-end costs could be.
Mr. Kassman responded that if the approximate same number of letters are kept, and Caltrans
can salvage the existing sign by overlaying a metal strip, the cost could be $15,000 to $20,000
per sign.
If you get into replacing the entire sign board with a larger one, which involves Caltrans doing
the work in the middle of the night with special equipment, closing down freeway lanes, and
designing and constructing the signs, could cost as much as $200,000.00. The City changed
signs on 1-5 for Marina Parkway and the cost was approximately $150,000 to $175,000.
Commissioner Ray asked how many signs would need to be replaced if the name was changed
to Main Street all the way through.
Mr. Kassman responded that there are approximately 18 signs that have the name Otay Valley
Road, including signs on the freeway and small signs that are On the off-ramps that would need
to be replaced.
Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, stated that his experience in another
jurisdiction with changing signs has been that the high costs are due to Caltrans having to re-
engineer the poles and sign boards that hang over the freeway, which have incredible specs
and characteristics. The engineering process involves testing for wind sheer and other weather
conditions; they cannot in any way allow those to fall on the freeway.
If these measures do not have to occur, then the cost is very reasonable and they just place a
band over the words "Otay Valley Road" and use the same signs.
;('I~ 02- /
- -~..._...-.__.---.---------~-_.~
Planning Commission Minutes -4- Wednesday, October 28, 1998
Mr. Salomone further stated that staff is recommending a policy decision at this point, minus
the fiscal impact; that will need to be determined with Caltrans. Once we know how much it
will cost, then staff will return to the City Council to determine who will pay for it.
Commissioner O'Neill stated he opposed piece-mealing even further, and recommended
changing it once and for all.
Mr. Salomone responded there are too many issues to address, and not knowing the impact on
the Ranch, or future SR-125, staff feels it would be premature to commit to changing it now to
one name for the entirety of Otay Valley Road.
What staff is recommending now, addresses the competitive economic development issues of
the Auto Park. The Statewide trend is that the Auto Parks have freeway reader boards and
signs. National City is a perfect example with having reader boards visible from every freeway;
the City of Chula Vista cannot have reader boards visible from the freeway under Caltrans rules.
Escondido has Auto Park Way, which most auto parks have, and it gives them an economic
advantage.
With staff's recommendation, only the half-mile strip from 1-805 to Brandywine, which is the
Auto Park strip will need to change their address; everyone else will continue to receive their
mail at Otay Valley Road.
Mr. Kassman interjected that the amphitheatre and water park address is Otay Valley Road and
any change has to take into consideration their operating season and that they be granted
enough time to change their promotional materials for the coming year.
Commissioner Tarantino asked if it is feasible to place a sign off of the freeway which states,
"Auto Park Next Exit". In addition, he asked if there was any statistical data which supports
and/or attributes the success of an Auto Park to having the street name in front of their business
be Auto Park Drive, Avenue or Street.
Mr. Salomone stated that Caltrans has criteria that has to be met in order to place these signs
and they are based on the number of people that frequent these facilities and for traffic control
reasons. The City was successful in being granted a sign that states "Amphitheatre Next Exit"
or "Plaza Bonita Next Exit" because of the high volume of traffic that is generated. They will
not do it for a private commercial enterprise.
In addition, he is not aware of any data that measures the success of an Auto Park in relation
to whether the street is named Auto Park Way, however, it is his opinion that it is a matter of
perception, and signs are viewed as a positive thing for any commercial enterprise.
Commissioner Thomas asked if Carlsbad and Escondido had a similar situation where there is
residential on one side and commercial on the other side.
Director Leiter responded that Escondida does not have residential on Auto Park Way, and the
way that they were able to get Auto Park Way on the freeway sign board is similar to what is
21/-,,2;L
Planning Commission Minutes -5- Wednesday, October 28,1998
being proposed here. They have one link that is 9th Avenue, a major east/west street and one
link of that is adjacent to the freeway and is named Auto Park Way, which wanders into the
auto park, but the remainder of it, east and west of the freeway is 9th Avenue.
Commissioner O'Neill asked how much the City has subsidized the auto dealers to date with
new construction loans and the purchase of the old dealerships.
Director Salomone stated that the auto park was opened in part, because the downtown dealers
would eventually be closing on Broadway due to the corporation headquarters' direction in
moving the dealerships to other existing auto parks. Secondly, the Auto Park was opened at
the height of the recession, although they are doing better, therefore, it is hard to quantify. The
City did assist in acquiring the dealerships on Broadway and one of them is in the process of
being developed and the other has been redeveloped. The City did facilitate a loans which are
to be paid back out of a portion of the sales tax and that process is underway.
PUBliC HEARING OPENED 7:05.
Doug fuller, Fuller Ford, 560 Auto Park Drive, Chula Vista, gave a historical perspective of
the partnership that developed between the City of Chula Vista and Fuller Ford, a business that
has existed for over 50 years in Chula Vista.
Approximately 13 years ago, he was approached by Ford Motor Company requesting that he
look for new locations for a Ford dealership. One ideal site which was picked out was on East
H Street, the Terra Nova site. However, at that time, he was approached by the City of Chula
Vista and was asked if he would help the City in exploring establishing an auto park, and that
endeavor was embarked upOn. The City has been very interested in a successful auto park for
a number of years and certain representations have been made to the dealers throughout the
years. The dealerships have cooperated, though not totally altruistically, because they are in
business to make a profit, however there exists an allegiance to the City and a mutual
recognition that the benefits of a successful auto park are great.
When discussing the costs involved in changing the signs, whether it be $15,000 or $150,000,
it seems out of balance because the reality is that the dealerships in the auto park generate
hundreds of thousands of dollars in sales tax revenue to the City of Chula Vista.
In order to be competitive with other auto parks and be able to attract the other dealers, the
name change is necessary.
In conclusion, Mr. Fuller stated that the City of National City has just recently approved
renaming 24th Street off of 1-5 to Mile of Cars Boulevard. In addition they are allowed to have
reader boards off of the freeways. This goes hand-in-hand with the Mission Valley Auto Circle,
which has name recognition on 1-8, and Auto Park Way in Escondido.
Commissioner Ray stated that a new car is not an impulse purchase, and most people plan out
the different dealerships they want to visit, therefore, they know exactly where they are going.
Having a freeway sign that says" Auto Park Drive", will not necessarily make them pull off the
freeway and go to the auto park to look for a car.
J:I---;¿ :J
--,...._.._.....~,-_.,--------_._--_._~--_._---
Planning Commission Minutes -6· Wednesday, October 28,1998
Mr. Fuller stated that the auto park is losing business from Chula Vista residents to the National
City Mile of Cars. One of the biggest disadvantages the Chula Vista Auto Park has is that five
years ago they went out to pioneer a new retail area on Otay Valley Road.
Mr. Fuller stated that the auto park needs to distinguish themselves as a marketing area in Chula
Vista. One of the biggest obstacles of that location is that people who are looking for them get
off at Otay lakes Road, or they go past them looking for Otay Mesa. There exists a stigma with
the name 'Otay' which has been a real road block because people associate it with Otay Mesa,
the landfill, traffic accidents, border patrol and immigration problems.
It is critical to the survival of the auto park that they be able to market themselves as a retail
area in Chula Vista. They need to be able to compete with the Mile of Cars; presently they are
out-matched; they have 22 dealerships, Chula Vista has 3. Another reasons is that they cannot
attract other dealerships because they do not see a commitment to Chula Vista and the lack of
infrastructure that is needed.
Commissioner Thomas stated that he understands the issues and is sympathetic, however, he
has concern with the fragmentation/phasing part of this proposal.
Commissioner Aguilar asked Mr. Fuller is he could cite any data that supports the idea that the
name Auto Park Drive actually increases sales.
Mr. Fuller responded that he had not done any research on this subject, but his general
experience in the automobile industry has been that the most successful auto parks throughout
the State have freeway designation and visibility.
Commissioner Tarantino asked if he had any commitments from other dealerships to locate
to the Chula Vista Auto Park if the name change is approved.
Mr. Fuller responded that he has no guarantees, but that there is a great deal of interest with the
growth in this area. He stated that in the State of California, Toyota has two 'open points',
which means that they have a named sited location for a new Toyota dealership; one is an auto
park in Indio and the other is Chula Vista. They have indicated to him that they would like to
be in Chula Vista, but they feel it is not fully developed and they are going to see what happens
in the future.
Chrysler has had their reps visit the auto park and they have conducted market analysis, and
believe they will be in the Chula Vista Auto Park in the near future. Furthermore, he has first
hand knowledge that the high-end dealerships like, Infiniti, lexus, Mercedes, BMW, would
prefer to be in Chula Vista rather than in National City. The demographics, growth and trends
are better in Chula Vista and firmly believes that the opportunity exists to have the high-end
vehicles present in the auto park in the near future.
Ed Wesche, 1012 Acero Street, Chula Vista, Chevrolet, stated he is new in Chula Vista and
has been here for 1 year; his two predecessors went out of business at that location. He stated
he did not have the historical insight, however, it is his understanding that promises were
made, and signage was one of them.
')i/.2 r
Planning Commission Minutes -7 - Wednesday, October 28,1998
He stated that the National City Mile of Cars supports 40% of the overhead of that City. Mr.
Wesche came from probably the most successful auto park in the State of California which is
just outside of Sacramento, Roseville Auto Mall. They have approximately 22 franchises
represented there and sell in excess of 4,000 vehicles per month at retail with gross sales in
excess of a billion dollars a year, and they have freeway signage.
People who drive by an auto mall exit are not necessarily in the market for a car today, but they
mjght be six months from now; speaking for himself and the other dealers in the auto park, he
would like to be considered.
Mr. Wesche reaffirmed what Mr. Fuller stated earlier, that Chrysler is definitely interested in
locating in Chula Vista, but they would like to see a little more establishment. With the City
supporting a name change and with freeway identification, this would be an outstanding
message to those dealers who are considering relocating.
The amphitheatre, which is a seasonal operation, has signage from the freeway; yet, the auto
park is a retail operation that is opened year-round and they do not have signage. Next to
payroll, the next largest expense he has is advertizing because he has an awareness problem
with people not knowing where they are located. It is not only the car sales he is trying to
attract, but also as the only GM dealer in this area, the other back-end operation like servicing
center and auto parts department are equally as important and his competition is National City.
Walter Fischer, P.O. Box 3666, Chula Vista, CA, member of the Otay Valley Project Area
Committee, stated that Mr. Davies suggestion to change the name to Main Street was discussed
and the committee agreed that it is probably the least expensive way to go because you could
probably overlay the new name and not have to go to the larger size sign.
In addition, although he does not speak for his employer, he does work for the amphitheatre
and it is his opinion that the general consensus is that they are not as concerned with what it
is named, but rather, that the education process is not disrupted or shortened.
Glenn Davidson, 2052 Otay Valley Road, General Manager Whitewater Canyon Park stated
that they too have experienced some location identification problems and recommended that
whatever the change is, do it all at one time now rather than incrementally. Whitewater
Canyon will have committed themselves by January' 999 to $650,000 worth of advertizing
and media for the coming year.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8:00
Commissioner O'Neill stated that he could support having the hyphenated name from 1-805
to Brandywine, and strongly recommends that whatever it is changed to that it be done now,
the full length of Otay Valley Road, and not incrementally by phases.
Commissioner Thomas concurs with Commissioner O'Neill that it all should be done now,
rather than later. If we wait until later, it will be more expensive and there will most likely be
more players who have a vested interest in their piece of the pie.
;(1/ /',25
- _.._..,..~"~._.._.~--- -_.~--~..,--_._.._,-_._-_.,._.._--_.- -.-...-.-
Planning Commission Minutes - 8· Wednesday, October 28, 1998
Commission Tarantino thanked the speakers for helping him understand the economic issues
of this proposal and supports changing it now and be done with it.
Commissioner Aguilar echoes and support the statements made by her colleagues.
MSC (Aguilar/Ray) that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council:
1. that Otay Valley Road's intersection with Main Street going east to 1-805 be changed to
Main Street;
2. that 1-805 going east to Brandywine Avenue be changed to Main Street-Auto Park Drive;
3. that Otay Valley Road's intersection with Brandywine Avenue going east until it turns
south over the river be changed to Main Street; and
4. that from where Otay ~alley Road turns south and goes over the Otay River that it be
renamed Paseo Ranchero to the City limits.
c? L/ - cJ, ("
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT . ~
[œ~
Meeting Date 1 ;.2.8 I 1'1 0
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing on Adoption of the Otay Ranch Village I and 5 Pedestnan
. Bridge Report and Establishment of the Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5
Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee
/J Ordinance 27 t 7 of the City Council of Chula Vista Establishing the
Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5 Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee to
Pay for Pedestrian Bridge Improvements as a condition of issuance of
building pennits.
!J Resolution /9,:l.'j J Adopting the City of ChuJa Vista Pedestrian Bridge
Development Impact Fee Report.
SUBMITTED BY' Directm of Pub Ii, wm~ ~
REVIEWED BY: City ManageVt2.- ~ --r (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_X)
The developers of Otay Ranch SPA One are required to fund the fair share of constructing three
pedestrian bridges within Villages 1 and 5. On May 14, 1998 both the McMillin Company and the
Otay Ranch Company requested that a Development Impact Fee be created to spread the cost of
these facilities over those areas benefitting from the proposed bridges. Tonight's public hearing will
consider an ordinance to this effect. All affected property owners been noticed for the public
hearing.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Conduct a Public Hearing on Adoption of the Otay Ranch Village I and 5 Pedestrian Bridge
Report and Establishment of the Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5 Pedestrian Bridge Development
Impact Fee.
2. Adopt an Ordinance Establishing the Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5 Pedestrian Bridge
Development Impact Fee to Pay for Pedestrian Bridge Improvements as a condition of
issuance of building pennits.
3. Adopt a Resolution Adopting the City ofChula Vista Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact
Fee Report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
The goal of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan is to organize land uses based upon a village
concept to produce a cohesive, pedestrian friendJy community, encourage non-vehicular trips and
foster interaction amongst residents. The Otay Ranch General Development Plan also requires a
non-auto circulation system, such as pedestrian walkways and bike paths, be provided between
~ ~3/'/
--'---"-'--'--~-~""-"'- ----'"'--,.--.-------..-----.-- .---
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/8/98
villages and, where appropriate and feasible, a grade separated arterial crossing to encourage
pedestrian activity between villages. The proposed pedestrian bridges (connecting Villages I and
5, I and 2, and 5 and 6) are an essential component of this non-auto circulation system. The location
of the proposed bridges is presented in Exhibit A.
The Tentative Map for Chula Vista Tract No. 96-04, covering all the property owned by the Otay
Ranch Company within SPA One, was approved by Resolution Nos. 18398 and 18613. Council also
approved two Tentative Maps for properties owned by the McMillin Company by Resolution Nos.
18686 and 19034. Conditions of approval of said tentative maps require that securities, guaranteeing
the fair share of constructing the pedestrian bridges be provided prior to approval of the first final
"B" map in SPA One. On May 14, 1998, the McMillin Company and the Otay Ranch Company
requested that this requirement be met through the establishment of a Development Impact Fee (see
Exhibit B).
It has to be noted that Council has already approved eight final "B" maps in the Otay Ranch SPA
One. Two additional maps for Units 2 and 3 of McMillin Otay Ranch are also on tonight Council's
agenda. Because the DIF has not yet been established, the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement
Agreement ("SSIA") for said maps requires developer to deposit cash equal to the estimated DIF
amount for the "B" Map. In the SSIA, the developer also acknowledges that if no DIF mechanism
is established for any reason, the City has the right to use the cash deposit for constructing said
pedestrian bridges. The agreement also establishes that the deveJoper shall pay the City any
difference between the Final Map's fair share of the actual total costs incurred to construct the
pedestrian bridges and the amount previously paid.
Development Impact Fees (DIF), established pursuant to Government Code Section 66000, are
charges levied by local governing bodies against developers for their fair share of capital funding for
facilities needed by new development. The City currently maintains eight (8) Development Impact
Fee Programs: one for drainage, four for sewerage infrastructure, one for public facilities, and two
for transportation.
Area of Benefit
The Area of Benefit of the proposed DIF includes all the parcels located within the Otay Ranch SPA
One, Villages 1 and 5 (See Exhibit A).
Construction Cost Estimate
The proposed DIF will fund 1) the construction of a full bridge at Lå Media Road (connecting
Villages I and 5), and 2) the construction of half of the two proposed bridges over Olympic Parkway
(connecting Villages I and 2, and Villages 5 and 6). The bridge across La Media Road will be built
in conjunction with the improvements for said street. The timing of construction of the two bridges
across Olympic Parkway is tied to the development of Villages 2 and 6. Said Villages 2 and 6 will
be required to provide the remaining funding (half of the cost) for constructing said facilities.
The report entitled "City of Chula Vista Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee Report"
("Pedestrian DIF Report") dated November 6, 1998 prepared by the consulting firm Development
Planning & Financing Group provides the criteria and methodology followed in determining the DIF
.~ ..2.S>;Z
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 12/8/98
(a copy is on file at the City Clerk's office). Said report incorporates the "Pedestrian Bridge
Planning Study" dated March 18, 1998, prepared by Simon Wong Engineering, providing a
preliminary design and cost estimate of the proposed bridges. The Environmental Review
Coordinator has determined that EIR 95-0 I (previousJy approved by Council) addresses all the issues
concerning the proposed DIF and that no further environmental review is required (see Exhibit C).
Staff has reviewed the Pedestrian DIF Report, found it acceptable and recommends Council
approval.
Construction cost for the bridges were based on Wong Engineering's report. The cost estimates
assume a lighted cast in place concrete structure will be constructed with a maximum clearance of
18.5 feet (Caltrans standard). The 15-foot width of the bridge will pennit electric carts, bikes, and
pedestrian circulation. Other costs included in the DIF are:
1. Approach ramps to the bridges (except grading which will be perfonned as part of
the subdivision grading)
2. The City's cost of administration @ 7%
3. Design Engineering and other soft costs
4. Special bridge inspection fees
The total cost of the Pedestrian Bridges DIF program is estimated to be $2,342,000, as broken down
in Table I below. City Public Works staff is in agreement with the consuJtant's cost estimate.
Table 1
Preliminary Cost Estimate
La Media Bridge Y:. of Olympic Y:. of Olympic
. (100%) Parkway West Bridge Parkway East Bridge
Bridge Cost $868,158 $754,152 $719,593
The cost to fonn the Development Impact Fee is not included in this estimate and is being funded
by the developers of the Otay Ranch Village I and 5.
Develonment Imnact Fee
Land uses were provided by The McMillin Company and the Otay Ranch Company. Since people
will be using the bridges, the land uses were translated into Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) using
the "people per household factor" for parkland dedication set forth in Chapter 17.1 of the Municipal
Code. The fee is limited to residential development only since it is considered that the residential
areas will generate the pedestrian trips. The bridges are needed to serve the residential uses and will
make the residential uses more compatible with a pedestrian and transit friendly neighborhood.
Destination uses (i.e., schools, parks, commercial and community purpose facilities) are proposed
to be exempt from the DIF.
~ ;IS'''" 3
. ,....---...-..--..---.'...- .._-"---""~'-"-"""._---. .---_._-----~._------- "----'--.--... ..-..... -. -..- _.__._._,,~._._..__._--,_._.._. ..-....-.... _.~._.._--_..._~---_..- ._---------_._--_._--_._-_._~
Page 4, Hem
Meeting Date 12/8/98
The residential land uses within the villages will have different degrees of benefit from the
installation of the three pedestrian bridges. Residential units containing larger square footage will
typically hold more people per household than the residential units containing smaller square
footage. As such, residential units with a larger number of people per household will inure greater
benefit from using the pedestrian trail system and its three bridges than residential units with a
smaller number of people per household. Staff proposes that the benefit for the bridges be based on
the number of people living in the residential type. (i.e., single family detached, single family
attached, duplex, and multi family). In order to detennine the number of people per household type
staff is using the people per household factors ("PPHF"). This process is used by the City in
detennining the amount of parkland dedication required by new development projects pursuant to
City Ordinance, Chapter 17.10. The PPHF used in Chapter 17.10 can serve as a reasonable method
of allocating the bridge benefit to different residential uses.
The fee was calculated by dividing the total cost of the improvements by the projected EDUs in
Villages I and 5. Table 2 below gives a breakdown by land use.
Table 2
Fee by Land Use
Land Use People per EDUs Fee Amount
household
Single Family Detached 3.22 I $545
("SFD") ..
Single FamiJy Attached 2.80 0.87 $474
("SF A")
Duplex ("DUP") 2.48 '77 $420
Multi Family ("MF") 2.21 0.69 $374
The proposed fee is payable prior to building pennit issuance for residential land uses only. For the
purpose of this fee the land uses are defined as follows:
· "SFD" means a single residential unit on a single assessor's parcel provided such assessor's
parcel has a lot.size greater than 3,000 square feet.
· "SF A" means all residential units that are not classified as SFD, DUP or MF.
· "DUP" means a residential structure that contains two separate living units that share a
common wall and roof.
· "MF" means a condominium unit or apartment unit.
The proposed ordinance provides for the DIF to be updated annually for CPl increases, to update
construction costs, and to reflect any land use changes. The ordinance also allows the developer to
finance the construction with private funds. In this case, the developer may receive a reimbursement
from existing DIF funds and/or receive credits towards future building pennits. Construction
~ J-3~f
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 12/8/98
funding may also be included in a public financing district. In this case, Council may grant credits
in an amount not to exceed the DIF obligation. It should be noted the McMillin Otay Ranch is
proposing to include the construction of the La Media Road bridge in CFD No. 97-3. A public
hearing and formation of this district is also on Council's agenda.
Findin!!:s
Government Code 66000 requires that the City make the following findings when establishing a
Development Impact Fee:
· The establishment of the Impact Fee is necessary to protect the public safety and welfare and
to ensure the effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
· The Impact Fee is necessary to ensure that funds will be available for the construction of the
Facilities concurrent with the need for these Facilities and to ensure certainty in the capital
facilities budgeting for growth impacted public facilities.
· The amount of the fee levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of
providing the Facilities for which the fee is collected.
-
· The Otay Ranch project seeks to use neo-traditional planning and an extensive trail/sidewalk
system to foster pedestrian circulation within the subdivision. The proposed pedestrian
bridges (connecting Villages I and 5,1 and 2, and 5 and 6) are an essential component of this
system to allow safe crossing of pedestrian, bikes, and electric carts over major roads.
Therefore, construction of the pedestrian bridges will be needed to service the development
of Villages I and 5.
Future Actions
Tonight is the first reading of the Ordinance. The second reading is scheduled for December IS,
1998. If adopted by Council and no legal challenge is filed, the Ordinance will become effective on
February 13, 1999.
FISCAL IMP ACTS: The developers have deposited funds for the creation of the fee and any future
administration costs will be covered by the administration component of the fee (7%). The City will
receive the benefit of full cost recovery for staff cost involved in the DIF administration (estimated at
$167,000). The maintenance of the bridges, including access ramps and pedestrian lighting, will be
funded by CFD 97-1 (Open Space Maintenance District, Otay Ranch - SPA One, Villages I & 5).
Exhibits:
A. Benefit area map
B. Letter dated 5/14/98 ITom The Olay Ranch and McMillin Companies requesting the formation ofDlF.
C. Memo from environmental review addressing environmental considerations
File # onS-IO-HX048 H-agcnda\bridge _ s.wpd.ta
--
~ rJ-S?
-_.~..._-,,_......_-------- .. ---_._...__._-_.._-~~-.~-------~
w
'"' .
5 ~
... c.
~ ~
~ c
. "
a: c.
~ 0
~ c
5 '
o .
'"
~ ~
\,
"
II:
~
...
..
".
a..'
,
~ '
~ '
o
0.
W
~
wen
wZ
· e '
~ ~ o.
o . '.
0... o' I· ·
o 0 · ·
· .' .ò '
~ w' ~> ·
<zO' 0 >
w C:5 "
~." '
¡;; .. '< .
_ 0 Z t- "
X". 0 ·
x w - ·
w >. -
w ~ ' ~
o· ' >
w ' -
w 0 I 0
~w -
o . ·
_0. I a:o "
· .
· ~ I ·
z. '
.. "> ' ~ >
.. <' ' ' z 5
~ _ t- 0 I ' w
· , ' > ' >
w W w Z I " \ « "
o < · ' . '
w ~~~ ~> olf \ . " ~
· ,<" <- " .
o ," <' > :' ·
,,_",z <' " " ,~»
gj W ;: 8 Iii ~ ~ W <:::! { \ ,..) \ w !J!
cc:~st- ~c:J \'- I 0'"
§§<o,= .,,: ,z ·
,.P"' qH \, - .
~:& "'!!- _ W _ < z \ I
occ.z~o'"' ,~w "
0000'-'"5"05 ,<" 0 ·
z..··P~"<õ" <,' " · '
_ I H -.' <.' ," ~
w. .~ _ ».. ._ , ' " 0
C)-I-II"" c_,' > -
L1J - I. § : : ( II tD- \ \ ..
..J.. = .. I ? \ "
... ",,'" .
= . . I I ~ \ '
= :: I ~ \ {,
0\ \ :::
~ \ ( u'"
W ~/ Zw
t- , \ ~~
\ ;;:-1
\ ~>
" 0
,
----..; - \....-
~
w~ //~
~~ ~ 'r' 25~¿
>~
£\~ ~~~!cl!i~MS~~R~~~~1~ Exhibit B
May 14, 1998
Mr. Lombardo de Trinidad
Mr. Rick Rosaler
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 9J910
RE: Otay Ranch SPA I-Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee
Dear Sirs,
Attached pJease find calculations for the proposed Pedestrian Bridge Development
Impact Fee ("Ped Bridge DIF") within Otay Ranch SPA I. We are requesting that an
ordinance be forwarded for City Council approval.
The following assumptions were utilized in computing the proposed fee:
I. Construction costs for the bridges were derived from the Otay Ranch Villages
I and 5 Pedestrian Bridge Planning Study perpared by Simon Wong
Engineering dated March 18, 1998.
2. Costs for design, inspection and administration were derived from similar fees
in place for roadway facilities.
3. Contributing units include SPA I, Villages 1 and 5, and SPA I West.
4. Equivalent dwelling unit calcuJations are based on traffic EDUs.
If you have any particular questions or require additional information, please contact the
undersigned.
Sincerely,
THE OTA Y RANCH COMPANY
Robert A. Pletcher
Executive Vice-President Vice-President
. r-~
h:data\engnring\bpletcher\otaymch\pdbrdg02.doc ' - e:2--5-
2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, CA 91~7-4117 fax ( 19)336-3119 www.mcmillin.com
--^._- _.._~...._".._.___.m_._·. . ^ .___.~..__.._."."_.____~
Exhibit C
,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Adler, Engineering Division
FROM: Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordina~
DATE: June 5, 1998
SUBJ: Pedestrian Bridges for Otay Ranch SPA I; Environmental
Determination .ç¡ (..<¿ q 5-;;ó
After further review of the existing adopted Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 95-.
01 and related public discussion during the adoption hearings it is this Departments
determination that no further environmental review is required for the proposed
establishment of the Development Impact Fee for the Otay Ranch pedestrian bridges.
Final EIR 95-01 adequately addressed the issue of pedestrian safety and design
features. The City Council found that mitigation regarding street designs that
promote pedestrian safety to be feasible and adopted them as conditions of approval
and made them binding on the applicant.
Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to. call me at 691-5104 or
Benjamin Guerrero at 476-5393.
~ ;;f/f"
o 'f-V &
i{0-{7. 0\) \;)I~
. v~(!; 0;:> \2-~~
ORDINANCE NO. 2.? t 7 " ?-(
. r\~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CHULA
VIST~ ESTABLISHING THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 1
AND 5 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
TO PAY FOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS AS A
CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan Land Use and Public
Facilities Elements require that adequate public facilities be
available to accommodate increased population created by new
development, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that new development
within certain areas within the city of Chula Vista as identified
in this ordinance, will create adverse impacts on certain existing
public facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and
construction of those facilities identified in this ordinance, and
WHEREAS, developers of land within the City are required to
mitigate the burden created by their development by the construc-
tion or improvement of those facilities needed to provide service
to their respective developments or by the payment of a fee to
finance their portion of the total cost of such facilities; and
WHEREAS, development wi thin the City contributes to the
cumulative burden on pedestrian facilities in direct relationship
to the amount of population generated by the development or the
gross acreage of the commercial or industrial land in the
development; and
WHEREAS, the goal of the otay Ranch General Development Plan
is to organize land uses based upon a village concept to produce
a cohesive, pedestrian friendly community, encourage non-vehicular
trips and foster interaction amongst residents; and
WHEREAS, a component of the Otay Ranch circulation system is
a comprehensive trail system to provide for non-vehicular
alternative modes of transportation; and
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch GDP requires a non-auto circulation
system, such as pedestrian walkways and bike paths, shall be
provided between villages. And, where appropriate and feasible, a
grade separated arterial crossing should be provided to encourage
pedestrian activity between villages; and
WHEREAS, Otay Ranch, villages 1 and 5 is that area of land
within the city of Chula vista and the County of San Diego
surrounded by Telegraph Canyon Road, Otay Lakes Road, Paseo
Ranchero, Olympic Parkway and SR-125. This area is shown on the
~~~
"ÝK-- (JE(!. t) t' /'19' g>' ~ ðL. ;¿.5 f) .../
~ 0..e ~ þ1( eO c?¡f-.:<5f
___~__'_M_"'U_'"'_ .'._"_..___ ._._..".___________,__.~_._.
map marked Exhibit "111 , on file in the City Clerk's Office and
known as Document No. , and included as an attachment to the
City of Chula Vista Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee
Report, dated November 6, 1998, on file in the Office of the City
Engineer; and
WHEREAS, City Engineering Staff has approved the City of Chula
Vista Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee Report ("Report" )
dated November 6, 1998; and
WHEREAS, said the City of Chula Vista Pedestrian Bridge
Development Impact Fee Report, recommends pedestrian over crossing
facilities needed for pedestrian access, and establishes a fee
payable by persons obtaining building permits for developments
within Otay Ranch Villages 1 and 5 benefitting from the
construction of these facilities; and
WHEREAS, a series of meetings have been held with the owners
and developers of properties located within Otay Ranch Villages 1
and 5 to discuss the Report and city staff recommendations
establishing the Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5 Pedestrian Bridge
Development Impact Fee (" Impact Fee"); and
-
WHEREAS, the Environmental Impact Report 95-01 adequately
addressed the issue of pedestrian safety and design features of the
pedestrian bridges; and
WHEREAS, on December 8, 1998, a Public Hearing was held before
the City Council to provide an opportunity for interested persons
to be heard on the approval of the Report and establishment of the
Impact Fee; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, based upon the evidence
presented at the Public Hearing, including, but not limited to, the
Report and other information received by the City Council in the
course of its business, that imposition of the Impact Fee on all
developments within Otay Ranch Villages 1 and 5 in the City of
Chula Vista is necessary in order to protect the public safety and
welfare and to ensure effective implementation of the City's
General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of
the Impact Fee . levied by this ordinance does not exceed the
estimated cost of providing the public facilities identified by the
Report.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
2
- ;J.þ/J - ;2
,
.
SECTION 1. Environmental Review
The Environmental Impact Report 95-01 adequately addressed
environmental concerns associated with the construction of
pedestrian facilities.
SECTION 2. Approval of Report.
The City Council has reviewed the proposed Report and has adopted
the same, by Resolution No. /9~9~ , in the form on file in the
Office of the City Clerk.
SECTION 3. "Facilities" .
The facilities to be financed by the Impact Fee are fully described
in the Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee Report and
incorporated herein by this reference, ("Facilities"), all of which
Facilities may be modified by the City Council from time to time by
resolution. The locations at which the Facilities will be
constructed are shown on Exhibit "4", of the approved City of Chula
Vista Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee Report, on file in
the City Clerk's Office and known as Document No. 98 -~1 , which
is included in the Report. The City Council may modify or amend
the list of projects herein considered to be part of the Facilities
by written resolution in order to maintain compliance with the
City's Capital Improvement Program or to reflect changes in land
development and estimated and actual pedestrian generation.
SECTION 4. Territory to Which Fee Is Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the Impact Fee herein
established shall be applicable is set forth on Exhibit "4" of the
Report, on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as Document
No. Co 98 - ':;'5'#- and is generally described herein as the
"Territory. "
SECTION S. Purpose.
The purpose of this ordinance is to establish the Impact Fee in
order to provide the necessary financing to construct the
Facilities within the areas shown in Exhibit "1" of the Report, in
accordance with the City's General Plan.
SECTION 6. Establishment of Fee.
The Impact Fee, to be based on a per Equivalent Dwelling unit
("EDU" ) basis, and payable prior to the issuance of building
permits for residential development projects within the Territory,
is hereby established to pay for the Facilities.
SECTION 7. Due on Issuance of Building Permit.
3
. ;L;-/7 ~ ;5
.
, .
___.__.......__.____...___m~___~~__
The Impact Fee shall be paid in cash upon the issuance of a
residential building permit. Early payment is not permitted. No
building permit shall be issued for residential development
projects subject to this Ordinance unless the developer has paid
the Impact Fee imposed by this Ordinance.
SECTION 8. Determination of Equivalent Dwelling units.
Residential land uses shall be converted to Equivalent Dwelling
Units for the purpose of this fee based on the following table:
Fee by Land Use
Land Use People per household EDUs
Single Family Detached 3.22 1
("'SFD'·)
Single Family Attached 2.80 0.87
("SF A")
Duplexes ("DUP") 2.48 0.77
Multi Family ("MF") 2.21 0.69
"SFD" means a single residential unit on a single assessor's parcel
provided such assessor's parcel has a lot size greater than 3,000
square feet.
"SFA" means all residential units that are not classified as SFD,
DUP or MF.
"DUP" means a residential structure that contains two separate
living units that share a common wall and roof.
"MF" means a condominium unit or apartment unit.
SECTION 9. Time to Determine Amount Due; Advance Payment
Prohibited.
The Impact Fee for each development shall be calculated at the time
of building permit issuance and shall be the amount as indicated at
that time and not when the tentative map or final map was granted
or applied for, or when the building permit plan check was
conducted, or when application was made for the building permit.
SECTION 10. Purpose and Use of Fee.
4
~ JS/J'-(
,
The purpose of the Impact Fee is to pay for the planning, design,
construction and/or financing (including the cost of interest and
other financing costs as appropriate) of the Facilities, or
reimbursement to the City or, at the discretion of the City if
approved in advance in writing, to other third parties for
advancing costs actually incurred for planning, designing, con-
structing, or financing the Facilities. Any use of the Impact Fee
shall receive the advance consent of the City Council and be used
in a manner consistent with the purpose of the Impact Fee.
SECTION 11. Amount of Fee; Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule
The initial Impact Fee shall be calculated at the rate of $545 per
EDU. Chapter XVI, Other Fees, of the Master Fee Schedule is hereby
amended to add Section E, which shall read as follows:
"E. Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5 Pedestrian Bridge
Development Impact Fee.
This section is intended to memorialize the key
provisions of Ordinance No. , but said Ordinance
governs over the provisions of the Master Fee Schedule.
For example, in the event of a conflict in interpretation
between the Master Fee Schedule and the Ordinance, or in
the event that there are additional rules applicable to
the imposition of the Impact Fee, the language of the
Ordinance governs.
a. Territory to which Fee Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula vista to which the Impact
Fee herein established shall be applicable is set forth
in Exhibit "1" of the City of Chula Vista Pedestrian
Bridge Development Impact Fee Report dated November 6,
1998, and is generally described as the area surrounded
by Telegraph Canyon Road, Otay Lakes Road, Paseo
Ranchero, SR-125 and Olympic Parkway.
b. Rate per Residential Land Use and Fee
The Impact Fee shall be calculated at the rate of $545
per EDU and translated into a fee per land use based on
the pÉople per household factor given below, which rate
shall be adjusted from time to time by the City Council.
5
~ ;2f'A -Ç
- -- - - - -,.~---- -- -.---...-.........-.. _ ---....-....----,-----------......-.....----- --~---_._-----_.._---------
'Residential Land EDU's I Fee
! use !
I Single Family 1 I $545
: Detached (SFD)
i Attached, Cluster 0.87 $474
'Housing ("SFA") I
,Duplexes ("DUP") I 0.77 $420 i
I I I I
Multi Family("MF") 10.69 ! $374
c. Residential land use categories defined.
"SFD" means a single residential unit on a
single assessor's parcel provided such
assessor's parcel has a lot size greater than
3,000 square feet.
"SFA" means all residential units that are not
classified as SFD, DUP or MF.
"DUP" means a residential structure that
contains two separate living units that share
a common wall and roof. .
"MF" means a condominium unit or apartment
unit.
d. When Payable.
The Impact Fee shall be paid in cash not later than
immediately prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
The City Council shall review the amount of the
Impact Fee annually or from time to time. The City
Council may, at such reviews, adjust the amount of
this Impact Fee as necessary to assure construction
and operation of the Facilities. The reasons for
whiçh adjustments may be made include, but are not
limited to, the following: changes in the costs of
the Facilities as may be reflected by such index as
the Council deems appropriate, such as the
Engineering-News Record Construction Cost Index
(ENR-CCI); changes in the type, size, location or
cost of the Facilities to be financed by the Impact
Fee; changes in land use in the City's General
Plan; other sound engineering, financing and
planning information. Adjustments to the above
6
~;¿~A-?
·
Impact Fee may be made by resolution amending the
Master Fee Schedule.
SECTION 12. Authority for Accounting and Expenditures.
The proceeds collected from the imposition of the Impact Fee
shall be deposited into a public facility financing fund
("Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5 Pedestrian Bridge Development
Impact Fee Fund", or alternatively herein "Fund") which is
hereby created and shall be expended only for the purposes set
forth in this ordinance.
The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various
accounts within the Fund for the Facilities identified in this
ordinance and to periodically make expenditures from the Fund
for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the
facilities phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by
the City Council.
SECTION 13. Findings. -
The city Council hereby finds the following:
A. The establishment of the Impact Fee is necessary to
protect the public safety and welfare and to ensure the
effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
B. The Impact Fee is necessary to ensure that funds will
be available for the construction of the Facilities concurrent
with the need for these Facilities and to ensure certainty in
the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public
facilities.
C. The amount of the fee levied by this ordinance does
not exceed the estimated cost of providing the Facilities for
which the fee is collected.
D. New development projects within the Territory will
generate a significant amount of pedestrian traffic that
current pedestrian facilities can not service, therefore
construction of the Facilities will be needed to service new
development projects.
SECTION 14. Impact Fee Additional to other Fees and Charges.
The Impact Fee established by this section is in addition to
the requirements imposed by other City laws, policies or
regulations relating to the construction or the financing of
7
µ-? ,2J/;-?
------. --------.._._.__._--~"--_.~._-_._--_.__.- "---
the construction of public improvements within subdivisions or
developments.
SECTION 15. Mandatory Construction of a Portion of the
Facilities; Duty to Tender Reimbursement Offer.
Whenever a developer is required as a condition of approval of
a development permit to construct or cause the construction of
the Facilities or a portion thereof, the City may require the
developer to install the Facilities according to design
specifications approved by the City and in the size or
capacity necessary to accommodate estimated pedestrian traffic
as indicated in the Report and subsequent amendments. If such
a requirement is imposed, the city shall offer, at the City's
option, to reimburse the developer from the Fund either in
cash or over time as Fees are collected, or give a credit
against the Impact Fee levied by this Ordinance or some
combination thereof, in the amount of· the costs incurred by
the developer that exceeds their contribution to such
Facilities as required by this Ordinance, for the design and
construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost
of that particular Facility as included in the calculation and
updating of the Impact Fee. The City may update the Impact
Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior to making such
offer. This duty to offer to give credit or reimbursement
shall be independent of the developer's obligation to pay the
Impact Fee.
SECTION 16. Voluntary Construction of a Portion of the
Facilities; Duty of City to Tender Reimbursement Offer.
If a developer is willing and agrees in writing to design and
construct a portion of the Facilities in conjunction with the
prosecution of a development project within the Territory, the
City may, as part of a written agreement, reimburse the
developer from the Fund either in cash or over time as Fees
are collected, or give a credit against the Impact Fee levied
by this Ordinance or some combination thereof, in the amount
of the costs incurred by the developer that exceeds their
contribution to such Facilities as required by this Ordinance,
for the design and construction of the Facility not to exceed
the estimated cost of that particular Facility as included in
the calculation and updating of the Impact Fee and in an
amount agreed to in advance of their expenditure in writing by
the City. The City may update the Impact Fee calculation as
city deems appropriate prior to making such offer. This duty
to extend credits or offer reimbursement shall be independent
of the developer's obligation to pay the Impact Fee.
SECTION 17. Procedure for Entitlement to Reimbursement Offer.
8
~ c2S--/l ~r
.
.
The City's duty to extend a reimbursement offer to a developer
pursuant to Section 15 or 16 above shall be conditioned on the
developer complying with the terms and conditions of this
section:
a. Written authorization shall be requested by the
developer from the City and issued by the City
Council by written resolution before developer may
incur any costs eligible for reimbursement relating
to the construction of the Facilities, excluding
any work attributable to a specific subdivision
project.
b. The request for authorization shall contain the
following information, and such other information
as may from time to time be requested by the City:
(1) Detailed descriptions of the work to be
conducted by the developer with the
preliminary cost estimate.
c. If the Council grants authorization, it shall be by
written agreement with the Developer, and on the
following conditions among such other conditions as
the Council may from time to time impose:
(1) Developer shall prepare all plans arid
specifications and submit same to the city for
approval;
(2) Developer shall secure and dedicate any
right-of-way required for the improvement
work;
(3) Developer shall secure all required permits
and environmental clearances necessary for
construction of the improvements;
(4) Developer shall provide performance bonds in a
form and amount, and with a surety
satisfactory to the City;
(S) Developer shall pay all City fees and costs.
(6) The City shall be held harmless and
indemnified, and upon demand by the city,
defended by the developer for any of the costs
and liabilities associated with the
improvements.
(7) The developer shall advance all necessary
funds for the improvements, including design
9
~ »/7 ~7
--_._..._~-------
. .-.....--.---.-.--.----.-.-.---------
and construction. The City will not be
responsible for any of the costs of
constructing the facilities.
(8) The developer shall secure at least three (3 )
qualified bids for work to be done. The
construction contract shall be granted to the
lowest qualified bidder. Any claims for
additional payment for extra work or charges
during construction shall be justified and
shall be documented to the satisfaction of the
Director of Public Works.
(9) The developer shall provide a detailed cost
estimate which itemizes those costs of the
construction attributable to the improvements.
Soils Engineering shall be limited to 7.5% of
the project cost, civil Engineering shall be
limited to 7.5% of the hard cost and landscape
architecture shall be limited to 2% of the
landscaping cost. The estimate is preliminary
and subject to final determination by the
Director of Public Works upon completion of
the Public Facility Project.
(10) The agreement may provide that upon
determination of satisfactory incremental
completion of the public facility project, as
approved and certified by the Director of
Public Works, the City may pay the developer
progress payments in an amount not to exceed
75 percent of the estimated cost of the
construction completed to the time of the
progress payment but shall provide in such
case for the retention of 25% of such costs
until issuance by the City of a Notice of
Completion.
(11) The agreement may provide that any funds owed
to the developer as reimbursements may be
applied to the developer's obligations to pay
the Impact Fee for building permits to be
applied for in the future.
(12) When all work has been completed to the
satisfaction of the City, the developer shall
submit verification of payments made for the
construction of the project to the City. The
Director of Public Works shall make the final
determination on expenditures which are
eligible for reimbursement.
10
~ .,2~/) -/¡/
·
(13) After final determination of expenditures
eligible for reimbursement has been made by
the Public works Director, the parties may
agree to offset the developer's duty to pay
Impact Fees required by this ordinance against
the city's duty to reimburse the developer.
(14) After offset, if any funds are due the
developer under this section, the city may at
its option, reimburse the developer from the
Fund either in cash or over time as Fees are
collected, or give a credit against the Impact
Fee levied by this Ordinance or some
combination thereof, in the amount of the
costs incurred by the developer that exceeds
their required contribution to such Facilities
as required by this ordinance, for the design
and construction of the Facility not to exceed
the estimated cost of that particular Facility
as included in the calculation and updating of
the Impact Fee and in an amount agreed to in
advance of their expenditure in writing by the
City.
(15) A developer may transfer a credit against the
Impact Fee to another developer with the
written approval of the Director of Public
Works in the Director's sole discretion.
SECTION 18. Procedure for Fee Modification.
Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses
proposed for a development project, contends that application
of the Impact Fee imposed by this ordinance is
unconstitutional or unrelated to mitigation of the burdens of
the development, may apply to the City Council for a waiver or
modification of the Impact Fee or the manner in which it is
calculated. The application shall be made in writing and
filed with the City Clerk not later than ten (10) days after
notice is given of the public hearing on the development
permit application for the project, or if no development
permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building
permit application. The application shall state in detail the
factual basis' for the claim of waiver or modification, and
shall provide an engineering and accounting report showing the
overall impact on the DIF and the ability of the City to
complete construction of the Facilities by making the
modification requested by the applicant. The city Council
shall make reasonable efforts to consider the application
within sixty (60) days after its filing. The decision of the
City Council shall be final. The procedure provided by this
section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law
11
~/ 23/l -//
---.--..---..- __._..._n__···.___. --..-......- ..--.-... ___ _n_'___'__'~"'__~"" .._ .__._,____._._____ ....,,-.-.------- -----------.-----
·
for protection or challenging the Impact Fee imposed by this
ordinance.
SECTION 19. Fee Applicable to Public Agencies.
Development projects by public agencies, including schools,
shall not be exempt from the provisions of the Impact Fee.
SECTION 20. Assessment District.
If any assessment, community facilities district or special
taxing district is established to design, construct and pay
for any or all of the Facilities ("Work Alternatively
Financed") , the owner or developer of a project may apply to
the City Council for reimbursement from the Fund or a credit
in an amount equal to that portion of the cost included in the
calculation of the Impact Fee attributable to the Work
Alternatively Financed. In this regard, the amount of the
reimbursement shall be based on the costs included in the
Report, as amended from time to time, and therefore, will not
include any portion of the financing costs associated with the
formation of the assessment or other special taxing district.
-
SECTION 21. Expiration of this Ordinance.
This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect when
the City Council determines that the amount of Impact Fees
which have been collected reaches an amount equal to the cost
of the Facilities.
SECTION 22. Time Limit for Judicial Action.
Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set
aside, void or annul this ordinance shall be brought within
the time period as established by Government Code Section
66022 after the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 23. Other Not Previously Defined Terms.
For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or
phrases shall be construed as defined in this Section, unless
from the context it appears that a different meaning is
intended.
(a) "Building Permit" means a permit required by and
issued pursuant to the Uniform Building Code as
adopted by reference by this City.
(b) "Developer" means the owner or developer of a
development.
12
~ ;¿_? /J ~)2
(c) "Development Permit" means any discretionary
permit, entitlement or approval for a development
project issued under any zoning or subdivision
ordinance of the City.
(d) "pevelopment Project" or "Development" means any
activity described in Section 66000 of the State
Government Code.
(e) "Single Family Attached Dwelling" means a single
family dwelling attached to another single family
dwelling, with each dwelling on its own lot.
SECTION 24. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall become effective sixty (60) days after
its second reading and adoption.
Presented by Approved as to form by
~~u.¿
John P. Lippitt Joh . Kaheny ~
Director of Public Works city Attorney
H;\Home\Attorney\PED3
13
~ ~~/;J
\" '
.,--.-, ------.,., ...~_._---~---~.._._."---"_.__._,-,~.,._, - ------..--------
·
RESOLUTION NO. /'9-2 ~ J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
REPORT
WHEREAS, the "City of Chula Vista Pedestrian Bridge
Development Impact Fee Report" dated November 6, 1998 was prepared
by the consulting firm Development Planning & Financing Group; and
WHEREAS, said Report provides the criteria and
methodology followed in determining the Development Impact Fee; and
WHEREAS, said Report incorporates the "Pedestrian Bridge
Planning Study" dated March 18, 1998, prepared by simon Wong
Engineering, providing a preliminary design and cost estimate of
the proposed bridges; and
WHEREAS, the total cost of the pedestrian Bridges DIF
program is estimated to be $2,343,000; and
WHEREAS, the land uses were translated in Equivalent
Dwelling Units (EDUs) using the "people per household factor" for
parkland dedication set forth in Chapter 17.10 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby adopt the City of Chula Vista
Pedestrian Bridge Development Impact Fee Report dated November 6,
1998 prepared by Development Planning & Financing Group, a copy of
which shall be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of ~~~~torney
Public Works
Þff'l »ß -- /
.___._.._____+._. ___ .__._._.______.".__ ___.__~. _ ___'__"_.m._.'__'_.._.'_.___._ _.____...,__,__~__
COQNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ;2 ~
. Ite~
Meeting Date )~)Ø f
ITEM TITLE: A. Resolution /93t1tlofthe City Council of the City ofChula Vis ,
California, Amending the City of Chula Vista Statement of Goals and
Policies Regarding the Establishment Community Facilities Districts.
B. Resolution /9 J t/ I of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, approving the AcquisitionlFinancing Agreement with
McMillin Otay Ranch for Community Facilities District No.97-3
(McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One)
C. Resolution 193tJ~ of the City Council of the City ofChula Vista,
California, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of Community
Facilities District No.97 -3 (McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One) declaring
the results of a special election in such Community Facilities District.
D. Ordinance ;}.. '/ t. Yof the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of Community
Facilities District No.97-3 (McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One) authorizing
the levy of a special tax in such Community Facilities District.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Wor~ ~
REVIEWED BV, C;~ MM'", k~ _1 (4I5t>. v...., Va_NoX)
On November 24, 1998, the City Council held e public hearing for the fonnation of Community
Facilities District No. 97-3. This district will fund the construction of backbone infrastructure within the
McMillin Otay Ranch SPA I project. Tonight's Council action will certify the results of a special election
where the qualified electors of the District were asked whether the levy of this special tax should be
authorized. In addition, Council will be considering an amendment to the current CFD Policy which
requires that a project be fully completed and accepted by the City prior to acquisition. The amended
policy will allow for the acquisition of complete discrete components of a project. Said amended policy
is incorporated in the proposed amendment to the AcquisitionlFinancing Agreement which establishes
the procedure for acquiring the improvements from the developer.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
I) Approve the Amended CFD Policy
2) Approve the resolution approving the fonn of the AcquisitionlFinancing
Agreement with the McMillin Company for the acquisition of facilities
corn;tructed by Community Facilities District No. 97-3
3) Approve the resolution declaring the election results for CFD No. 97-3, and
4) Introduce for first reading of the ordinance authorizing the levy of a special tax
in Community Facilities District No. 97-3
BOARDSlCOMMlSSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
At the COll!1lJiI Meeting of November 24, J 998, the City Council held the public hearing for the fonnation
of Community Facility District No. 97-3. This public hearing was held pursuant to the provisions of the
~ :26 ~ /
__M'_'___"_'~'___'_'_+_~__"_ -- +-.-.---.+.+----"..---- ---. ..----.-..--.-- -_._..._----~,._---~-~~._-----_..,.._-_.._.,--
Page 2, Item_
Meetin!,: Date 12/8/98
"Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982". The City Council also approved the resolutions
establishing CFD No. 97-3, and authorized the submittal of the tax levy to the qualified electors.
District Boundaries
Exhibit I presents the b9undaries 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, ballfields, etc.).
The Improvements
Preliminary estimates show that the district would support a total bond indebtedness of approximately
$10.7 million. A bond sale amount of $10.7 million will fmance approximately $9 million in
facilities (i.e. grading, landscaping, streets, utilities, drainage, sewer, pedestrian bridges, etc). The
balance will provide for a reserve fund, capitalized interest and pay district fonnation and bond
issuance costs.
The developer is proposing the fmancing of backbone streets and associated improvements (i.e.,
grading, sewer, streets, dry utilities), a pedestrian bridge, and backbone utilities described below.
CFD Policy requires a detennination of the priority for the acquisition of improvements by a CFD. Staff
prioritized the developer's list of projects as follows. The developer has not objected to said priority list. .
-
Priority Facilitv
I A portion of Olympic Parkway (offsite), from Paseo Ranchero to Brandywine A venue
up to $4.7 million
2 La Media Road, from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street
2 East Palomar Street west of Santa Cora Avenue
2 Santa Cora Avenue north of East Palomar Street and a sewer trunk line extending to the
north
3 Santa Cora A venue south of East Palomar Street
3 East Palomar Street, east of Santa Cora Avenue
4 La Media Road, from East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway
4 Olympic Parkway (onsite), within the subdivision boundaries
4 Pedestrian bridge over La Media Road
Priority I is assigned to offsite Olympic Parkway which is a key facility for developing the Eastern
Territories of the City. The AcquisitionlFinancing Agreement allocates $4.7 million of the bond proceeds
for the construction of offsite Olympic Parkway. This is the estimated fair share of McMillin for
constructing this facility. Priority 2 has been assigned to those improvements necessary for developing
Phase J of the Otay Ranch McMillin project (currently under construction). Priority 3 and 4 projects
would serve future phases of the subdivision. Staff recommends Council approval of the proposed
ranking. The AcquisitionlFinancing Agreement will include the list offacilities to be financed by CFD
97-3 and assigned priority.
The location of the proposed facilities is presented in Exhibit I. The total improvements suggested by
McMillin for inclusion in the district would cost around $14.0 million. As mentioned before, it is
estimated that only $9 million will be able to be funded by the CFD. On October 20, 1998, Council
adopted the "Resolution Declaring Intention to Issue Bonds" approving a maximum bond authorization
of $13.5 million. The actual amount to be financed by CFD 97-3 would be detennined after bond sale
, when the final interest rate on the bonds and final value-to-lien ratios are known. Ultimately, as
.. sUbdivision exactions, the developer will finance improvements that this CFD district cannot finance.
~,,;¿t ~-2
.
Page 3, Item_
Meetinc Date 12/8/98
Maximum Taxes (
The rate of special tax t'òì- a variety of dwellings is presented below. In accordance with CFD Policy,
these taxes are not subject to escalation.
f j
· Single Family Detached (1920 SF) $752
· Single Family D¿fached (1200 SF) $470
· Attached (I I 00 SF) $431
· Multi Family (1900 SF) $392
· Commercial/ Industrial ( I Acre) $4,000
· Community PurpBse Facility (J Acre) $1,000
· Vacant Land (f Were) $7,954
These taxes may be redUled at the close of escrow for any residential unit if the "2% maximum tax"
criteria is not met. In thürcase, the developerlbuilder will be required to provide cash to buy down the
taxes and/or assessments· 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. )(:
ver.
Election Results -r.::ql
On December I, I 9981:hè1special election was held at the City Clerk's office. In accordance with the -
Mello-Roos Act, since no registered voters were identified by the Registrar of Voters within the CFD,
the election was held by the property owners. Each property owner having one vote for each acre or
portion of an acre that he or she owns within the CFD. Staff has tallied the ballots cast in this special
election with the results showing 97 % of the votes cast in favor oflevying the proposed special tax. The
Mello-Roos Act provides that if two thirds (2/3) of the votes are in favor, the City Council may proceed
to levy the special tax.
Resolutions
By approving the proposed resolutions, Council will be accomplishing the following:
The "Resolution aDDrovinl! the amended CFD Policv" will allow for the acquisition of complete discrete
components of a Project. Tonight, Council is also considering a similar amendment to the Assessment
District Policy. Current Policy (see Exhibit 2, page 5) requires that a "project" be fully completed and
accepted by the City prior to acquisition. Said Policy defines "project" as all the improvements within
a particular street or eaSéfuent including water, drainage, sewer, drainage, and utilities. The amended
policy (see Exhibit 2, ~ 5) establishes that Council may, at its sole discretion, approve a waiver or
deviation from the poli8;' in its consideration of approval of an AcquisitionlFinancing Agreemènt to
authorize the acquisitióftibf discrete components of a "project". Under the amended policy, portions
of a road that can starlll ~lone (grading & drainage, paving futilities, landscaping) may be acquired
separately. The amend~ policy also states that Council may condition the acquisition of said discrete
components as the CitfCouncil deems necessary to insure the financial integrity of the assessment
district. "gn
The developer conten¡ßfthat a reimbursement schedule based on discrete components would greatly
improve their construèfiòh cash flow. Staff considers that the proposed policy would provide enough
flexibility by I) leavinThllie final decision to Council on a case-by-case basis, and 2) allowing to impose
conditions on the acqui .Iñon of discrete components. Council approyal of the "acquisition by discrete
components" and ap~lœable conditions would be memorialized in the corresponding Acquisi-
tionlFinancing Agreerl\ëht.
~Xi1( M~J
p-:3
,.~.-.__.._..~~_._-"._~..,-_.. -'--~'--'-~--~----'-'- -..".--
Page 4, Item_
Meeting Date 12/8/98
The "Resolution Aoorovin~ the ACQuisition / Financinl! Al!I'eement" will approve the agreement
establishing the procedure for acquiring the improvements from the developer. The agreement has
provisions allowing acquisition by complete discrete components of a "project", similar to the proposal
for the adjacent AD 97-2. The agreement provides that the City may reimburse 75% of the total cost
of the drainage, paving, utilities, and landscaping improvements upon the determination by the City
Engineer that those improvements have been installed per approved pJans with required City inspections.
Those facilities may not be functional, at that time, and certain activities (i.e., testing, completion of
punch list, preparation of as-built drawings) may still be pending. The 25% final payment may be made
once all project within a phase are fully completed and accepted by the City (grading is the exception
where 100% rather than 75% is reimbursed at the time the City Engineer determines the grading and
drainage has been installed per plans).
The agreement also conditions the purchase of said discrete component to deveJoper's compliance with
all the applicable conditions and obligations imposed on the property within CFD 97-3 pursuant to the
land use entitlements approved by the City, including but not limited to, payment of all applicable fees,
dedication of right-of-ways or other property (i.e., parks, open space, etc.), payment of assessment
installments or special taxes, and construction of all applicable public improvements.
Staff has reviewed the proposed agreement and believes that I) the 25% payment retention, and 2) the
condition requiring compliance with approved land use entitlements will provide enough security to
guarantee completion of the improvements while insuring the financial heaJth of the district.
The City retained the firm of Brown, Diven, Hessel & Brewer as Bond Counsel for AD 97-2. They
already reviewed and approved the form of the proposed agreement.
The "Resolution Declarinl! the Election Results" is the formaJ action of the City Council approving the
results of the election to form CFD No 97-3.
The "Ordinance Authorizinl! the Levv of Soecial Taxes" is the formal action authorizing the levy of
special taxes as set forth in the Special Tax Formula previously approved by the City Council.
Future Actions
. The issuance of bonds is anticipated in March of 1999 and the acquisition of improvements
planned for the second quarter of 1999.
FISCAL IMP ACT: The developer will pay all costs and has deposited money to fund initial consultant
costs, and City costs in accordance with the approved Reimbursement Agreement. The City will receive
the benefit of the full cost recovery for staff time involved in district formation (estimated at $25,000)
and administration activities. Staff anticipates that most of the CFD 97-3 administration will be
contracted out. The CFD administration cost is estimated at $125,000 annually during buildout and
$75,000 annually thereafter.
In accordance with the CFD Policy, as consideration for the City's agreement to use the City's bonding
capacity to provide the financing mechanism for the construction of the proposed improvements, the
developer will pay one percent (I %) of the total bond authorization prior to bond sale.
Exhibit I CFD Boundary
2 Current Policy & Proposed Changes to CFD
Dccemberl,1998 ~ .2/-y
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA ICERT97·3.LDT
RESOLUTION NO. /5'-1 tlJ
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATEMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES REGARDING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
. DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, current policy requires that a "proj ect" be
fully completed and accepted by the City prior to acquisition; and
WHEREAS, said policy defines "project" as all the
improvements within a particular street or easement including
water, drainage, sewer, drainage, and utilities; and
WHEREAS, it is now recommended that the policy be
amended to establish that Council may, at its sole discretion,
approve a waiver or deviation from the policy in its consideration
of' approval of an Acquisition/Financing Agreement to authorize the
acquisition of discrete components of a "project"; and
WHEREAS, under the amended policy, portions of a road
that can stand alone (grading and drainage, paving/utilities,
landscaping) may be acquired separately; and
WHEREAS, the amended policy also states that Council may
condition the acquisition of said discrete components as the City
Council deems necessary to insure the financial integrity of the
assessment districts; and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy would provide enough
flexibility by (1) leaving the final decision to council on a case-
by~case basis and (2) allowing the imposition of conditions on the
aC9uisition of discrete components.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby amend the City of Chula vista Goals
and Policies regarding the Establishment of Community Facilities
Districts, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as
if set forth in full.
Presented by Approved as to form by
~ ìVt.t~~.
John P. Lippitt, Director of John M. Kaheny, City
Public Works Attorney
H:\home\lorraine\re\goals.973
pÞ}--I ~/J //
__,._._.__._. ___".____,._ _ ___._u . _._ ._.'.. _ .._...'_0.____..___._ _.... _.__,___.,._,.."...."..._.__._._____._.._~__.__..,.__.._.._......_...____._._________.____". "__
RESOLUTION NO. Iq~ol
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FORM OF AN ACQUISITION/FINANCING
AGREEMENT PERTAINING TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.
97-3 (McMILLIN OTAY RANCH SPA ONE)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (the
"City Council "), has previously declared its intention and held and conducted proceedings relating
to the levy of special taxes and the issuance of bonds in a community facilities district to finance
the acquisition of certain public improvements, as authorized pursuant to the terms and provisions
of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 ", being Chapter 2.5. Part 1, Division 2,
Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"), said Community FaciJities
District designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 97-3 (McMILLIN OTAY
RANCH SPA ONE) (the "District"); and,
WHEREAS, the District was formed for the purpose of financing the acquisition of such
public improvements from McMillin Otay Ranch, LLC, the master developer of the property
within the District (the "Developer"); and,
WHEREAS, the City and the Developer have negotiated the terms and conditions pursuant
to which the pubJic improvements are to be constructed by the Developer and acquired by the City
and bonds are to be issued to finance the acquisition of such public improvements and such terms
and conditions have been memorialized in an Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and between
the City and the Developer (the" Acquisition/Financing Agreement "), the form of which has been
presented to this City Council for its consideration and approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. The form of Acquisition/Financing Agreement, herewith submitted, is approved
substantially in the form submitted. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the final form of
such agreement on behalf of the City. The City Manager, subject to the review of the City
Attorney and Bond CounseJ, is authorized to approve changes in such agreement deemed to be
in'the best interests of the City, approval of such changes to be evidenced by the execution of such
agreement.
PREPARED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
John P. Lippitt Jo~n~ ~
Director of Public Works City Attorney
J¿ß - /
ACQUISITIONIFINANCING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this _ day of J 998, by and
between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city duly organized and validly existing under the
Constitution and laws of the State of California, (the "City") acting for and on behalf of itself and~
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 97-3 (OT A Y RANCH McMILLIN SPA ONE), and
McMILLIN OTA Y RANCH, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as successor to
McMILLIN - D.A. AMERICA OT A Y RANCH L.L.c. (the "Developer").
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that the City consider the formation of a
community facilities district under the terms and conditions of the "Mello-Roos Community
Facilities Act of 1982," as amended (Govemment Code Section 53311 and following) (the "Act"),
for the acquisition of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurtenant
work within the jurisdictional limits of said City, said community facilities district known and
designated as COMMUNITY F ACIUTIES DISTRICT NO. 97-3 (OT A Y RANCH McMILLIN
SPA ONE) (the "Community Facilities District"); and,
WHEREAS, Developer, in order to proceed in a timely way with development of its property
within Otay Ranch SPA One (the "Development"), desires to construct certain public improvements
that are to be owned, operated and maintained by the City and that are proposed to be funded, in
whole or in part, through the Community Facilities District, namely, the public improvements as set
forth and described in the attached, referenced and incorporated Exhibit "A" (each, a "Project"); and,
WHEREAS, the Projects have been grouped in several phases as described in Exhibit "A"
(each, a "Phase") and an estimate of the cost of the Projects is set forth in Exhibit "B" hereto; and,
WHEREAS, discrete components (the "Improvements") have been identified for each Project
which are described in Exhibit "A."; and,
WHEREAS, the City and Developer are in agreement that the Projects may be acquired by
the City through the Community Facilities District at prices and increments determined pursuant to
the provisions of this Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Agreement that Developer shall, upon the formation of
the Community Facilities District, the authorization for the levy of special taxes within the
Community Facilities District and the sale of bonds by the Community Facilities District, be entitled
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement to be paid for the Projects at the prices as determined
by the City pursuant to this Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, the City is willing to acquire the Projects from Developer subject to the
requirements of the Act, the City of Chula Vista Statement of Goals and Policies Regarding the
Establishment of Community Facilities Districts adopted by the City Council(the "Goals and
12-Q4~98 9009-00003
S:lt72\98110003.AG5 1
;¿¿ß~c2
Policies") and this Agreement, and Developer is desirous that the City acquire such Projects, and at
this time any of such Projects currently existing are owned by Developer.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED between the respective parties as follows:
SECTION J. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. Plans and Specifications. All plans, specifications and bid documents for the
Projects (the "Plans and Specifications") shall be prepared by the Developer at the Developer's
initial expense, subject to City approval. The costs of acquisition of such Improvements shall
include costs ofthe preparation of the Plans and Specifications and all related documentation as
set forth in Section 7 below.
Developer shall not award bids for construction, commence construction or cause
commencement of construction of a Project until the Plans and Specifications for such Project have
been approved by the City.
SECTION 3. Construction ofImprovements. Developer covenants and agrees that each Project
to be acquired from Developer pursuant to this Agreement shall be constructed
(a) in substantial compliance with the approved Plans and Specifications for such
Project;
(b) in a good and workmanlike manner by well-trained adequately supervised workers;
(c) in strict compliance with all governmental and quasi-governmental rules, regulations,
laws, building codes and all requirements of Developer's insurers and lenders;
(d) free of any design flaws and defects; and
(e) in compliance with the requirements of this Section 3.
With respect to Improvements completed prior to adoption of the resolution offonnation of
the Community Facilities District (which are identified in Exhibit A), Developer shall have solicited
at least three (3) bids for the construction of such Improvements and awarded the bid to the lowest
responsible bidder. With respectto Improvements to be completed after adoption of such resolution,
Developer shall comply with the requirements of the attached, referenced and incorporated
Exhibit C.
SECTJON 4. Inspection and Acceptance of the Improvements. The construction activities
relating to the Improvements shall be subject at all reasonable times to inspection by authorized
representatives of City. Once an entire Improvement to be acquired by City is substantially
12.()4-98 9009-00003 2
S,1172198110003.AG5
.lie [J - 3
completed in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications (including any change orders
reasonably approved by City), then such Jmprovement shall be eligible for acceptance by the City
for purposes of paying the Base Increment of the Purchase Price (as defined in Section 7 below) for
such Jmprovement.
Prior to acceptance of any Project by City for purposes of paying the Retained Increment (as-·
defined in Section 7 below) of the Purchase Price, the Developer shall provide to City Engineer of
the City, or his designee (the "City Engineer"), the documentation set forth in Section 7( c )(ii) below
and obtain approval of as-built drawings in accordance with the process described below in this
Section 4. The engineer of record for the Project ("Engineer of Record") shall file fonn PW-E-I06
(Request for Release of Bonds) with the City Engineer. Within 20 working days of such filing, the
field inspector of the City ("Field Inspector") shall issue and transmit to the Engineer of Record a
letter requesting (i) as-built drawings and soils reports and (ii) a punchlist. Within 20 working days
of receipt of the Field Inspector's letter, the Engineer of Record shall prepare redline as-built
drawings and submit them to the Field Jnspector and the Developer shall complete the punchlist
items. Within 10 working days of the Engineer of Record's submittal, the Field Inspector shall
review the redline as-built drawings and provide comments. The Engineer of Record shall revise
the redline as-built drawings per the Field Jnspector's comments and resubmit within 10 working
days. The Field Inspector shall make his final review within 5 working days of the Engineer of
Record's resubmittal and notify the Engineer of Record to prepare mylar as-built drawings and a
microfiche copy and submit both to the Public Works Director or his designee and the Developer
shall complete the punchlist items. The City and Developer shall make best efforts to perfonn
within the time periods described above. The inability of City or Developer to perfonn within each
time period, notwithstanding its best efforts, shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement.
SECTION 5. Warranty ofImprovements. Prior to payment of the Retained Increment of the
Purchase Price for an Improvement, the Developer shall be responsible for maintaining the
Improvement at the Developer's expense. The Developer shall be obligated for a period of twelve
(12) months after the date City accepts an Improvement for purposes of paying the Retained
Jncrement to repair or replace any defects or failures resulting from the work of Developer, its
contractors or agents. Upon the expiration of such twelve (12) month period, Developer shall assign
to City and the Community Facilities District its rights in and to any warranties, guarantees or other
evidence of contingent obligations of third persons with respect to such Improvement. At the time
City accepts an Improvement and as a condition precedent to the payment of the Retained Increment
(as defined in Section 7 below) of the Purchase Price, Developer shall post a maintenance bond in
a fonn reasonably approved by the City, cause a maintenance bond to be posted, or assign
Developer's rights under such a bond naming City and/or the Community Facilities District as
beneficiary in an amount equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the Purchase Price of the Improvement
in order to secure Developer's obligations pursuant to this Section. Upon posting of such
maintenance bond, the City shall release any performance, labor and material bonds for such
Improvement.
12-04-98 9009-00003
S,\I72\981 t(JOO3.AG5 3
;2¿ß-f
SECTION 6. Notice of Completion and Lien Releases. Developer shall notify the City Engineer
in writing upon completion of each of the Improvements to be acquired hereunder. Upon completion
of a Project, Developer shall notify the City Engineer in writing of such completion and shall prepare
and execute a Notice of Completion for such Project in the form prescribed by Section 3093 of the
California Civil Code and shall record such notice in the Official Records of the County of San-
Diego. Developer shall cause its contractors to provide unconditional lien releases for such Projecf
or all Improvements thereof in accordance with Section 3262 of the Civil Code. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, City may waive the requirement for a Notice of Completion and lien releases if City
determines that as of the date of payment of the Retained Increment of the Purchase Price for an
Improvement, title to such Jmprovement or portion thereof satisfies the requirements for Acceptable
Title (as hereinafter defined).
SECTION 7. Payment of Purchase Price.
(a) Amount of Purchase Price. The amount to be paid by City for the Jmprovements to
be acquired from Developer (the "Purchase Price") shall, as to each such
Improvement, (i) be determined by City in accordance with the provisions of this
Section 7, (ii) equal the lesser of the cost or the value thereof, (iii) include the
reasonable cost orvalue of eligible appurtenant public facilities, (iv) include the costs .
ofthe title insurance policy described in Section 9 (a), and (v) include all other costs
of construction and incidental costs eligible under the Act and the Goals and Policies
as a part of the cost of the Improvements, including the following:
(i) Usual and customary design and engineering costs not to exceed the following
percentages:
a. Civil engineering - 7.5% of the cost of the construction of the
Jmprovement for which the service was performed.
b. Soils engineering - 15% of the cost of the grading for the
Improvement.
c. Landscape architecture - 10% of the cost of applicable landscaping
and irrigation relating to the Improvement.
d. Survey and construction staking - 2% of the combined cost of the
construction cost and grading for the Jmprovement.
e. Utility engineering/coordination - 3% of the cost of the construction
of the applicable traffic signal.
12-04-98 9009-00003 4
S:\I72\98110003.AG5
c1tß~3
"--.----..-
(ii) Construction administration and supervision not to exceed, in aggregate,
1.75% of the total construction cost of the Improvement.
(iii) Special engineering studies related to "collector" or "transmission" facilities
as reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director.
(iv) Plan check and inspection fees (less any refunds).
(v) Capacity or connection fees related solely to the Improvement.
(vi) Costs of acquisition of off-site rights-of-way and/or easements including the
following:
a. Appraisal and title insurance costs.
b. Costs of preparing acquisition plats.
c. The appraised value or actual cost of right-of-way or easement,
whichever is less.
d. Legal fees and costs related to eminent domain proceedings approved
by the City Attorney.
(vii) Costs of environmental review, permitting and mitigation related to the
Jmprovement.
In no event shall the cost or value ofthe construction ofthe Improvements be deemed to exceed the
construction contract prices set forth in the contracts and change orders approved by City.
(b) Incremental Pavment of Purchase Price. The Purchase Price for an Improvement
shall be payable in not to exceed two increments: the "Base Increment" which shall
be an amount not to exceed 75% of the Purchase Price for such Improvement and the
"Retained Increment" which shall be an amount not to exceed the remaining, unpaid
portion of the Purchase Price for such Improvement determined pursuant to the
provisions of (a) above.
(c) Requisition for Incremental Pavment of Purchase Price.
(i) Base Jncrement. The Developer may submit a written request to the City
Engineer for the payment of the Base Jncrement for an Improvement upon the substantial completion
of the construction of such Improvement in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, 100% of the Purchase Price of any grading Improvement shall be
paid upon substantial completion of such work. The criteria for determining "substantial
12-04-98 9009-00003
So\172\98110003.AG5 5
.1to-¿,
.~~-----
completion" of each Improvement is described in Exhibit A and shall mean generally that
construction, or work with respect to the Improvement has progressed to the point where it is
sufficiently complete so that the Improvement can be utilized for the purpose for which it was
intended. Each Base Increment payment request must be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D-I
and conform to the requirements of (d) below.
_.
(ii) Retained Increment. The Developer may submit a written request to the City
Engineer for the payment of the Retained Increment for an Improvement upon the completion of all
of the Improvements within a Project and all Projects within the same Phase in accordance with the
approved Plans and Specifications. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City Engineer may approve
the payment of the Retained Increment for an Improvement upon completion ofthe Improvements
within a Project within Phases 3 or 4 prior to completion of all Projects within the same Phase. Such
Retained Increment payment request must be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D-2 and conform
to the requirements of (d) below and, unless previously provided to the City, must be accompanied
by (I) as-built drawings or other equivalent plans and specifications for such Improvement in a form
reasonably acceptable to the City, (2) evidence that the Developer has posted a maintenance bond
for such Improvement as required by Section 5 hereinabove, and (3) evidence of the satisfaction of
the requirements of Section 9, hereinbelow directly related to such Improvement.
(d) Documentation. Any payment request submitted by Developer shall be properly
executed and shall include all supporting documents referred to in the payment
request, including, (i) as a condition precedent to payment of the Retained Increment,
evidence acceptable to the City Attorney of the City (the "City Attorney") that the
Developer's contractors have provided unconditional lien releases for the
Improvement or portion thereof to be acquired and (ii) as a condition precedent to
payment of the Base Increment, evidence acceptable to the City Attorney that the
Developer's contractors have provided conditional lien releases in an amount not less
than the Base Increment.
(e) Review ofPavment Request. The City Engineer shall review each payment request.
If the City Engineer finds that any such payment request is incomplete, improper or
otherwise not suitable for approval, the City Engineer shall inform Developer in
writing within twenty (20) working days after receipt thereof, the reasons for his
finding. Developer shall have the right to respond to this finding by submitting
further documentation and/or to resubmit the payment request within thirty (30) days
after receipt of the denial. A resubmittal shall be deemed a new payment request for
purposes of this Section. The City Engineer shall review any resubmitted payment
request and inform Developer of his approval or denial of it in accordance with this
Section within ten (10) working days after receipt of the resubmission. Costs
incurred under a construction contract entered into pursuant to the requirements of
this Agreement and pursuant to change orders approved by City shall be deemed to
be reasonable. The City Engineer shall, after the sale of Bonds (defined in Section
12-04-98 9009-00003 6
S,1172198110003.AG5
J¿ß-?
J 8 below) pursuant to Section 18 and the receipt of the proceeds of such Bonds
which are intended to be used to acquire the Improvements and after his or her
approval of a payment request, immediately forward a request to the Finance Director
of the City notifying the Finance Director of his or her approval of the payment
request and requesting that such payment be made to the appropriate payee. The
Finance Director shall process any such request of the City Engineer pursuant to thê·
applicable procedures of the Finance Department and shall make or authorize such
payment pursuant to such procedures and subsection (f) below.
(f) Pavment. The increment of the Purchase Price for each Improvement shall be paid
to Developer within thirty (30) days after the date ofthe City Engineer's approval of
the payment request for any such increment; provided, however, no Retained
Increment may be paid earlier than thirty-five (35) days after the recording of a
Notice of Completion for the Improvement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
Purchase Price or any increment thereof shall not be due and payable to the
Developer except to the extent of available funds solely from the proceeds of the sale
of Bonds as provided in Section J 8 hereof, after all costs of fOnTIation of the
Community Facilities District and all costs of issuance of such Bonds have been paid
and deposits of accrued and capitalized interest to the redemption fund and the initial
deposit to the reserve fund have been made. Beyond the amount of such available
proceeds, the City shall have no obligation to pay for the Improvements
contemplated hereby.
In addition to the foregoing, the City shall have the right to withhold payment
of the Purchase Price or any increment thereof of any Improvement if (a) the
Developer is delinquent in the payment of any assessment installments or special
taxes levied by the City or a community facilities district established by the City on
properties then owned by the Developer within the Community Facilities District or
(b) the City Engineer reasonably detenTIines that the Developer is not then in
substantial compliance with all applicable conditions and obligations imposed upon
the Development pursuant to the land use entitlements approved by the City ofthe
Development, including but not limited to, payment of all applicable fees, dedication
of all applicable rights-of-way or other property and construction of all applicable
public improvements. The City Engineer shall provide written notice to the
Developer of the decision to withhold any such payment and shall specify the reason
for such decision. If the payment is withheld as a result of the delinquency in the
payment of assessment installments or special taxes, the notice shall identify the
delinquent parcels and the amount of such delinquency. If the payment is withheld
as a result of substantial non-compliance with a condition or obligation, the notice
shall specify such condition or obligation and what action will be necessary by the
Developer to substantially comply with such condition or obligation. Upon receipt
by the City Engineer of evidence reasonably satisfactory to the City Engineer of the
12-ü4-98 9009-00003 7
Soll7219RIIOOO3.AGS
c1t;ß-fr'
- --_..__.~._~_...-
payment of the delinquent special taxes or assessments or upon the determination by
the City Engineer that the Developer has substantially complied with the subject
condition or obligation, the City shall forthwith make any payment which has been
withheld pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph.
(g) Olvmpic Parkwav Improvements. The estimated fair share of the costs of
constructing Olympic Parkway offsite (Paseo Ranchero to Brandywine A venue) and
associated Poggi Canyon sewer improvements (the "Olympic Parkway Offsite
Improvements") allocable to the Development are included within the Improvements.
Except as provided below in this subsection (g), a portion of the available proceeds
of the Bonds not to exceed $4,742,742 (the "Reserved Portion") shall be reserved for
the Olympic Parkway Offsite Improvements and shall not be available for funding
the Purchase Price of any other Improvements. Upon the City's acceptance of the
Olympic Parkway Offsite Improvements, the lesser of (i) the Reserved Portion or (ii)
the fair share of the costs of the Olympic Parkway Offsite Improvements allocable
to the Development shall be disbursed as required to acquire the Olympic Parkway
Offsite Improvements. Any additional amount of the Reserved Portion shall then be
disbursed to pay all or any portion of the Purchase Price of other Improvements. The
Reserved Portion may be reduced from time to time upon Developer's request and
funds made available to fund the Purchase Price of other Improvements if and to the
extent the City Manager, or his designee (the "City Manager") reasonably determines
that the Community Facilities District estimated fair share of the cost of the Olympic
Parkway Offsite Improvements is less than the Reserved Portion. In addition, the
City shall release all or any portion of the Reserved Portion to fund the Purchase
Price of other Improvements if Developer provides a contract bond, letter of credit
or other form of security (the "Security") in a form and from a financial institution
approved by the City Manager and in the amount of the released funds securing
Developer's obligation to fund the amount of the released funds as required to
acquire the Olympic Parkway Offsite Improvements. The Security shall be drawn
on if and to the extent Developer fails to perform such obligation, shall be reduced
upon, and in the amount of each payment by Developer and shall be released in total
upon Developer's full satisfaction of such obligation.
The City and Developer anticipate entering into a separate agreement regarding, among other things,
the Olympic Parkway Offsite Improvements and the threshold requirements of the SPA One Public
Facilities Financing Plan dated September I, 1998 which shall take into account the provisions of
this Agreement with respect to the Reserved Portion.
SECTION 8. Audit. The authorized representatives of City shall have the right, upon two (2) days
prior written notice to Developer and during normal business hours, to review all books and records
of Developer pertaining to costs and expenses incurred by Developer in construction of the
Improvements.
12-ü4-98 9009-00003 8
So\t72\98110003.AG5
.1 t ß-9
SECTION 9. Ownership and Transfer ofImprovements. The conveyance of the Improvements
by Developer to City shall be in accordance with the following procedures:
(a) ImDrovements Constructed on Land not Owned bv Citv. As a condition to the-
payment of the Retained Jncrement of the Purchase Price, Developer shall cause añ"
irrevocable offer of dedication to be made to City or an outright grant of a fee interest
or easement interest as appropriate, in the sole discretion of the City of the
appropriate right, title and interest in and to the portion of the applicable property
related to the applicable Improvement, including any temporary construction or
access easements. Developer, whether or not it is the entity constructing the
Improvements, agrees to execute and deliver to the City the documents required to
complete the transfer of Acceptable Title. For purposes of this Agreement, the term
"Acceptable Title" shall mean title to the portion of the property to be conveyed free
and clear of all taxes, liens, encumbrances, assessments, easements, leases, whether
any such item is recorded or unrecorded, except those non-monetary encumbrances
and easements which are reasonably determined by the City not to interfere with the
intended use of the portion of the property. As a further condition to the payment of
the Retained Increment of the Purchase Price for any Improvement, Developer at its
sole cost and expense, subject to reimbursement pursuant to Section 7, shall cause
to be issued a policy oftitle insurance for such portion of the property in an amount
not to exceed the Purchase Price and in the form normally required by City in
connection with the dedication ofland for subdivision improvements and containing
such title endorsements as may be reasonably requested by City. City's final
acceptance of the portion of the property and the Improvements constructed thereon
shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed.
(b) ImDrovements Constructed on Land Owned bv City. If Developer is authorized to
construct an Improvement on land owned in fee by City or on land over which the
City owns an easement Developer shall obtain the necessary encroachment permits
to enter such land for purposes of constructing such Improvement. City shall
cooperate with Developer in issuing such encroachment permits. The Improvements
shall be inspected by City on an ongoing basis.
SECTION JO. Grading and Subdivision Improvement Bonds. Except as provided below,
Developer shall be required to post bonds or other security acceptable to the City to guarantee
completion of the Jmprovements in accordance with City's standard subdivision requirements and
conditions of approval of the Development (the "Conditions of Approval").
Performance and labor and material bonds for specific Improvements shall not be required
or may be released if: (I) such Jmprovements constitute a portion of the required subdivision
improvements, (2) Bond proceeds to construct or acquire such Improvements are available, and (3)
12-04-98 9()()9-00003 9
S,II72198110003.AG5
;2¿; ß-jO
the Improvements are to be constructed or acquired entirely with the proceeds of the Bonds.
Provided that conditions (I) and (2) are satisfied, if an Improvement is to be constructed or acquired
only in part with the proceeds of the Bonds, perfonnance and labor and material bonds shall not be
required for that portion of the Improvements to be so constructed or acquired except with respect
to the portion that will not be acquired or constructed with Bond proceeds. City will cooperate with·
Developer in the tennination or exoneration of any perfonnance and labor and material bonds·
assuring completion ofImprovements for which bonds have been sold.
SECTION II. Indemnification by Developer. Developer shall defend, indemnify and hold
hannless City, its officers, directors, employees and agents, and the Community Facilities District,
its officers, directors, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities,
damages, including court costs and reasonable attorneys, fees by reason of, or resulting from, or
arising out of the design, engineering and construction of the Improvements; provided that any
claims which relate to the Improvements shall be limited to those arising out of personal injury or
property damage caused by actions or omissions by Developer or Developer's employees, agents,
independent contractors or representatives which occurred during the period prior to the transfer of
title to the Improvements by City, whether or not a claim is filed prior to the date of acceptance of
the Improvements. Nothing in this Section I J shall limit in any manner the rights of the City and/or
the Community Facilities District against any of the architects, engineers, contractors or other
consultants employed by the Developer which has perfonned work in connection with construction
or financing of the Improvements.
Except as set forth in this Section I J, no provision of this Agreement shall in any way limit
the extent of the responsibility of Developer for payment of damages resulting from the operations
of the Developer, its agents, employees or contractors.
SECTION 12. Obligation of City. Neither the City nor the Community Facilities District has a legal
or financial obligation to construct or finance the actual construction of the Improvements. All costs
incurred for actual construction ofthe Improvements, including all incidentals thereto, shall be borne
by Developer. The obligations of the City are limited to the acquisition of the Improvements
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
SECTION 13. Failure by Developer to Construct Improvements. At any time that the
construction of the Improvements is not progressing within a reasonable time in accordance with the
Conditions of Approval or the Developer fails to demonstrate a continuing ability to complete the
construction of the Improvements in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, the City may give
written notice of such failure of perfonnance to the Developer. Developer shall have sixty (60) days
from the date of receipt of such notice to cure such failure of perfonnance by demonstrating to the
satisfaction of the City during such cure period reasonable progress in the construction of the
Jmpro\'ements and a continuing ability to complete the construction of the Jmprovements in
accordance with the Conditions of Approval. Should Developer fail to satisfactorily demonstrate
such reasonable progress or such continuing ability, this contract may be tenninated by the City by
12-04-98 9009-0000J 10
S:\I72\981 tOOOJ.AG5
;;1>[5-//
providing ten (10) days written notice to the Developer. Upon termination, the City may in its sole
discretion then proceed to advertise and bid the balance of the Jmprovements, and there will be no
further obligation on the part of the City for payment due to Developer pursuant to this Agreement.
In the event that the City chooses not to advertise and bid the balance of the Improvements·
following such a tennination, any monies remaining in the improvement fund for the Communitÿ"
Facilities District and not appropriated or subject to appropriation for eligible expenses of the
Community Facilities District previously incurred shall be transferred to the redemption fund for the
Community Facilities District and used to call outstanding Bonds.
SECTION 14. Agreement Contingent. As a precondition to the sale of the Bonds of the
Community Facilities District, Developer shall pay in cash to City an origination charge of 1.0% of
the amount of the Bonds ("Origination Payment"). Said Origination Payment shall be at Developer's
own expense and not recoverable from the proceeds of the special taxes or from the proceeds ofthe
Bonds. In the event that the Bonds are, for any reason, not sold, the amount of the Origination
Payment shall be returned to the Developer.
This Agreement is contingent upon the fonnation of the Community Facilities District, the
authorization by the qualified electors of the Community Facilities District to levy special taxes and
incur bonded indebtedness and the successful sale of Bonds, and it shall be null and void if said
Bonds are not sold within a three (3) year period following the date of this Agreement, or any
mutually agreed extension; however, this time can be extended by request of the Developer and
concurrence of the legislative body.
The City may, at its option, suspend the perfonnance of its obligations under this Agreement
if, during the 30-day statute of limitations period following the fonnation of the Community
Facilities District, any legal challenge is filed relating to the validity or enforceability of this
Agreement, the Community Facilities District proceedings or the issuance of the Bonds. The
obligations of the City hereunder shall be reinstated upon the entry of a final judgment in any such
proceedings upholding the validity and enforceability of the Agreement, the Community Facilities
District proceedings and the issuance of the Bonds. In the event that a final judgment is entered
invalidating or declaring unenforceable this Agreement, the Community Facilities District
proceedings or the issuance of the Bonds, the City may, at its option, tenninate this Agreement.
SECTION J 5. Notice of Special Tax. Developer, or the successor or assigns of the Developer, shall
provide written notice to all potential purchasers oflots in a form satisfactory to City so advising the
potential owner ofthe fact of the proposed or confinned Community Facilities District, with said
document being executed by the potential purchaser. Such notice shall be provided to the potential
purchaser a reasonable time before the potential purchaser becomes contractually committed to
purchase the lot so that the potential purchaser may knowingly consider the impact of the special tax
in the decision to purchase the lot. A copy of all such notices executed by actual purchasers shall
be sent to the City Engineer.
12..{)4·98 9009-()()()()3
S,II72198110003.AG5 11
;¿;;ß ~/~
SECTION 16. Limitation of Aggregate Taxes and Assessments. Developer shall include in any
future agreement to sell all or any portion of the property to any person or entity for the purpose of
constructing and marketing owner-occupied residential dwelling units (a "Builder") provisions
requiring the inclusion of the following "escrow instructions" in all sales by such Builder to
residential home owners:
--
I. At or prior to the close of each such escrow, the escrow company shall apply a
"calculation formula" previously approved by the City Engineer and deposited with
the escrow company by the Builder to determine the aggregate of all annual ad
valorem property taxes, all special taxes authorized to be levied to finance the
construction or acquisition of public facilities and all assessment installments
authorized to be levied to finance the construction or acquisition of public facilities
(the "Total Annual Taxes and Assessments") applicable to the parcel subject to such
escrow (the "Applicable Parcel").
2. If the Total Annual Taxes and Assessments exceed 2% of the sales price of the
Applicable Parcel, the Escrow Company will make immediate written demand upon
the Builder for deposit into the escrow of the funds necessary to partially prepay the
special tax obligation for the Community Facilities District or any other community
facilities district so that the Total Annual Taxes and Assessments will thereafter be
equal to or less than 2% of the sales price ofthe Applicable Parcel. Such funds must
be received by the escrow company prior to the close of escrow of the sale of the
Applicable Parcel. Upon closing of such escrow, the amount so deposited by the
Builder pursuant to this escrow instruction shall be sent by the escrow company to
the Finance Director, together with written instructions that such amount is to be
used to partially prepay the special tax obligation of the Applicable Parcel for the
Community Facilities District or shall be sent to the community facilities district for
which the special tax obligation has been prepaid with similar written instructions.
In addition to any other remedy provided for by law or in equity, the City may
enforce the provisions of this Section J 6 by an action for specific performance or
injunctive relief or both.
SECTION 17. Relationship to Public Works. This Agreement is for the construction and
acquisition of certain Jmprovements by City and the sale of the Bonds for the payment of
construction and acquisition costs for such Improvements and such other amounts as are herein
provided, and is not intended to be a public works contract. Jn performing its obligations under this
Agreement, Developer is an independent contractor and not the agent of City. City shall have no
responsibility for payment to any contractor or supplier of Developer. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, Developer may be subject to certain public contract requirements as provided in Section
3 of this Agreement.
12-04-98 9009-00003
So\t72\981Iooo3.AG5 12
:2t. ß - ) ;J
SECTION 18. Sale of Bonds. Ifand when the Community Facilities District is successfully formed, tlï
and authorization for the levy of special taxes approved by the qualified electors, the City shall tr
proceed with the issuance and sale of bonds secured by such special taxes (the "Bonds") to be issued )1
pursuant to the Act. The proceeds of the Bonds shall be used in the following priority to (i) fund a 1~
reserve fund for the payment of principal and interest with respect to the Bonds; (ii) fund capitalized"
interest on the Bonds in an amount not to exceed the amount required to pay interest on the Bonds-· Ii
until sufficient special taxes of the Community Facilities District are collected; (iii) pay for costs of c
issuanœ of the Bonds including, without limitation, underwriter's discount, bond counsel fees, ~ i
printing, and paying agent fees; (iv) pay for the costs offorming the Community Facilities District; v
and (v) pay for the costs of the construction or acquisition of the Improvements pursuant to the
provisions of this Agreement.
The timing of the issuance and sale of the Bonds, the terms and conditions upon which the g
ft
Bonds shall be issued and sold, the method of sale of the Bonds and the pricing of the Bonds shall a
be determined solely by the City and shall conform to the Goals and Policies and this Agreement. 1[;
The sale of the Bonds shall be subject to receipt by the City of a competitively bid or negotiated
bond purchase agreement which is acceptable to the City.
IT
The aggregate principal amount of the Bonds shall not exceed one-fourth (1/4) of the value :t
of the property within the Community Facilities District subject to the levy of special taxes as (
determined by an independent appraisal undertaken for the City utilizing appraisal assumptions t
approved by the City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a value-to-lien ratio ofless than 4: J but equal t)
to or greater than 3: J may be approved, in the sole discretion of the City Council, upon e
determination by the City Manager, after consultation with the Finance Director, the bond counsel,
the underwriter and the financial advisor, that a value-to-lien ratio of less than 4; J is financially t
prudent under the circumstances of the Community Facilities District. The City may, in its sole vI
discretion, accept a form or forms of credit enhancement such as a letter of credit, bond insurance a'
or the escrow of bond proceeds to offset a deficiency in the required value-to-debt ratio. The amount
of the Bonds to be issued shall be determined in accordance with the Goals and Policies such that
the maximum projected annual special tax revenues equal II 0% of the projected annual gross debt
service on the Bonds.
Developer agrees to provide all information regarding the development of the property within
the Community Facilities District, including the financing plan for such development, which are
necessary to ensure that the official statement for such Bonds complies with the requirements of Rule
l5c2- J 2 of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Rule") and all other applicable federal
and state securities laws. Additionally, Developer agrees to enter into a continuing disclosure
agreement to provide such continuing disclosure pertaining to the Community Facilities District, the
development thereof and the Developer as necessary to ensure ongoing compliance with the :(
continuing disclosure requirements of the Rule.
12-04-98 9009-00003 13
S:\I72\98110003.AG5
c2~[]-/f
SECTION J 9. Development Impact Fee Credit. The Improvements include public facilities that
are included in several City development impact fee programs (each, a "DIF Program"), as indicated
in the attached referenced and incorporated Exhibit E. Credits against the applicable DIF Program
fees shall be granted in accordance with the applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies.
SECTION 20. Conflict with Other Agreements. Except as specifically provided herein, nothing-·
contained herein shall be construed as releasing Developer from any condition of development or
requirement imposed by any other agreement with City. In the event of a conflicting provision, such
other agreement shall prevail unless such conflicting provision is specifically waived or modified
in writing by City.
SECTJON 2 I. General Standard of Reasonableness. Any provision of this Agreement which
requires the consent, approval, discretion or acceptance of any party hereto or any of their respective
employees, officers or agents shall be deemed to require that such consent, approval or acceptance
not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, unless such provision expressly incorporates a different
standard.
SECTION 22. Entire Agreement; Amendment. This Agreement and the agreements expressly
referred to herein contains all of the agreements of the parties hereto with respect to the matters
contained herein and no prior or contemporaneous agreement or understandings, oral or written,
pertaining to any such matters shall be effective for any purpose. No provision of this Agreement
may be modified, waiver, amended or added to except by a writing signed by the party against which
the enforcement of such modification, waiver, amendment or addition is or may be sought.
SECTION 23. Notices. Any notice, payment or instrument required or permitted by this Agreement
to be given or delivered to either party shall be deemed to have been received when personally
delivered or seventy-two (72) hours following deposit of the same in any United States Post Office
in California, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed as follows;
Developer: McMillin Otay Ranch, LLC
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City, CA 91950
City: City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 9J910
Attn: City Manager
Each party may change its address for delivery of notice by delivering written notice of such change
of address to the other party.
12~>4·98 9OQ9.()()Q03 14
S:\t72\98110003.AG5
..26ß ~/S-
SECTION 24. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be illegal or
unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall be given
effect to the fullest extent reasonably possible.
SECTION 25. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the"
benefit ofthe successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Developer may not assign its rights of
obligations hereunder except upon written notice to City within ten (10) days of the date of such
assignment indicating the name and address of the assignee. Upon such notice and the assumption
by the assignee of the rights, duties and obligations of the Developer arising under or from this
Agreement, Developer shall be released by City from all future duties or obligations rising under or
from this Agreement. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, Developer may assign its rights and
obligations hereunder as security to lenders for the purpose of obtaining loans to finance
development within the Community Facilities District, but no such assignment shall release
Developer from its obligations hereunder to City.
SECTION 26. Governing Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be
governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California, Additionally, this
Agreement and the construction of the Improvements shall be subject to all City ordinances and
regulations relating to the requirement of improvement agreements, land division, improvement
security or other applicable development requirements.
SECTION 27. Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the
provisions of this Agreement by any other party, or the failure by a party to exercise its rights under
the default of any other party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to insist and demand
strict compliance by any other party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter.
SECTJON 28. Singular and Plural; Gender. As used herein, the singular of any work includes
the plural, and terms in the masculine gender shall include the feminine.
SECTION 29. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall
be deemed an original.
SECTION 30. Construction of Agreement. This Agreement has been reviewed by legal counsel
for both the City and the Developer and shall be deemed for all purposes to have been jointly drafted
by the City and the Developer. No presumption or rule that ambiguities shall be construed against
the drafting party shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement ofthis Agreement. The language
in all parts of this Agreement, in all cases, shall be construed as a whole and in accordance with its
fair meaning and not strictly for or against any party and consistent with the provisions hereof, in
order to achieve the objectives of the parties hereunder. The captions ofthe sections and subsections
of this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving
questions of construction.
12-04-98 9009-00003
S,\172\98110003.AG5 15
c1~ [J -/t
SECTJON 31. No Obligation to Form Community Facilities District. Developer acknowledges
that the decision of the City Council of the City to form the Community Facilities District is a
legislative action and the City may not enter into an agreement to obligate the City Council to
exercise its legislative discretion in a particular manner or for a particular result. This Agreement
does not, therefore, in any way create a contractual, legal or equitable obligation of or commitment·
by the City to approve the formation of the Community Facilities District. _.
[End of page. Next page is signature page.]
12-04-98 9009-00003 16
So\I72\98110003.AG5
)b ß -/7
---,-,._..~-_..._,...- .
Signature Page to
Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and between
the City of Chula Vista and McMillin - D.A. America Otay Ranch L.L.c.
EXECUTED by and between the parties hereto on the day and year first hereinabove written. _.
"CITY"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MAYOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM;
CITY CLERK JOHN KAHENY, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF CHULA VJST A CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE OF CALIFORNJA
"DEVELOPER"
McMILLIN OT A Y RANCH, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company,
By: McMILLIN COMPANIES, LLC, its
m~~~~
By:
ICL·
By: ~/tiit
I
12-1)4-9S 9009-00003 J7
So\I72\98110003.AG5
2t/J-/r
EXHIBIT" A"
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS AND PROJECTS
Phase! Completed Substantial
Project Improvements Completion
Priority Pre-ROF Criteria
1 Olympic Parkway Offsite
(Brandywine A venue to Paseo
Ranchero) ***fair share
obligation (not to exceed
Reserved Portion)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and 1
storm drain (per grading plans)
Surface Improvements,
including sewer and stonn
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
pavmg
Landscaping 3
2 La Media Road North
(Telegraph Canyon Road to East
Palomar Street West)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and ¡ I
storm drain (per grading plans)
Surface Improvements,
including sewer and storm
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
paving
Landscaping 3
2 East Palomar Street West CFD
(West CFD Boundary to Santa
Cora A venue North)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and ¡ I
storm drain (per grading plans)
12·04·98 9009'()()()()3 A-I
S:\172\98110003.AG5
c2¡;ß-/;
,_.__._ "___u
Phase! Completed Substantial
Project Improvements Completion
Priority Pre-ROF Criteria
Surface Improvements,
including sewer and storm
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
paving
Landscaping 3
12-04-98 9009-00003 A-2
S:\t72198110003.AG5
,2;ß~~tJ
.....
Phase/ Completed Substantial
Priority Project Improvements Pre-ROF Completion
Criteria
2 Santa Cora A venue North
(East Palomar Street West to
Boquet Canyon Drive)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and ¡ I
storm drain (per grading plans)
Surface Improvements, 2
including sewer and storm
drains (per street improvement
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
paving
Landscaping 3
2 Master Utility Loop
(Santa Cora North to La Media
Road North)
Surface Improvements,
including sewer and storm
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
paving
2 La Media Road Crossing Grading, including site
(at Telegraph Canyon Channel) preparation and mobilization ¡ I
and storm drain (per grading
plans)
12-04-98 9009-00003
S:\I72\98110003.AG5 A-3
cliP ß" e2/
-"- ~.- .-----"---
Phase! Completed Substantial
Project Improvements Completion
Priority Pre-ROF Criteria
Surface Improvements,
including storm drains (per
street improvement plans), ¡ 2 _.
specialty items, site concrete
and AC paving
3 East Palomar Street East
(Santa Cora A venue North to
East CFD Boundary Line)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and 1
storm drain (per grading plans)
Surface Improvements,
including sewer and stann
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
pavmg
Landscaping 3
3 Santa Cora A venue South Loop
(East Palomar Street West to
East Palomar Street East)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and 1
storm drain (per grading plans)
Surface Improvements,
including sewer and storm
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
paving
Landscaping 3
4 La Media Road South
(East Palomar Street West to
Olympic Parkway On site)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and I
storm drain (per grading plans)
12-04·98 9009-00003 A-4
S,\I72\98110003.AG5
c2¿lJ-2 ~
Phase! Completed Substantial
Priority Project Improvements Pre-ROF Completion
Criteria
Surface Improvements.
including sewer and storm
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
paving
Landscaping 3
4 Olympic Parkway Onsite
(La Media Road South to East
Palomar Street)
Grading, including site
preparation & mobilization and I
storm drain (per grading plans)
Surface Improvements,
including sewer and storm
drains (per street improvement 2
plans), traffic signals, specialty
items, site concrete and AC
paving
Landscaping 3
4 Pedestrian Bridge (at La Media
Road South)
Grading, including site I
preparation and mobilization
Site Concrete 2
Substantial Completion Criteria:
1. Grading: grading complete, storm drain installation complete, certification of geotechnical
and civil engineer and inspection.
2. Surface Improvements: installation complete and inspected.
3. Landscaping: installation complete and inspected.
12-04-98 9009-00003 A-5
S,II72198110003.AG5
;lb ß ~.23
EXHIBIT "B"
ESTIMATED COSTS OF PROJECTS
Project Cost Estimate
La Media Road North (Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street West) $3,269,654
East Palomar Street West (West Boundary to Santa Cora Avenue North) $889,304
Santa Cora Avenue North (East Palomar Street West to Boguet Canyon Drive) $615,807
Master Utility Loop (Santa Cora North to La Media Road North) $82,080
La Media Road Crossing (at Telegraph Canyon Channel) $294,736
East Palomar Street East (Santa Cora Avenue North to East Boundary Line) $534,493
Santa Cora Avenue South Loop (East Palomar Street West to East Palomar Street
East) $465,204
La Media Road South (East Palomar Street West to Olympic Parkway Onsite) $1,207,554
Olympic Parkway Onsite (La Media Road South to East Palomar Street) $1,]36,879
Olympic Parkway Offsite (Brandywine Avenue to Paseo Ranchero) "'fair share
obligation $4,742,742
Pedestrian Bridge (at La Media Road South) $729,896
Total Estimated Cost $13,970,615
12-04-98 9009-00003 B-1
S,II72198t 10003.AG5
;2&!3 -c2 f
EXHIBIT "c"
DESIGN, BID AND CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS
1. General
..
These requirements shall be applied to all improvements proposed to be acquired through
the Community Facilities District. Any deviation from these requirements must be
approved in advance by the Public Works Director.
References to the Public Works Director means the Public Works Director, City Engineer
or their designee.
The City reserves the right to make the final determination of cost of the Improvements to
be acquired in accordance with this Agreement.
II. Design Phase
A. Only design costs directly related to the public improvements to be acquired are
eligible for inclusion.
B. Bidding Documents. Two complete sets of bidding documents, including
improvement plans, general provisions, and bid proposal forms shall be submitted to the
Engineering Division for review and approval within J 5 working days of submittal. Advertising
for bids shall not take place until the bidding documents are approved in writing by the City.
This procedure shall be followed for each contract proposed to be advertised. Unless otherwise
noted, the bidding documents shall conform to the following minimum requirements:
I. Unless impractical due to the nature of the improvement, the bid proposal
shall be unit priced rather than lump sum. A.C. pavement, base and sub-base shall be bid on a
square foot per inch thickness basis.
2. The bidding documents shall require the bidder/contractor to provide the
following bonds:
a. Bid Bond - 10% of the amount of the bid.
b. Material and Labor Bond - 50% of the contract amount.
c. Performance Bond - 50% of the contract amount.
12-04-'98 9009-00003 C-I
S:\I72\98110003.AG5
2~[J~.2Ç
3. The bidding documents shall require the successful bidder to provide
evidence of comprehensive public liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 prior to
the award of the contract.
4. The bidding documents shall provide for monthly progress payments to
the contractor.
5. Unless otherwise required by the City, the contractor is not required to pay
prevailing wages.
6. The bidding documents must clearly state the time, date, and place where
bids are to be submitted and opened.
7. The bidding documents shall clearly state the amount oftime to complete
the work. The time allowed must be reasonable for the amount of work. Accelerated
construction time allowances must be supplementally bid, and are not eligible for public finance
unless previously approved by the City Engineer.
III. Bidding Phase
A. The Notice inviting Sealed Bids shall be published in the Chula Vista Star News
and the San Diego Daily Transcript. The notice inviting bids shall state where
bidding documents are available.
B. The bidding period following the advertisement of the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids
shall be a minimum of 14 calendar days.
C. Developer shall provide complete sets of bidding documents to all contractors,
subcontractors, or suppliers requesting them. A reasonable price may be charged
for bidding documents.
D. Developer shall keep a log of all persons obtaining bidding documents, and their
mailing address.
E. Addenda shall be mailed by first class mail to all bidding document holders and
the Public Works Director. Ifan addendum is required within five working days
of the noticed bid opening date, the bid opening date shall be extended.
F. Submitted bids shall be in sealed envelopes.
G. Bids shall not be accepted after the stated time for submission.
t2-Q4-98 9009-00003 C-2
S,\172\98110003.AGS
2~ß ~026
H. Bid opening shall be conducted by the Developer at the Developer's place of
business or other site mutually acceptable to the Developer and Public Works
Director.
E. Sealed bids shall be opened and read aloud immediately following the submission_:
time. A City representative shall be invited to attend the bid opening.
1. Conditioned bids, unless the bid proposal lists them for all to bid on, shall not be
accepted.
K. The bid proposals shall confirm to all state and local laws governing the listing of
subcontractors and suppliers.
L. The arithmetic of the two lowest bid proposals received shall immediately be
checked for errors.
M. A tabulation of all bids received shall be provided to the Public Works Director
within five working days of the bid opening.
N. A ward shall be made to the lowest responsible bidder within a reasonable period
of time following approval by the Public Works Director.
O. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the contractor prior to beginning the
work. A City representative shall be invited to attend the meeting.
P. The Notice to Proceed shall be issued within a reasonable period of time
following the contract execution.
IV. Construction Phase
A. The City shall be provided a copy of the construction schedule.
B. Developer shall require the contractor to conduct weekly construction status
meetings to which a City representative shall be invited.
C. All change orders shall be reviewed and approved by the City inspector prior to
execution. The City Engineer shall reserve the right to reject the change order as
an eligible element of the Purchase Price of the Improvements at the time of
review of the applicable payment request.
12-04-98 9009-00003
S:\t72198110003.AG5 C-3
02h8-~ ?
D. Any additional costs incurred for the benefit of the Developer, such as
accelerating the construction schedule, shall not be eligible for public financing
unless previously approved by the City Engineer.
E. Any additional construction costs incurred due solely to delays caused by the
Developer shall not be eligible for public financing.
F. All contracts and construction related records shall be available to the City as and
when required for the final determination of eligible costs for the public financing.
This shall include trip tickets and other confirmations of material delivered to the
project.
12-04·98 9009-00003 C-4
So\t72\98t IOOO3.AG5
Jtß~02r
EXHIBIT "D-I"
BASE INCREMENT
PAYMENT REQUEST NO.
_.
The undersigned (the "Developer") hereby requests payment in the total amount of
$ for the Base Increment of the Purchase Price of the Improvements (as defined in the
Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and among the City ofChula Vista (the "City") and Developer
and described in Exhibit A to that Agreement), all as more fully described in Attachment I hereto.
In connection with this Payment Request, the undersigned hereby certifies, represents and warrants
to the City as follows:
I. He(she) is a duly authorized officer of Developer, qualified to execute this Payment Request
for payment on behalf of Developer and is knowledgeable as to the matters set forth herein.
JI. The Improvements that are the subject of this Payment Request have been substantially
completed in accordance with Exhibit A.
Ill. The Purchase Price for the Improvements has been calculated in conformance with the terms
of the Agreement. All costs for which payment is requested hereby are eligible costs (as
permitted in the Agreement) and have not been inflated in any respect. The Base Increment
for which payment is requested has not been the subject of any prior payment request paid
by the City.
IV. Supporting documentation (such as third party invoices, change orders and checks) is
attached with respect to each cost for which payment is requested.
V. The Improvements for which payment is requested were constructed in accordance with the
requirements of the Agreement.
VI. Developer is in compliance with the terms and provisions ofthe Agreement.
VII. No mechanics liens or other encumbrances have attached, or to the best knowledge of
Developer, after due inquiry, will attach to the Improvements.
12-04-98 9009-00003 D-l-l
S,1172198110003.AG5
~t!3 -d.-/
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the above representations and
warranties are true and correct.
DEVELOPER:
McMILLIN OT A Y RANCH, LLC, a Delaware--
limited liability company,
By: McMILLIN COMPANIES, LLC, its
managing member
By;
By:
Dated:
CITY
Payment Request Approved for Submission to
Finance Director
Public Works Director
Dated:
t2·(I4·98 90()<).()()()()3 D-I-2
S:\I72\98i tOOO3.AG5
c1tß-,JO
ATTACHMENT 1
SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS
TO BE ACQUJRED AS PART OF PAYMENT REQUEST NO.
Phase No. Proiect Jmprovement Purchase Price Base Increment
Disbursement
Requested
[List here all Improvements for which payment is requested, and
attach supporting documentation]
12-04-98 9009-00003 0-1-3
S:\I72\98110003.AG5
;2tß-3¡
EXHIBIT "D-2"
RETAINED INCREMENT
PAYMENT REQUEST NO.
,.
The undersigned (the "Developer") hereby requests payment in the total amount of
$ for the Retained Increment of the Purchase Price of the Improvements (as defined in
the Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and among the City of Chula Vista (the "City") and
Developer and described in Exhibit A to that Agreement), all as more fully described in Attachment
J hereto. In connection with this Payment Request, the undersigned hereby certifies, represents and
warrants to the City as follows:
I. He(she) is a duly authorized officer of Developer, qualified to execute this
Payment Request for payment on behalf of Developer and is knowledgeable as to the matters set
forth herein.
2. Developer has submitted or submits herein to the City, if applicable, as-built
drawings or similar plans and specifications for the Improvements and such drawings or plans and
specifications, as applicable. are true. correct and complete.
, The Purchase Price for the Improvements has been calculated in conformance
,). with the terms of the Agreement. All costs for which payment is requested hereby are eligible costs
(as permitted in the Agreement) and have not been inflated in any respect. The Retained Increment
for which payment is requested has not been the subject of any prior payment request paid by the
City.
4. Supporting documentation (such as third party invoices, change orders, lien
releases and checks) is attached with respect to each cost for which payment is requested.
5. The Jmprovements for which payment is requested were constructed in
accordance with the requirements of the Agreement.
6. Developer is in compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreement.
7. No mechanics liens or other encumbrances have attached, or to the best
knowledge of Developer. after one inquiry. will attach to the Improvements.
12-04-98 9009-00003 D-2-I
S,\I72\98110003.AG5
02r; ß - -3.2-
--- --,,_..
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the above representations and
warranties are true and correct.
DEVELOPER:
McMILLIN OT A Y RANCH, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company,
By: McMILLIN COMPANIES, LLC, its
managing member
By:
By:
Dated:
CITY
Payment Request Approved for Submission to
Finance Director
Public Works Director
Dated:
12-04-98 9009-00003 D-2-2
S:\I72\98110003.AG5
c1Þ 0 r-;JJ
ATTACHMENT I
SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS
TO BE ACQUJRED AS PART OF PAYMENT REQUEST NO._
Phase No. Proiect Improvement Purchase Price Base Increment
Disbursement
Requested
[List here all Jmprovements for which payment is requested, and
attach supporting documentation]
12-04-98 9009-()()()()) D-2-3
S:\172\98110003.AG5
c1tß~3f
"
. 00...
"ò"ò_
æ·¡: 0
c:¡
"60 u...
00_
ó:0
-¿:¡...
c_ '-,.
.~O
V!
,
~...
c_ '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,.
:::0
I-
"
o:E
u.."5Q '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,. '-,.
U:.:::
UJ
f-o .2
¡,.¡ - ;; .§
f-o Q .~
- ¡,.¡ :E ;;
Q:I ~ ):; -
::=: 0 ~ .~ ,
- ~ :::;
- U ~ .5: ¡¡.¡
... ':! E
~ '- ¡¡ ¡¡ 00
- > ~ C "ò
¡,.¡ - 0 õ ~ E > 'C -<
Q ~ "'§i 0 "
c. 1! " ~ 00
;; c ¡¡ c. " c
oS ~ .¡; ÕÍJ ~ E c .52
" ~ üi .f' :< '5. 'ÕÍJ Ü
c.
" 00 0 õ " " ~1J C "
~ ~ u -¿:¡ u u C UJ ~
"- :¡; E " '" 'ü u '"' ~ 00 1;;
~ ~ '- ;< 'v; :.:2 ~
.~ " 0 " " u ~ ¡; " 'õ c
~ ii5 " ~ c. üi " " ii5 0
V! \:) V! l- V! V! ...J 0 V! U
¡¡
"
~
ii5
~
"
c
Õ
-¿:¡
"-
1;;
~ "
u UJ
" .9
'õ'
~ "0
"- "
-=ª
t
o c
Z 0
>, M
." C ª"
" "
ou
cG _ ,<
"ë" ~~
.- "
." ~
(1) 00,-..
:::; " - ~
- ~
" " " ~'"
"'-
...J !::.:;: , M
9~
N-;'
- '"
c:Lb!J - 33
"
-d ~:::
æ ï:: 0
c:¡
'õò u...
OJ>_
¡£o
-;¡....
"-
.~o
(/J
J,....
"- '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-.
eo
I-
"
o;¡; '-.
u..'öb '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-. '-.
U:.:::
'"
"
.S:
;¡;
~ ;, ~ N
E .~ E ,
" .5 r.IJ
" ~
¡¡ gf ~ .;f
> -i3 ¡¡
e ,:: < ~ >
" -;¡ " 0 ¡¡
"- " - OJ>
" " ¡¡ ~ "
.§ .¡; " .S: .¡; õJJ " "
'õJJ - 'ë. '§:
ð ü - u
OJ> " OJ> 0 (/) " '"
OJ> " 0 " OJ> "
" " '" - " - u u u " '"
'5 " en " Vi '5 E " "" U <E ~ en "
t: .;;; :.:;¡ ..!!J - > .... ." .;;; :.:;¡ ~
'" " '" '" " - "
- 0 " '" 'õ 0 - 0 ¡; - " '" " '" 'õ
0 ~ 0 ~ (/) u 0 ~ (/) l- e¡; (/) ..J 0 ~ (/)
>,
'"
>
.;;;
-
'"
0..
u
'ë.
5
>,
~ õ
¡¡ ]
" ¡: s
'õ' '" Vi
- en:':::
c.. "
"u :.:::~
.;;; "
~ 0 "S ¡;
0 >,
- o "
U " (/) ;,
'" .,,(/J ~
."u ~~
g..= '" -
0 '"
e>: "- 0<: "
'" '" õ ~~
." -
en :.;~-
." "
" - ,,0.. "
:E~ :¿ ~ .~ ~
'" '" ~ ~~
'" - ~ -
..J~ ..J~Õ ' N
9~
N--=-=
-V)
~t-ß-.J6
'"
. bO...
'1:1'1:1_
æ"¡: 0
CO
'ÔJ) t,¡,.
ß"õ ~ ~
0..
'"...
"- ~
.~O
'"
,
~...
ëõ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I-
'"
0:<5
....õj¡ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
u:::
UJ
"
.S:
.§ .§ ]
E ~ .-
~ == tJ}.t:..g ("I')
... VJ tJ}
- .- .- "" ..,
U ë; t: ¿ .- ......
E ,... ~" ';:: _y e
C ) c: _....J _ "'0 "...,
> ""0 V'J iU t: -0 c: ¡....¡
e < ~ E 2; ï: <I:: 0 -E
c.. _ c ~~~o..oI} ~c ~o
E.S 'ë;; oI} - ~.:: .5 .g æ ¿¡:j
- Ü 1..0 ü),Qu_c.. oI}ü 0..-
~ OlJO :.::§ottl one=, vOl)
;... ::: '- U ttI U ~ _ UJ '- 1..0 ....
;;;; :';::: v E ï3 U ~ ""0 .:P :.;;: V'J Vi 0... :.tj Q)
C ttI ~ ~ ttI U 0 1..0 _ V) ttI ._ - Q) ttI ~
o rl;:; _ CI) I- 0.. ._ -' co::I )¿ -' 0 0 ._ ¡.., U
U I".,Ir./)CI)f-o(/)U':Jr./)...J~cnr.nU r./)QC/J
~
~ ~
- .
" .
~ .
- ~
'" 0
~ ~
~ '"
E ~
o "
- ~
ó:. ~
_ _ 0
u ~ '"
U ttI VJ
.~ UJ ttI
1..0 C) 0 ~ c..
0.. ..... _ .- 0
.~~ ~-
,... -' ....... 0
Õ " 0 "
o "
^r./) ~u
ttI -0 co::I ;;> ... !"")
~ttI ~<õ girl
~~ ~Q)~ 8~
ctI ctI C 00 ' .
0.. ttI 0.. ';;._ Sf""¡
.S:! ~ .::! >.:C ~ §
0.. "" 0.."'0 0
E¿ E§~ co
;;.... C': >. I... ttI g;: 0-.
O-....¡ O-c:c..= ,¡:::::¡
__ __ V) ;~
N-:":
-on
2¡'(?~J ?
"
-d ~t.. ~ "" "" "" -,.. "" -,..
æ -c õ
¡:¡
-.
·õO r.:..
OJ)_
~o
1ªr.:..
õb- ""
.- 0
(/'J
,
~r.:.. "" "" "" "" "" ""
;¡-
_0
I-
"
0:<5
U."õo "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
U:.=
UJ
"
.2
.§ ¡:¡ "
.::: .2
"§ :¡; ¡:¡
~ - .,¡-
i2 v; 0 i2 ~
g ~ :5 ,
g .= ~ ¡¡¡
¡; OJ) o(! OJ) E
> ¡; " .;; ¡; "0
0 ~ > 'C -< Õ > -<
- -;¡ " 0 " 0 " ¡¡
Ê - OJ) " " ¡:¡ - " "
" 0:; 0- " .2 0- 0:; .2
OJ) - - ~ -
e¡; u - 'is. 'ÕÌJ Ü " u 'ÕÌJ Ü
" " " 0- "
u 0 " u OJ) UJ Ë " " 0 " OJ) ¡¡j 2
U u ~ ÕÌJ " ò: u U c
:.= <E "0 :;;; ~ ~ <E on :;;; ~ ;;;
'- .¡;; .¡;;
" " - " " " - " "
- ::> " " " 'õ 0 ::> " " 'õ 0
l- e¡; (/'J ...J 0 ù'j (/'J U e¡; (/'J (/'J 0 ù'j (/'J U
Ü
"
'õ' ~
ò: "5
0
(/'J
"iJ
00 0 ~
~o::: gG
-
00 .g .<
""2 ~~
"5 ¿
~ "
~...J ~~
" -
o.~ . N
9~
N-;'
-'"
02t[J-Jr
.."--_._.__.~---
RESOLUTION NO. j t 3tJ.2
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 97-3 (McMILLIN OTA Y RANCH SPA ONE)
DECLARING THE RESULTS OF A SPECIAL ELECTION IN SUCH COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (the "City
Council "), has previously declared its intention and held and conducted proceedings relating to the levy of
special taxes and the issuance of bonds in a community facilities district, as authorized pursuant to the tenns
and provisions of the "Mello- Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 ", being Chapter 2.5. Part 1, Division
2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State ofCalifomia (the "Act"), said Community Facilities District
designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 97-3 (McMILLIN OTA YRANCH SPA ONE)
(the "District"); and,
WHEREAS, this City Council did call for and order to be held an election to submit to the qualified
electors of the District a proposition relating to the levy of special taxes and the issuance of bonds and a
separate proposition relating to the establishment of an appropriations limit for the District; and,
WHEREAS, at this time said election has been held and the measures voted upon and each such
measure did receive the favorable 2/3's vote of the qualified electors, and this City Council desires to declare
the results of the election in accordance with the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE'CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRlCT NO. 97-3 (McMILLIN OTA Y RANCH SPA ONE), AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. This City Council hereby receives and approves the CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION
OFFICIAL AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST, as submitted by the City Clerk, acting in her capacity
as the Election official, said Statement setting forth the number of votes cast in the election, the measures
voted upon, and the number of votes given for and/or against the measures voted upon. A copy of said
Certificate and Statement is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A", referenced and so incorporated.
1 cJt C-)
~
.-.-.-".. __.,,_,..____n
SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed, pursuant to the provisions of the Elections Code
of the State ofCalifomia, to enter in the minutes the results of the election as set forth in said STATEMENT
OF VOTES CAST.
PREPARED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Ov- ~ ~~
John P. Lippitt John Kaheny ~
Director of Public Works City Attorney
.
2
~ 2té-;2,
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL
AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
The undersigned, ELECTION OFFICIAL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that pursuant to the provisions of Section 53326
of the Government Code and Division 12, commencing with Section 17000 of the Elections Code of the
State of California, I did canvass the returns of the votes cast at the
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 97-3
(McMILLIN OT A Y RANCH SPA ONE)
SPECIAL ELECTION
in said City, held December I, 1998.
I FURTHER CERTIFY that this Statement of Votes Cast shows the whole number of votes cast in said
District in said City, and the whole number of votes cast for the Measures in said District in said City, and
the totals of the respective columns and the totals as shown for the Measures are full, true and correct.
1. TOTAL NUMBER OF VOTES CAST: æ¿{,~
II. VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION A: YES ><
NO
III. VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION B; YES )(
NO
WITNESS my hand and Official Seal this /~ »~, 1998.
day of
~~ 1'6)
ELECTION OFFICIAL
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
EXHIBIT "A"
A-J
~ ;¿¿,C-3
-.-"-----..-
ORDINANCE NO. J.7tÝ
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF mE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 97-3 (McMILLIN OTAY RANCH SPA ONE) AUTHORIZING THE
LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (the "City
Council''), has initiated proceedings, held a public hearing, conducted an election and received a favorable
vote from the qualified electors authorizing the levy of a special tax in a community facilities district, all as
authorized pursuant to the tenns and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982",
being Chapter 2.5, Part I. Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State ofCalifomia (the "Act").
llis Community Facilities District is designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 97-3
(McMILLIN OTA Y RANCH SPA ONE) (the "District").
BE IT ORDATh'ED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. This City Council does, by the passage of this ordinance, authorize the levy of special
taxes pursuant to the rate and method of apportionment of the special taxes as set forth in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto (the "Rate and Method"), referenced and so incorporated.
SECTION 2. This City Council, acting as the legislative body of the District, is hereby further
authorized, by Resolution, to annually detennine the special tax to be levied for the then current tax year or
future tax years, except that the special tax to be levied shall not exceed the maximwn special tax calculated
pursuant to the Rate and Method, but the special tax may be levied at a lower rate.
SECTION 3. The special tax shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem taxes
are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure, sale and lien priority in case
of delinquency as is provided for ad valorem taxes.
SECTION 4. The special tax shall be secured by the lien imposed pursuant to Sections 3114.5 and
3115.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of Cali fomi a, which lien shall be a continuing lien and
shall secure each levy of the special tax. The lien of the special tax shall continue in force and effect until
the special tax obligation is prepaid, pennanently satisfied and canceled in accordance with Section 53344
of the Government Code of the State of California or until the special tax ceases to be levied by the City
Council in the manner provided in Section 53330.5 of said Government Code.
SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Within fifteen
(15) days after its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of
general circulation in the City pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, on December 8 ,1998;
I
.;.3J;J:?/ c2 ¿, 'j)- /
.. M~...___".._.__..__ ..__,._....._....,..
Presented by Approved as to form by
(A~ ~~ ~~}-
John P. Lippitt, Director John M. Kaheny, City Attorn
of Public Works
~ 2('Y-;<
Exhibit "A" ,
RATE A]\l) METHOD OF APPORTIOI\"MENT FOR
CITY OF CmJLA VISTA
COMMU1'\1:TY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 97-03
(OTAY RANCH MC MILLIN SPA ONE)
A Sp~cial Tax as h~r~inafter d~Ímed shall b~ levied on all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property
in Ci¡y of Chula Vis:a Commumty Facilities District No. 97-03 ("crn No. 97-03") and collected
each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 1999-2000, in an amount determined by the City
Council through th~ application of th~ appropriate Sp~cial Tax for "Dev~Joped Property,"
"Taxabl~ Property Owner Association Properry: and "UndeveJoped Property" as described
b~low. All of th~ real property in CFD No. 97-03, unI~ss exempted by law or by the provisions
hereof, shall b~ tax~d for the purposes. to th~ extent and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEœlTIO~S
Tn~ terTI'.5 h~reinafter set forth have th~ following meanings:
"Acre or Acreage" m~ th~ land area of an Ass~ssor's Par~1 as shov.'D on an Ass~ssor's
Parcel Map, or if th~ land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area
shown on th~ applicabJe Ímal map, parcel map, condoIIJinjum plan, record of survey, or
other recorded document creating or describing the parcel. If the preceding maps are not
available, the Acreage shall be determined by the City Engineer.
"Act" means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being
Chapter 2.5. Division 2 of TitJe 5 of the Goverrnnent Code of the Stat~ of California.
"Anminiçtrative Expenses" means the following actual or reasonably estimated costs
directly related to the administration of CFD No. 97-03: the costs of computing the Special
Taxes and preparing the annual Special Tax collection schedules (whether by the City or
designee thereof or both); the costs of collecting the Special Taxes (whether by the County,
the City, or otherwise); the costs ofremining the Special Taxes to the Trustee; the costs
of the Trustee (including its Jegal counsel) in the discharge of the duties required of it
under the Indenture; the costs to the City, CFD No. 97-03 or any designee thereof of
complying with arbitrage rebate requirements; the costs to the City, CFD No. 97-03 or any
designee thereof of complying with Cit)', crn No. 97-03 or obligated persons disclos¡;re
requirements associated with applicable federal and state securities laws and of the Act; the
costs associated with preparing Special Tax disclosure statements and responding to public
inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs of the City, CFD No. 97-03 or any
designee thereof related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the costs associated with the
release of funds from an escrow accounI. if any. Administrative Expenses shall also
include arnOUnIS estimated or advanced by the CilY or CFD No. 97-03 for any other
adminisrra!Ìve purposes of CFD ~o. 97-03. induding anorney's fees and Olher COSIS
~~ $~ 1
+~_c;.~.~! r,., ~^ ~,':~~.~': --' October 8, 1998
.___..·._m__.·.._. ...-.._-_.~-- -..-...
·
related to commencing and pursuing to comp]etion any foreclosure of delinquent SpeciaJ
Taxes.
"Assessor's Parcel" means a Jot or parcel shown in an Assessor's Parce] Map with an
assigned AssessDr's Parcel number.
"Assessor's Parcel Map" means an official map of the County Assessor of the County
designating parcels by Assessor's Parcel number.
"A "aiJable Funds" means the balance in the reserve fund established pursuam to the terms
of the Inåenture in excess of the reserve requirement as defmed in such Indenrure,
delinqueD! special tax payments, foreclosure proceeds, the ponion of proceeds of Backup
Special Tzx payments and Special Tzx prepayments collected to pay interest on Bonds, and
other sources of funds available as a credit to the Special Tzx Requirement as specified in
such Indenrure.
"Backup Special Tax" means the special tax that is required to be paid as a condition
precedeD! to the issuance of buiJding permits or recordation of fmal maps, as detennined
in accordance with Section E below.
"Bonds" means any bonds or other debt (as defmed in the Act), whether in one or more
series, issued by CFD No. 97-03 under the Act.
"CFD Anmin;c;trator" means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for
determining the Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the
SpeciaJ Tzxes.
"CFD Ko. 97-03" means City of Chula Vista Community Facilities District No. 97-03
(Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One).
"City" means the City of Chula Vista.
"Council" means the City Council of the City, acting as the legislative body of
CFD No. 97-03.
"Commercial Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which
a building permit(s) was issued for a non-residential use, excluding Community Purpose
Facility Property. ..
"Community Purpose Facility Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed
Property which are c1assified as community purpose facilities and meet the requirements
of City of Chu]a Vista Ordinance No. 2452.
"County" means the County of San Diego.
-2tP-1:
~)7p-r
r;_. _J"r:..._ ":.._ f")~.~ L__ c> . nf')(\
,
"Developed Property" means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Prop~ny. exclusive of
Taxable Propeny Owner Association Propmy for which a building permit for new
construction was issued prior to April 1 of the prior Fiscal Year.
"Development Projection" means an annual calculation for each Planning Ar~a of
CFD No. 97-03 of (i) the number and total Residential Floor Area of existing dwelling
units of Residential Property, the number of existing Acres of Comm~rcial Prop~rty. and
the number of existing Acres of Community Purpose Facility Property and (ii) a projection
of all future development, including the acreage, projecæd number of residential dweliing
units, projected Residential Floor Area, projected Commercial Property Acres, projected
Community Purpose Facility Property Acres, and an absorption schedule for all future
development in CFD No. 97-03. The Development Projection shall be dated as of April
1 and prepared each Fiscal Year by the Masær Developer. Upon submittal, the CFD
AdminislTator shall review, modify if necessary, and approve the Development Projecrion.
If the Development Projection is not received by the CFD Administrator on or before May
1, the CFD Administrator shall then prepare or cause to be prepared a Development
Projection.
"Final Residential Subdivision" means a subdivision of property crealed by recordation
of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, approved by the City pursuant to the
Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 el seq.) or recordation
of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code 1352 that creates individuaJ lots
for which residential building permits may be issued without further subdivision of such
propeny.
"Fiscal Year" means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30.
"Indenture" means the indenture, fiscal agent agreement, U1lst agreement, resolution or
other instrument pursuant to which Bonds are issued, as modified, amended and lor
supplemented from time to time, and any instrument repJacing or supplementing the same.
"Land Use Class" means any of the classes listed in Table 1.
"Master Developer" means the owner or owners of 1he predominant amount of
Undeveloped Property in CFD No. 97-03.
"Maximum Annual Special Tax" means the maximum annual Special Tax, determined
in accordance with the provisions of Section C below, that may be levied in any Fis;al
Year on any Assessor's Parcel of TaxabJe Property.
"Occupied Residential Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Residential Propeny
which have closed escrow to an end user.
"Outstanding Bonds" means all Bonds which remain outstanding.
~ JJ?~ dt j/-ç
_C{~':.J!LC~" 'C_~~;f;ff'! {}ctnhrr Ii ] Q91i
.......- .---..----...-.
·
"Planning Areas" mtans thost areas shown on Exhibit A. Minor adjustments in the
boundaries of the Planning Areas may be made by the CFD Administrator to confonn to
the tentative and final maps approved for these areas.
"Property' Owner Association Property" means any property within the boundaries of
CFD No. 97-03 owned by or dedicated to a property owner association, including any
master or sub-association.
"Proportionately" means for Developed Property that the ratio of the acrual Special Tax
levy to tht Maximum Annual Special Tax is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Developed
Property within cm No. 97-03. For Undeveloped Property, "ProportionateJy· means
that the ratio of the acmal Special Tax levy per Acre to the Maximum Annual Special Tax
per Acre is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Undeveloped Property in CFD No. 97-03.
"Public Property" means any property within the boundaries of cm No. 97-03 that is
used for rights-of-way or any other purpose and is owned by or dedicated to the federal
government, the State of California, the County, the City or any other public agency.
"Residential Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a
building permit has been issued for purposes of consuucting one or more residential
dwelling units.
"Residential Floor Area" means all of the square footage of living area within the
perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, wall-way, garage, overhang,
patio, en:]osed patio, or similar area. The determination of Residential Floor Area shall
be made by reference to appropriate records kept by the City's Building Department.
Residential Floor Area will be based on the building permit(s) issued for each dwelling unit
prior to it being classified as Occupied Residential Property, and shall not change as a
result of additions or modifications made after such classification as Occupied Residential
Property.
"Special Tax" means the (i) annual special tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each
Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property to fund the Special Tax Requirement and (ii) the
backup special tax that may be required as a result of changes in development.
"Special Tax Requirement" means that amount required in any Fiscal Year for
CFD No. 97-03 to: (i) pay annual debt service on all Outstanding Bonds; (ii) pay periodic
costs on the Bonds, including but not limited to, credit enhancement and rebate payme¡¡ts
on the Bonds; (iii) pay reasonable Administrative Expenses; (iv) pay any amounts required
to establish or replenish any reserve funds for all Outstanding Bonds in accordance with
the Indenrure; (v) and pay directly for acquisition and/or construction of which are
authorized to be financed by CFD No. 97-03; (vi) less a credit for Available Funds.
"State" means the State of California.
"Taxable Property" mtans all of the Asstssor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No.
97-03 whi:h are not exempt from the Special Tax ant to law or Section F below. Þ
/ d- b -
r:",. "T "'t..,,~ ~..;_._ n...rnh,.... R 10aR
"Taxable Property Owner Association Property" m~ans all Ass~ssor's Parce1s of
Property O.....ner Association Property that are not exempt pursuant to Section F bdow.
"Trustee" means the trustee, fiscal agent, or paying agent under the Indenture.
"Undeveloped Property" means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified
as Develop~d Property or Taxable Property Owner Association Property.
B. ASSIG!\"MENT TO LA...ND USE CATEGORIES
Each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property within CFD No. 97-03 shall be classified as
Developed Property, Taxable Property Own~r Association Property, or Undeveloped
Property, and shall be subject to the levy of annual Special Taxes determmed pursuant to
SectioDS C and D below. Developed Property shall be assigned to Land Use Classes 1
through 3 as listed in Table 1 based on the primary land use of each such Assessor's
ParceL
The Maximum Annual Special Tax for Residential Property shall be based on the
Residential Floor Area of the dwelling units located on the Assessor's ParceL The
Maximwn Annual Special Tax for Commercial Property and Commun.ity Purpose Facility
Property shall be based on the Acreage of the Assessor's ParceL
C. MAXIMUM A.~1JAL SPECIAL TAX R.\TE
1. Developed Property
The Maximum Annual Special Tax for each Land Use Class of Developed Property
sÌ1a1l be the amount shown in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1
Maximum Annual Special Taxes for Developed Pro pert>· .
Co=unity Facilities District No. 97-03
Land Use
Class Description Maximum Annual Special Tax
1 Residential Property 5>0.392 per square foot of Residential
Floor Area ..
I 2 I Commercial Property I 5>4,000 per Acre
, I Community Purpose Facility Property I 5>1.000 per Acre
)
%C- . 7/ ~~t'þ--)
+..c~~:_~r !:..~"0..~_ y;~,,,, October 8, 1998
-
2. l'ndeveloped Property and Taxable Property Owner Association Property
Tk Maximum Annual Special Tax for Undeveloped Property and Taxable
Property Owner Association Property in CFD No. 97-03 shall be $7,954 per Acre.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONME!\l OF THE SPECIAL TAX
Commencing with Fiscal Year 1999-2000 and for each following Fiscal Year, the Council
shall determine the Special Tax Requirement and shall levy the Special Tax until the
amount of Special Taxes equals the Special Tax Requirement. The Special Tax shall be
levied each Fiscal Year as follows:
First: The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of
Developed Property at up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Annual Special Tax.
Second: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the
fust step has been completed, the Special Tax shall be Jevied Proportionately on each
Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property at up to 100% of the Maximum Annual Special
Tax for Undeveloped Property;
Tnird: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the
first two Steps have b~n completed, then the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately
on each Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property Owner Association Property at up to the
Maximum Annua] Special Tax for TaxabJe Prop.erty Owner Association Property.
Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances will the Special Tax Jevied against any
Assessor's Parcel of Occupied Residential Property be increased by more than ten percent
per year as a consequence of delinquency or default in the payment of Special Taxes by the
owner of any other Assessor's Parcel within the CFD.
E. BAC1..'1JP SPECIAL TAX
The following defmitions apply to this Section E:
"Actual Average Special Tax Per Unit" means, for each Planning Area, the Actual
Special Tax Revenue divided by the sum of the number of units included in any current
building permit application(s) plus the number of units within such Planning Area for
which building permits have previously been issued. Any building pernúts issued after~
Assessor's Parcel has been classified as Occupied Residential Property shall not be
included in determining the Actual Average Special Tax Per Unit.
"Actual Special Tax Revenue" means, for each Planning Area, the sum of the total
Residential Floor Area shown on any current building pernút application(s) plus the total
Residential Floor Area from any previously issued buiJding permits within the Planning
Area multiplied by the applicabJe Maximum Annual Special Tax. Any building permits
!ssued after an Assessor's Parcel has been classified as Occupied Residential Property shall
not be included in determining the Acrual Special Tax Revenue. i)
c2¿ D~ JfY 0e- //:z. :23 ,t). {)()6
Cit\, of Chula Vista / ~'-'" ' v (Jeroner R. 199R
"Backup Special Tax Fund" means, for each PI arming Area, the fund or account
identified in the IndenTUre to hold Bad:up Special Tax payments received from property
owners within such Planning Area.
"Expected Special Tax Revenue" means, with respect to each Planning Area, the amount
shown in the column so labeled in Table 2
"Required Average Special Tax Per Unit/Acre" means, for each Planning Area, the
Expected Special Tax Revenue divided by the total expected number of dweIling units or
non-residential Acres (as applicable) expected to be developed wiÙ1ÍD the Planning Area,
as determined by the CFD Administrator based on tentative maps, Final Residential
Subdivision maps, the Development Projection, and all other relevant information available
to the CFD Administrator. In cases where residential and non-residential property are both
included within a Planning Area, the CFD Aåministrator may adjust the Required Average
Special Tax Per Unit/Acre as necessary_
"Share of A.nnual Debt Service" means, for each Planning Area, the maximum annual
debt service on the Bonds multiplied by that Planning Area's ¡x=rcentage of the total Special
Tax revenue, as shown in Table: 2 below. A Planning Area's Share of Armual Debt
Service shall be adjusted to reflect any prepayments within that Planning Area.
l. Expected DeveJopment and Special Tax Revenues
Tabl:: 2 below identifies the amount of development and Special Tax revenue that
is currently expected from each Planning Area. Table 2 may be revised by the
CFD Administrator if the Planning Area boundaries are modified.
,.
~k-1? d 77)-r- o21P- 73 .
r:",. "r r~H'''' ,::~._ n,.tn~"'" R 100f?
_._..._._,._,.._.~."-_._----------_.- -_.---- ---"--.---""
TABLE 1
Ex~ted Development and Special Tax Revenue by Planning Area
Community Facilities District No. 97-03
NUMBER EXPECTED
OF TOTAL SPECIAL PERCENT
PL.A.?\~ING EXPECTED UNITS! RESIDENTIAL TAX OF TOTAL
.A.REA PRODUCT TYPE ACRES FLOOR AREA REVENUE REVENUE
R-I-11 I Resid~tial Property 120 units I 344,760 I 5135.146 14.22%
I R-I-22 I Residential Property 86 units I 156.864 I 561,491 I 6.47%
I R-I-23 1 ResidentiaJ Property I 87 units I 173.3911 567.969 7.15%
I R-I-14 I ResidentiaI Property 138 units I 352,038 I 5137,999 14.52%
I R-I-46 I ResidentiaI Properrv 117 units 1 158.535 I 562.146 6.54%
CPF-I-4 Community Purpose 4.8 acres NA $4,800 I 0.51%
Facility Property
I R-I-]2 1 ResidentiaI Prooerty 103 units 205.279 1 580,469 I 8.48%
I R-I-41 1 ResidentiaI Prooerrv 90 units 166.500 I 565.268 6.87%
I R-I-41 1 ResidentiaI Properrv 74 units 1 134,976 I 552,911 5.57%
I R-I-40 I Residential Properrv 201 units I ì-lì-Ol 598,490 10.37%
-) .-)
I R-I-43 I ResidentiaI Properrv 240 units I 234,000 I 591.728 I 9.65%
I R-I-44 I Residential Property I 200 units I 195.000 576,440 8.05%
R-I-45 I ResidentiaI Properrv I 18 units I 17,550 56,880 0.72%
I C-I-2 I CommerciaI Property 1.1 acres NA I 58,400 0.88%
I TOTAL I NA 1.474 units I NA I 5950,137 100.00%
~ Calculation of Required A verage S~ial Tax Per Unit/Acre
At the time the first bui1åing pennit application for a PJanning Area is submined
to the City, the CFD Administrator shall calculaœ the Required Average Special
Tax Per Unit/Acre.
, Backup Special Tax due to Loss of Units! Acres
".
If at any time after the Required Average SpeciaI Tax Per Unit/ Acre has been
caIculated initially for a Planning Area, the CFD Administrator detennines that
based on tentative maps, Fina1 Residential Subdivision maps. the Development
Projection, and any other available infonnation there has been a reduction in r,Þe
total expected number of dwel1ing units or non-residential Acres within that
Planning Area, then a Bacl:up SpeciaI Tax payment shall be required for each Jost
unit or Acre prior to the issuance of any additional building permits or the
recordation of any additional final maps for such Planning Area.
4. Backup Special Tax due to Loss of Residential Floor Area
For Plaming Areas that include Residential Properry, before each building permit
oUj)-/O .?¡f-c~f ;:2:1 7/ -;/'lJ
r;....· ""rr¡".,r", ";..r" nNl"lhpr R ,OQR
(or group of p~rmits) is issu~d, th~ CFD Administrator shaH caJculate th~ Actual
A v~rage Sp::ci¡¡j Tax Per Unit for th~ Planning Area. If the Actual Average Special
Tzx Per Unit is less than the Required Average Special Tax Per Unit then a Back'1Jp
Sp~al Tax payment will be required prior to issuance of the building permit(s)
induded within the caJculation.
~. Calculation of Backup Special Tax
The Backup Special Tax payment amount will be calculated using the prepayment
formula described in Section 1.1, with the following exceptions: (i) if the Backup
S~:ial Tax is required 1!S a result of Section E.3, then the amount used in
Paragraph I of the prepayment formula described in Section 1. I shaH equal the
number of lost units or Acres, as applicable, times the Required Average Special
Tax Per Unit/Acre; (ii) if the Bac!..'1Ip Special Tax is required as a result of Section
EA, then the amount used in Paragraph I of the prepayment formula described in
Se..-non 1. I shall equal the difference between the AcruaJ Average Special Tax Per
Unit and the Required Average Special Tax Per Unit times the sum of the number
of units for which permits are being issued plus the number of units within the
Planning Area for which building permits have previously been issued. The amount .
de~mrined pursuant 10 the preceding sentence shaH be reduced by the balance in
the Back-up' Special Tax Fund that has been established for such PJanning Area; (iii)
in Paragraph 5 of the prepayment formula described in Section l.I, compute the
amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount until the first
red=ption date that occurs after ñve years ITom the date of the first Back'1Jp
Special Tax payment in the Plannmg Area; (iv) any Bad.'1Jp Special Tax payments
received for a Planning Area (less Administrative Fees and Expenses) shaH be
deposited into the Back'1Jp Special Tax Fund for that Planning Area and disbursed
pursuant 10 the Indenture; and (v) the Maximum Annual Special Taxes applicable
to property within a Planning Area shaH not be reduced or relieved as a result of
payment of the Bad.'1Jp Special Tax.
6. UselRelease of Backup Special Tax Payments
\\'hen a Planning Area reaches fuH buildout (i.e. all e?,pected building permits have
been issued), the CFD Administrator shall calculate the actual Developed Property
Maximum Annual Special Tax revenues that will be generated from such Planning
Area. If the actual Developed Property Maximum Annual Special Tax revenues are
greater than or equal to 1.1 times that Planning Area's Share of Annual D~bt
Service, the balance in the Back'1Jp Special Tax Fund shall be returned to the payer.
If Back-up Special Taxes have been paid by more than one entity, the amount of
Back-up Special Taxes returned to each payer shall be in proponion to the amount
paid by each entiry. If the actual Developed Property Maximum Annual Special
Tax revenues are less than 1. I times that Planning Area's Share of Annual Debt
Service, then (0 the extent necessary to generare 110% coverage, the balance in the
Back-up Special Tax Fund shaH be used to redeem bonds on the next available
reåemp¡ion dare. Any moneys remaining in Back'1Jp Special Tax Fund shall be
returned to the payer. If a Planning Area has nor re~ed fuH buildoUI within five
éÀ~V-// ~/~ -;2JD /l
_Q0:nf Chyla_\'ï!ta' Octa er 8. ]998
. - ----.--..-
Y~a;'s after the fIrst payment of Bad:up Special Taxes for such Planning Area, then
all moneys in the Backup Special Tax Fund sha] be used to redeem bonds on the
next available redemption date.
F. EXEMPTIONS
No Special Tax sha] be levied on up to 155.385 Acres of Property Owner Association
Propeny and Public Propeny. Tax-exempt status will be irrevocably 2Ssigned by the CFD
Adminisrrator in the chronological order in which property becomes Property Owner
Association Property or Public Property.
After the iirrrit of 155.385 exempt Acres has been reached, the Maximum Annual Special
Tax obligation for any additional Public Property shall be prepaid in full by the seller
pursuant to Section 1.1, prior to the transfer/dedication of such property.
Propeny Owner Association Property that is not exempt £Tom Special Taxes under this
section shall be subject to the levy of the Special Tax and shall be taxed Proportionate]y
2S part of the third step in Section D above, at up to 100% of the Maximum Annual Special
Tax for Taxable Property Owner Association Property.
G. REVIEW/APPEAL COMMITTEE
The Council shall estab]ish as part of the proceedings and administration of CFD No. 97-
03 a special three-member Review/ Appeal Comminee. Any landowner or resident who
feels thar the amount of the Special Tax levied on their Assessor's Parcel is in error may
fIle a wrinen norice with the Review/Appeal COInIIllnee appealing the amount of the
Special Tax Jevied on such Assessor's Parce1. The Review/Appeal Comminee may
establish such procedures as it deems necessary 10 undertake the review of any such
appeal. Tne Review/Appeal COInIIllnee shall imerpret this Rate and Method of
Apportionment and make detenninatioDS re]arive to the annual administration of the Special
Tax and any landowner or resident appeals, as herein specified. The decision of the
Review/Appeal Comminee shall be fInal and binding as to all persons.
H. MANJ\r:R OF COLLECTION
The annual Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as
ordinary ad valorem propeny taxes; provided, however, that CFD No. 97-03 may directly
bill the Special Tax, may collect Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner
,.
if necessary to meet its financial obJigations, and may covenant to foreclose and may
actually foreclose on Assessor's Parcels which are delinquent in the payment of Special
Taxes.
Landowners shall pay the Bad:up Special Tax directly to the City upon notifIcation of the
Back'1Jp Special Tax amount due, prior to the issuance the building pennirs or recordation
of the fInal map, as applicable, upon which the calculation of such Bad.'1Jp Special Tax is
b2Sed. Bad.'1Jp Special Tax paymems may be made in cash or as a lener of credit with
terms acceptable to the CFD Administrator. ~ /t 2~7?--r2
.2¿ p- /.:2 / ~ I /
Cin' of Chula Vista October 8. 1998
.
Tenders of Bonds may be accepted for payment of Special Taxes upon the terms and
conditions established by the Council pursuant to the Act. However, the use of Bond
tenders shall only be allowed on a case-by-case basis as specifically approved by the
Council.
I. PREPAYMENT OF MAXIMl,i'M ..v...ì\1JAL SPECIAL TAX
The following defmition applies 10 this Section I:
"Outstanding Bonds" means all previously issued Bonds which will remain outstanding
after the Îlrst interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year.
excluding Bonds to be redeemed at a later date with the proceeds of prior prepayments of
Maximum Annual Special Taxes.
1. Pa~1Dent in Full
The Maximum Annual Special Tax obligation may only be prepaid and
permanently satisñed by an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, Undeveloped
Property for which a building permit has been issued, or Public Property. The
Maximum Annual Special Tax obligation applicable to such Assessor's Parcd may
be fully prepaid and the obligation of the Assessor's Parcel to pay the Maximum
Annual Special Tax permanently satisñed as described herein, provided that a
prepayment may be made only if there are no delinquent Special Taxes with respect
to such Assessor's Parcel at the time of prepayment. An owner of an Assessor's
Parcel intending to prepay the Special Tax obligation shall provide the CFD
Aåministrator with wrinen notice of intent to prepay. Within 30 days of receipt of
such wrinen notice, the CFD Administrator shall notify such owner of the
prepayment amount of such Assessor's Parcel and may charge a reasonable fee for
providing this service. Prepayment must be made not Jess than 45 days prior to the
next occurring date that notice of redemption of Bonds from the proceeds of such
prepayment may be given to the Trustee pursuant to the Indenture.
The Prepayment Amount (defined below) shall be caJ~Jated as summarized bdow
(capitalized terms as defmed below):
Bond Redemption Amount
plus Redemption Premium ..
plus Defeasance Amount
plus Administrative Fees and Expenses
less Reserve Fund Credit
less Capitalized Interest Credit
Total: equals Prepayment Amount
As of the proposed date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount (defined be]ow)
shall be calculated as follows:
4P-/3 ~/) )?"[:' ¡'J.
çin-..£( Chula y'~ra , Octaber 8, 1998
. -..^'.-......-.-..'"
Par2~raph No.:
1. For Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property, compute the Maximum
Annual Special Tax for the Assessor's Par~l to be prepaid. For Assessor's
Parcels of Undeveloped Property to be prepaid, compute the Maximum
Annual Special Tax for that Assessor's Parcel as though it was already
designaœd as Developed Property, based upon the buiJding permit which
has already been issued for that Assessor's Parcel. For Assessor's Parcels
of Public Property 10 be prepaid, compute the Maximum Annual Special
Tax for such Assessor's Parcel using the Maximum Special Tax for
Undeveloped Property.
2. Divide the Maximum Annual Special Tax computed pursuant to paragraph
I by the total expecœd Special Tax revenues as shown in Table 2 in Section
E, excluding aDY Assessor's Parcels which have been prepaid.
~ Multiply the quotient computed pursuaDt 10 paragraph 2 by the Outstanding
;).
Bonds to compute the amount of Outstanding Bonds 10 be retired and
prepaid (the "Bond Redemption AmounJ).
4. Multiply the Bond Redemption .tunOUDt computed pursuant 10 paragraph 3
by the applicable redemption premium, if any, Dn the Outstanding Bonds
10 be redeemed (the "Redemption Premium").
5. Compute the amount needed 10 pay interest on the Bond Redemption
Amount from the first bond interest aDd! or principal payment date
following the current Fiscal Year until the earliest redemption date for the
Outstanding Bonds.
6. Confirm that no Special Tax delinquencies apply to such Assessor's Parcel.
7. Determine the Special Taxes Jevied on the Assessor's Parcel in the current
Fiscal Year which have not yet been paid. -
8. Compute the amount the CFD AdministralOr expects 10 derive from the
reinvestment of the Prepayment Amount less the Administrative Fees and
Expenses from.the dare of prepayment until the redemption date for the
Outstanding Bonds 10 be redeemed with the prepayment. ..
9. Add the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 5 and 7 and subtract the
amount computed pursuant to paragraph 8 (the "Defeasance Amount").
10. Verify the administrative fees and expenses of CFD No. 97-03, including
the costs of computation of the prepayment, the costs 10 invest the
prepayment proceeds. the costS of redeeming Bonds, and the costs of
~p-)fl K /~~J7 //r-
Cit\' of Chula 'Vista , October 8. 1998
recording any notices to evid~n::e the pr~payment and ¡h~ redemption (¡he
"Administrative Fees and Expenses ").
11. If reserve funds for the Outstanding Bonds, if any, are at or above 95 o/c, of
the reserve requirement (as deñned in the Indenture) on the prepayment
date, a reserve fund credit (the" ReseTìle Fund Credit") shall be calculated
as follows: (i) if the reserve funds are at or above 100% of the reserve
requirement, the Reserve Fund Credit shall equal the acrual reduction in the
reserve requirement, if any, as a result of the prepayment, or (ii) if the
reserve funds are at 95% or between 95% and 100% of the reserve
requirement, the amount calculated pursuant to paragraph 11 (i) shall be
reduced by the percentage by which the reserve fund is below the reserve
requirement. No Reserve Fund Credit shall be granted if reserve funds are
below 95 % of the reserve requirement.
12. If any capitalized interest for the Outstanding Bonds will not have been
expended at the time of the fus¡ interest and/or principal payment following
the current Fiscal Year, a capitalized interest credit shall be calculated by
multiplying the quotient compured pursuant to paragraph 2 by the expected
balance in the capitalized interest fund after such fIrst interest and/or
principal payment (the "Capitalized Imerest Credit ").
13. The Maximum Annual Special Tax prepayment is equal to the sum of the
amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 3, 4, 9 and 10, Jess the amounts
computed pursuant to paragraphs 11 and 12 (the "PrepaymenI Amount "J.
From the Prepayment Amount, the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 3,
4,9, 11 and 12 shall be deposited into the appropriate funds as established under
the Indenture. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 10 shall be retained
by CFD No. 97-03.
As a result of the payment of the current Fiscal Year's Special Tax levy as
determined under paragraph 7 (above), the CFD Administrator shall remove the
current Fiscal Year's.SpeciaJ Tax levy for such Asses.sor's Parcel from the Counry
tax rolls. With respect to any Assessor's ParceJ that is prepaid, the Council shall
cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act, to indicate the
prepayment of the Maximum Annual Special Taxes and the release of the
Maximum Annual Special Tax lien on such Assessor's Parcel, and the obligation
of such Assessor's Parcel to pay the Maximum Annual Special Tax shall cease:
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Maximum Annual Special Tax prepayment shall
be allowed unless the amount of Maximum Annual Special Taxes that may be
levied on Taxable Property within CFD No. 97-03 both prior to and after the
proposed prepayment is at least 1.1 times the maximum annual debt service on all
Outstanding Bonds.
oZbP~/Ç~ ",'2:J' :::' ..---
/.:>
Ci/)' of ChUÚl Visto October 8. 1998
__.___.u.
T~nd~rs of Bonds in pr~payment of Maximum Annual Special Taxes may be
a::~pted upon the terms and conditio!'.5 established by the Council pursuant to the
Act. However, the use of Bond tenders shall only be allowed on a case-by-case
bí!Sis as specifically approved by the Council.
2. Prepayment in Part
The Maximum Annual Special Tax on an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Propeny
or an Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Propeny for which a building permit has
been issued may be panialJy prepaid. The amount of the prepayment shall be
calculated as in Section 1.1; except that a partial prepayment shall be calculated
according to the following formula:
PP = PE x F.
Tnese terms have the following meaning:
PP = the panial prepayment
P- - the Prepayment Amount calculated according to Section 1.1
F= the percent by which the owner of the Assessor's Parcel(s) is panially
prepaying the Maximum Annllal Special Tax.
Tne owner of an Assessor's Parcel who desires to partially prepay the Maximum
AlJDual Special Tax shall notify the CFD Administrator of (i) such owner's intent
to partially prepay the Maximum Annual Special Tax, (ii) the percentage by which
the Maximum Annual Special Tax shall be prepaid, and (iü) the company or agency
that will be acting as the escrow agent, if applicable. The CFD Administrator shall
provide the owner with a statement of the amount required for the partial
prepayment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax for an Assessor's Parcel within
thiny (30) days of the request and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this
S~[\'lCe .
With respect to any Assessor's Parcel that is partially prepaid, the City shall (i)
distribute the funds remiued to it according to the Indenrore, and (ii) indicate in the
records of CFD No. 97-03 that there has been å partial prepayment of the
Maximum Annual Special Tax and that a portion of the Maximum Annual Special
Tax equal to the outstanding percentage (1.00 - F) of the remaining Maximum
Annual Special Tax shalJ continue to be authorized to be levied on such Assessor's
Parcel pursuant to Section D. ..
J. TER.M OF MAXIMUM A..!\'1'iLJ.U- SPECr.U- TAX
The Maximum Annual Special Tax shalJ be levied corrunencing in Fiscal Year 1999-2000
to the extent necessary to meet the Special Tax Requirement for a period not to exceed
thirty-five years.
F:\ µ"OR.C:::.J:"\TS~ICHr.:!..~ H5. T-I'..'t1£UO\ï.1d97.JIR.\!,-J, lRM."¡IO_ CHL"!...A.dCY.
R:-vls.:-: O:I~, 8. ~99& .1¿p~ / t gc;-~ {} vìJ ::::,r--. / f.-
Cir)' oj Chu/a Vista Ocrober 8, 1998
·
-
EXHIBIT A
PLANNING AREA MAP
-
..
-
2¿7J~ Il c2::;; /?
g'?---f;}/
Ci,,· of Chufa Visla .F- OClober 8. 1998
- -.. .---.-. '--'-'-', "'--"-'--"-'-"'--""- ----------..----
McMillin I Otay Ranch EXHIBIT "A"
CFD No. 97-3
PLANNING AREA MAP
P-6.5
, ¡ \ R-4,3 ~ .
, ~
.. ¡. i·
, ' R~
.-'./,:
"
\ -:.
. ~
I Õ
: , ~
j t
; \
f
. _ ~'./~ ø'.
\ <.r-: ,.
.~\
:¿~j)-/r-·
~ ~&~CON~~LTA.,N~S g-i ~~~ --. - - ---
~ ~>,; -__,>-". _ _ .-:- h _ ~07- ~ ..:---
m . -.----.. --.. ~ 1/ ~/;5
D",..,i::1 Tauss; &. Asso::iates 11/25/98 11 :05
City of Chula Vista
CFD No. 97-03 (Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One)
List of Property Owners
OWI.~::Õ. APN Acr&ags
:::::>:2- :'~e::t. LlC 6Q..Oi2·:;¡g - Portion [1] £.530
:::..:ro-,,¡;:- :"'1:.me:; ~-on-08 - Portion l~j ~.233
1J:::i.G.::- :)tay Rilitl::h, L!...C 64ê-œv:::2 - Portion ~5.350
M::IJiÎ:'~. :r.ay RÕU1:h, LLC ~2-'~:"':;1 . Portion 3.955
M::I.,=-7. ~ Ran::!":. LLC 6ð.2..qo.~, 36.5<2
M:::I~ ::I1ay Ran:t.. !..!..C ~~::2 0.786
Mol.....,.. ~tay Ranct,. LLC: 5<2~ 2..603
M:IJi!::' :)tay Rand1. LLC ~~~ 0272
W;:J,.':fi::" :)clay Ran::h. LLC 64ê-42C-C5 2.050
tJ:.;Lr :nay Ra..,::h. Ll.C &.:~21-01 14.689
M:I-W:- ::>=oy Ra.,:h. LLC: 5<2..<2,.::2 ~~ :'35
M;J,¡¡¡.... ::>:ay Ran:/¡, LLC õQ..¿.z1.::3 9266
M::fJ""1Ii:'" ::rt3y Ran:h. LLC ~~,-Ot. ,C23D
M;J.f-":"- ,:)t3y Ra..,::tI. u..c ~...(21~ ~.6't
M:: ~ ::>:ay Ron:h. LLC ~-~,-cs .<,.996
Mo~ :>IzIy A..n:h. LLC &.:2-421-07 0,182
M:Miii:- :>IzIy Ron:h. w:: ~2'-06 0.257
M=~ ::>:oy Ran:h. LLC 5<2·(22-01 ~ 8:.6«1
M~ =y Ran:h. LLC 64~(22·::2 20.176
M:Uò."': :::ay Ran::h, UC 6Q...Q2.:;3 0.986
M:I,!;Ic- ::>:oy Ran:h. LLC: ~2......:22~ 0.766
M:::I~. ::>b.y ~::h. L~C 642-422-05 C..39D
M~. :>3.y Ran':tt. L!...C' ~2~D5 7.$3:1
M= .~ :>byo R3.n:::h. U.C 642..(22-07 0.'55
M=IÆi:'" ;:)t3y Ran::h. LLC tï.L;:--'22-OS C.N8
SubtD"" 2~e.05B
G.¡œo.,.,%~ TDWt1 ea.",,:, L? &:.2-08:1-" - Portion 'E.~30
[1J .:..:..~ b,~owm providad by Mct".iI1În.
d;J j)-j:7 c2i 7)- J¡
. -----..-.-,. ~.__.-
Exhibit 1
~ErT I ::. : ~~~,.'!.
PR~?CSË::: 90L:N~ARJ'::S 0;:- :2t
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DIS TRIC T NO 97-03
(McMILLIN OrA Y RANCH SPA I )
rOil ¡...!
CITy 0; CHU!..L V:Sj A
CO:,.rNTy Of' SAN O¡::CC, STATr OF' CAUrOR:>; "
r'Lt" f><lS 0." or ,."
A' 1..[ ..eüi"M O'Y,.DC;I( 'O ~. Ji:Co(
- OT -..s or .usCSS"'[.d AIO() CO"..u..,1"r
p.D.a. '...c:LI't£S:JtS1'~...r,..o,c( -04
"'S~A\";"("TOC)_''''~OI"nc:ror
1o·[=::I.IN':'t'''!~Õ Df "[C:OI.:..rror
s.v.~f::;: .514:(ørCAl."~
GIf~J_$Yn'..
ASsts5Ol!/fItCOJlDtIl.tc:ouo.NCLr,,(
,'- \ eouotr'I' DI" Soul DI[C(
\" \ "' ,oe""""
\~.
r'LED ... noE OITa or 'HI: CIT'r CLlIQt or 1..e
c:.rr or CH\IU.1ItSL\ THIS_D4T Dr
,Iftll.
1tVERL"4, AUTK£W.
." ""'"
NOTE:
. IttrEIf TC wtTtS AND IIOuttDS US1'1frCCr
001 SoooEE1' 2
¡
¡
",
""
J \
'.
:\ , ~
, .,
[ \ ::. ,"4[~EiitYc:tll.;'4' ,..,,: 100(..,...,.. ~ s..c...""¡;
A / '-' ",.0", "'~..... CF 'o..,~"
, ;".loCU'''S ::ItS·Ii ,C·'i ...0 c.:-- or :"1..;..0.
'='\ / ¥'S'''. ;::...",... or s..~ 00c=-6utorr 51":! Or
:..>i."CIl...... ...s ~ .,.. r..;: CITY c::.....C.l
~ <. ~ T"C :,- ::r C:OOULÞ YlSI" .... " õ E:;;"~
\ ? -... "E:-""C "_;:õtE::r "[LO Qt. '''C__:)AO' ~¡
S=A¿~ ',-,/ 2- __" '9ge. ~"'S 'IESOLlJ:'O.. ..0
--- ---
= ',: ... ~ /
.-. - '_-. .-¡Ý
-----. - ., / -
......... '.:J '. :t,...~:t... .. .ot.:''''l.:'.
-- :-.:.£..<
"--- -+"' -~~
CURRENT POLICY & PROPOSED CHANGES t u·< BIT 1.-
(Proposed changes shown on page 5)
CITY OF CffiJLA VISTA
STATEMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES
REGARDING TIlE ESTABLISIIMEJIo'T
OF
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista (hereafter the "City Council") hereby
establishes and states its goals and policies concemÏng the use of Chapter 2.5 of Part I of Division
2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (hereafter the "Act") in providing
adequate public infrastructure improvements and public services for the City of Chula Vista (the
"City"). The following goals and policies shall apply to all community facilities districts hereafter
formed or proposed to be formed by the City. Any policy or goal stated herein may be
supplemented or amended by resolution of the City Council.
The purpose of this Statement of Goals and Policies is to provide the City staff. the
residents of the City and the owners and developers of property located within the City with
guidance in the application for and consideration of the establishment of community facilities
districts within the City for the purpose of fInancing or assisting in fInancing the acquisition or
construction of public infrastructure or the provision of authorized public services to benefIt and
serve either existing or new development or a combination thereof. The underlying principaJs
behind this policy are the protection of the public interest, assuring fairness in the application of
special taxes to current and future property owners, assuring full disclosure of the existence of any
special tax liens, insuring the creditworthiness of any community facilities district speciaJ tax
bonds, protecting the City's credit rating and fInanciaJ position and assuring that applicants for all
community facilities district proceedings other than City initiated proceedings pay all costs
associated with the formation of any community facilities district.
The scope of this policy is limited to the proposed formation of community facilities
districts for the limited purpose of fInancing or assisting in fInancing the acquisition or
construction of public infrastructure and/or the provision of authorized public services.
~ODUCTORYSTATEMENT
The City will consider applications initiated by owners or developers of vacant property
proposed to be developed, owners of property within existing developed areas or registered voters
residing in existing developed areas or the City itself for the establishment of community facilities
districts to finance authorized public improvements or to provide authorized public services which
benefIt or serve existing or new development or a combination thereof. A community facilities
district or an improvement area within a community facilities district proposed to be established
to finance public improvements or authorized services to serve new development may be referred
to as a "Development Related CFD."
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 1
Z
Each application for the establishment of a community facilities district must comply with
the applicabJe goals and policies contained herein unless the City Council expressJy grants an
exception to such policy or poJicies as they appJy to a specific appJication.
FINDING OF PUBLIC INTEREST OR BENEFIT
The City Council may authorize the initiation of proceedings to fonn a community facilities
district to finance authorized public improvements or to provide authorized public services if the
City CounciJ determines that the public improvements to be fmanced or pubJic services to be
provided or, in the case of a DeveJopment Related CFD, the attributes of the new development
will provide, in the opinion of the City Council, a public benefit to the community at large as well
as the benefit to be derived by the properties within the community facilities district.
Examples of public benefit to the community at large may include, but are not limited to,
the following:
1. Construction of a major public facility which meets a community need incluaing,
but not limited to, a major arterial which will provide a vital roadway facility to alleviate
congestion, water storage facilities which will remedy inadequate fire flow, and stonn drainage
facilities which are a part of the stonn drainage master plan.
2. Provision of public infrastructure sooner than would otherwise be required for a
particular development project.
3. Construction of public infrastructure to serve commercial or industrial projects
which will expand the City's employment and/or saJes tax base.
4. Provision of maintenance or other authorized public services such as landscaping,
lighting, stonn drain, flood control or open space maintenance necessary to promote or maintain
quality of life and public safety within existing or developing areas of the City.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 2
3
--._- _ _ __on_______...____
AUTHORIZED PUBLIC FACILITIES
Improvements proposed to be fInanced through a community facilities district must be
public improvements which will be owned, operated or maintained by the City or another public
agency or public utility or to which the City is authorized to contribute revenue. The types of
improvements eligible to be fInanced must serve a whole neighborhood area or greater. Such
improvements include:
A. Streets and highways satisfYing one or more of the following criteria:
(1) identifIed in the Circulation Element of the City as collectors or arterials;
(2) no direct access by abutting properties; or
(3) minimum daily traffic voJume of 3,500 ADT.
B. Sewer lines or other sewer facilities serving a minimum of 500 single fafuiJy
dwellings or equivalent dwelling units or such other community as the Director of Public Works
may detennine to otherwise be consistent with the intent of these goals and policies to be Jocated
within authorized streets and highways or within other public rights-of-way shown on the master
plan of sewer facilities.
C. Water mains with a minimum diameter of 10" or other water facilities to be located
within authorized streets and highways or within other public rights-of-way shown on the master
pJan of water facilities.
D. Drainage facilities serving a minimum of 1 ()() acres or such other community as the
Director of Public Works may detennine to otherwise be consistent with the intent of these goals
and poJicies or draining an eligible street.
E. Landscaping and irrigation facilities meeting one of the following criteria:
(1) Located within the right-of-way of a street or highway shown on the
Circulation Element of the City's General Plan;
(2) Located adjacent to an adopted scenic route; or
(3) Located within dedicated open space.
F. Reclaimed water facilities serving an area which benefIts the proposed community
facilities district.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 3
-I
G. Dry utilities serving a minimum of 500 single family dwelling units or equivalent
dwelling units or such other community as the Director of Public Works may determine to
otherwise be consistent with the intent of these goals and policies; provided, however, the amount
of special tax bond proceeds allocable to such dry utilities may not exceed that amount permitted
under Federal tax law and reguJations to ensure the tax exempt status of interest on the applicabJe
special tax bonds.
H. Grading for eligible public streets; provided, however, grading for a Development
Related CFD must meet one of the following criteria:
(1) Grading within the vertical planes of the right-of-way;
(2) Slopes to City-owned open space or open space easement areas; or
(3) Offsite roadway grading.
If the cut and fill within (1) and (2) do not balance, the cost of excavating, haliling
and compacting fill in the street is authorized to be financed. If there is excess
material in the street right-of-way, only the cost of excavating and hauling to
private property within the development project is eligible to be financed. The
determination of balance will be made on a total eligible street grading basis, not
on an individual street basis.
I. Such other improvements as may be authorized by Jaw and which the City Council
determines are consistent with the policies herein.
The City Council shall have the final determination as to the eligibility of any improvement
for financing, as well as the prioritization of fmancing of such improvements. Generally, "in-tract"
(e.g., local streets or utilities) improvements which serve residential development will not be
considered eligible to be fmanced through a community facilities district unless requested by the
owners or registered voters of an existing residentiaJ deveJopment to remedy a threat, found to
exist by the City Council, to the public health or safety resulting from an existing deficiency in
public improvements to serve such existing development.
Any public improvements proposed to be fmanced through a community facilities district
must meet all design and construction requirements and standards as may be established by the
City. Any public improvement, the construction of which is completed following the adoption of
the resolution of formation of a community facilities district, proposed to be acquired by the City
from the owner or developer of property within a Development Related CFD must be constructed
as if such improvements had been constructed under the direction and supervision, or under the
authority of, the City.
11 124/98 Marked to Show Changes 4
5
. ._.._-----_.-._-,.__.~...._._-----_.-
Public improvements proposed to be acquired from the proceeds of special tax bonds or
I special taxes shall not be acquired untiJ all improvements for a particular pproject (as defined
I below) are completed and accepted by the City and the Director of Public Works or his or her
designee has certified the final cost of such improvements. For purposes of this paragraph, a
I "Pproject" shall be defmed as all improvements within a particular street or easement including
I street improvements, sewer, drainage, 7md-utilities and grading and which are authorized to be
I acquired by the community facilities district pursuant to an acquisition and financing agreement
I by and between the City, acting on behalf of itself and the community facilities district, and the
I property owner or developer who is responsible for the construction of the public improvements
I (the" AcquisitionlFinancing Agreement"). If improvements within more than one (1) Project are
I authorized to be acquired through the community faciliteis district, then the improvements within
I each Project may be acquired separateJy as all improvements within such Project are compJeted
I and accepted by the City and the final costs certified. The. DiIcctol öf fublic 'Narks shð.ll hð.,e the.
ðtJthöIie, .!u.J.d dlsc:.l(,L.On to G.\tkblish one.. 01 mOl'- .!(.pAIllK. p.löjcc.~ Göml&t.\..Irt t\ith the. dc:.fLlitiÖll
I thClèðf for any conllT!l:lnÍt) ~HitiC! district. Each pproject established by the Diw::tor of Publ;c
Wö,ks for any community facilities district and all improvements included within each such
I project must be described in the Aacquisition/-m-fFinancing A'1Igreement for such commûnity
I facilities district. If the AcquisitionlFinancing Agreement Dit ""tm of Public. Works has established
I more than one (1) pproject for any community facilities district, the Acquisition/Financing
I AgreementD;,èctol of Públic Wö,k!, may authorize the partial release of funds to pay for the
I acquisition of each pproject when such pproject is completed and accepted by the City.-Any
dc"iatiÖll of the:. p.lõjêC.t d(.fmitiÖl"l ~hðl1 be. llþþlövOO by the. Dhc.c.tÖI of Itlbli" 'f.Volks.
I The City Council may, in its sole discretion, elect to deviate from or waive the foregoing
I policy in its consideration of the approval of an Acquisition/Financing Agreement for a community
I facilities district to authorize the payment of the purchase price for each discrete component of a
I Project, i.e., an individual improvement within a Project such as a sewer line within a Project
I which also includes street, water and drainage improvements. In eJecting to deviate from or waive
I the foregoing policy, the City Council may condition the payment of the purchase price for
I discrete components as the City Council deems necessary to insure the fmancial integrity of the
I community facilities district financing.
PRIORITIZATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
It is the policy of the City to give first priority to the provision of public improvements
benefitting the City in any community facilities district established by the City. It is secondarily
the policy of the City, in any community facilities district established by the City, to assist in the
provision of other public improvements to be owned, operated or maintained by other public
agencies or pubJic utilities.
, , /24/98 Marked to Show Changes 5
0
AUTHORIZED PUBLIC SERVICES
Public services proposed to be fInanced through a community facilities district may include:
A. Maintenance of parkways, medians and open space, including but not limited to,
maintenance of walls, fences, trail systems, pedestrian access systems and other
facilities within such open space, maintenance and preservation of habitat within
such open space, and biota and other forms of monitoring of plants, wildlife, use
of wildlife corridors and habitat quality as a part of any such open space
maintenance program.
B. Maintenance of naturalized drainage and flood control facilities including, but not
limited to, channels and detention and desiltation basins.
C. Such other services as may be authorized by the Act or by ordinance of the City
adopted pursuant to the charter authority of the City and which the City Council
detennines are consistent with the goals and policies herein and are in the'best
interest of the City and the residents and property owners within the community
facilities district.
INCIDENTAL COSTS
Eligible Incidental Costs
Eligible incidental costs which may be fInanced from the proceeds of special tax bonds
issued for a Development Related CFD or the special tax levied within a Development Related
CFD shall be limited to those incidental costs directly related to the improvements fInanced from
the proceeds of such special tax bonds or special tax revenues and may include:
1. Usual and customary design and engineering costs not to exceed the following
percentages:
a. Civil engineering - 7.5% of the cost of the improvements for which the
engineering was performed.
b. Soils engineering - 15 % of the cost of the applicable grading.
c. Landscape architecture - 10% of the cost of the applicable landscaping and
irrigation.
d. Surveying and construction staking - 2 % of the combined cost of the civil
engineering improvements and grading for the applicable street and wet
utilities.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 6
7
e. Utility engineering/coordination - 3 % of the cost of the applicable dry
utilities.
2. Construction administration and supervision not to exceed, in aggregate, 1.75 % of
the total construction cost of the applicable public improvements.
3. Special engineering studies related to "collector" or "transmission" facilities.
Eligibility of such studies must be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director.
4. Plan check and inspection fees (less any refunds).
5. Capacity or connection fees reJated soleJy to the public improvements being
acquired or constructed as pennitted under the Act.
6. CapitaJized interest on any community faciJities district special tax bonds as
authorized by the City Council pursuant to these goals and policies.
7. Costs of acquisition of off-site rights-of-way and/or easements including the
following:
a. Appraisal costs, including titJe reports.
b. Costs of preparing acquisition plats.
c. Appraised value or actual cost of right-of-way or easement, whichever is
Jess.
d. Legal fees and cost related to eminent domain proceedings approved by the
City Attorney.
8. Reimbursement of funds advanced by the applicant to pay for (i) preformation costs
and/or (ii) costs of issuance incurred by or on behaJf of the City.
9. Costs of environmental review, pennitting and mitigation limited to the specific
public improvements proposed to be financed through the community facilities district.
Unless specified otherwise above, the City Manager, or his designee, shall review all incidental
costs to insure that such costs are customary and reasonable.
Ineligible Incidental Costs
The following costs are not eligible to be financed from the proceeds of community
facilities district special tax bonds:
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 7
~
1. Development impact fees; provided, however, the City Council may, in its soJe
discretion, grant credit in an amount not to exceed the obligation for the payment of such fees if
improvements which would otherwise be financed from the proceeds of such fees are financed
from the proceeds of community facilities district special tax bonds.
2. Administrative or overhead expenses, [mancial or legal fees incurred by an
applicant for the formation of a community facilities district. This limitation does not apply to
amounts advanced by the applicant to the City pursuant to the provisions of this policy to pay for
prefonnation costs incurred by the City. (See "Prefonnation Cost Deposits and Reimbursements"
below.)
3. Land use planning and subdivision costs and environmental review costs related to
such land use planning and subdivision.
4. Planning studies unless off-site.
5. Environmental impact reports unless off-site. ~
6. Construction loan interest.
7. Subdivision fmancial analysis.
8. Attorneys' fees related to the land use entitlement or subdivision process unless off-
site.
9. On site right-of-way and easements.
10. Any compensation payable to the City as consideration for the City's agreement to
provide the financing mechanism for the fmancing of the authorized improvements and eligible
incidental expenses and to acquire the authorized improvements pursuant to the terms and
conditions of an agreement with the City and the property owner or deveJoper as appropriate.
11. Other overhead expenses incurred by the applicant.
REOUIRED VALUE-TO-DEBT RATIO
Itis the policy of the City that the value-to-debt ratio, i.e., the full cash value of the
properties subject to the levy of special taxes, including the value of the improvements to be
financed from the proceeds of the issue or series of special tax bonds for which the value-to-debt
ratio is being computed, compared to the aggregate amount of the special tax lien proposed to be
created plus any prior fixed assessment liens and/or special tax liens, for a community facilities
district must be at least 4: 1. The required value-to-debt ratio shall be determined with respect to
all taxable property within the community facilities district in the aggregate and with respect to
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 8
1
~__.__.._____._.._._.._.___.,,,.___ - 'n__.......____
each development area for which no fInals subdivision map has been fIled. A community facilities
district with a value-to-debt ratio of less than 4: 1 but equal to or greater than 3: 1 may be
approved, in the sole discretion of the City Council, upon a determination by the City Manager,
after consultation with the Finance Director, the bond counsel, the underwriter and the financiaJ
advisor, that a value-to-debt ratio ofless than 4: 1 is fInancially prudent under the circumstances
of the particular community facilities district. In addition, the City Council may, in its sole
discretion, accept a form or fonns of credit enhancement such as a Jetter of credit, bond insurance
or the escrow of bond proceeds to offset a defIciency in the required value-to-debt ratio as it
appJies to the taxable property within the community facilities district in the aggregate or with
respect to any development area.
The value-to-debt ratio shall be determined based upon the full cash value of the properties
subject to the Jevy of the special tax as shown on the ad valorem assessment roll or upon an
appraisal of the properties proposed to be assessed; provided, however, the City Manager may
require that the value-to-debt ratio be determined by an appraisal if, in his judgement, the assessed
values of the properties proposed to be assessed do not reflect the current full cash vaJue of such
properties. The appraisal shall be coordinated by, done under the direction of, and addressed to
the City. The appraisal shall be undertaken by a state certifIed real estate appraiser, as defmed in
Business and Professions Code Section 11340. The appraiser shall be selected and retained by the
City or the City's fmancial advisor. The costs associated with the preparation of the appraisal
report shall be paid by the applicant for the community facilities district, but shall be subject to
possible reimbursement as provided for herein. The appraisal shall be conducted in accordance
with assumptions and criteria established by the City, based upon generally accepted appraisal
standards or state recommended standards for similar appraisals conducted for the same purpose.
The City reserves the right to require a market absorption study for any community
facilities district proposed to include new development. In any such case the City shall retain, at
the applicant's sole expense but subject to reimbursement as provided for herein, a consultant to
prepare a report to verify or establish the projected market absorption for and the projected sales
prices of the properties proposed to be included within the community facilities district. If a
market absorption study is conducted, the appraiser shall utilize the conclusions of the market
absorption study in conducting the appraisal of the properties within the proposed community
facilities district or shall justify, to the satisfaction of the City Manager, why such conclusions
were not utilized in conducting such appraisal.
CRITERIA FOR APPRAISALS
DefInition of Appraisal
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 9
/d
For purposes of these goals and policies, an appraisal shall mean a written statement
independently and impartially prepared by a qualified appraiser setting forth an opinion of defmed
value of an adequately described property as of a specific date, supported by the presentation and
analysis of relevant market infonnation.
Contents of the Appraisal
An appraisal should reflect nationally recognized appraisaJ standards, including, to the
extent appropriate, the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. An appraisal must
contain sufficient documentation, including valuation data and the appraiser's analysis of such
data, to support the appraiser's opinion of value. At a minimum, the appraisaJ shall contain the
following:
1. PUI:pose of the appraisal. This should include the reason for the appraisal, a definition of
all values required and the property rights being appraised.
2. Area. City and Nei¡:hborhood Data. These date should include such infonnation as ditëctly
affects the appraised property together with the appraiser's conclusions as to significant trends.
3. Property Data. This should include a detailed physical description of the property, its size,
shape, soil conditions, topography, improvements, and other physical characteristics which affect
the property being appraised. The avaiJability, capacity of, and proximity to, utilities and other
infrastructure should also be discussed.
4. TitJe Condition. The condition of title to the property appraised should be discussed based
upon the appraiser's examination of a title report of the property appraised. The appraiser should
analyze and discuss those title issues which are concluded to impact the value of the property being
appraised.
5. Improvement Condition.
a. The appraiser shall value the property within the community facilities district on
an "as-is" basis taking into consideration the value associated with the public
improvements to be funded from the proceeds of the issue of bonds for which the
appraisal is being undertaken. The property in the community facilities district shalJ
be valued as if it were free and clear of any special taxes and assessments, if any,
so that a proper comparison of value-to-debt can be determined. In determining his
or her conclusion of value, the appraiser may consider the value of the property in
the community facilities district under different market conditions. This may
consist of vaJuing the property as if it were sold to a single purchaser in bulk or
soJd to severaJ purchasers in portions or pieces.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 10
//
....__.m.._._ --.- ---_.._--~----_..._,---_.._."
b. Land parcels which have been developed with residences and subsequently sold
shouJd at a minimum indicate land parcel size, number of lots, density, number of
plans, square footage, room counts, year construction was initiated, year of
completion, and when sales were initiated.
c. Land parceJs with residential product under construction or with standing inventory
should be described as in a. above and include a summary of the stage of
development regarding the number of units completed, number of models, status
of units under construction, finished Jots and mass-graded or raw Jots. In addition,
a comment on the marketability of the units (architecture, size, etc.) is appropriate.
d. Land parcels which have been deveJoped with income-producing (or owner-occu-
pied) commercial, industrial, apartments, offices, etc., should be described as
follows:
(i) Commercial-Retail - Land parcel size; basic construction type; typicaJ
tenant improvements (and who is responsible for their constructIon);
leasabJe area, when construction was initiated; and date of completion.
(ii) Industrial - Land parcel size; basic construction type, whether single or
multi tenant; typical office buiJd-out as percentage of total area, when
construction was initiated; and date of completion.
(iii) Apartments - Land parcel size; basic construction type; number of stories;
number of units; unit mix; size; total rentabJe area, when construction was
initiated; and date of compJetion.
(iv) Office - Land parcel size; basic construction type; typical tenant improve-
ments/allowance; net rentabJe area, when construction was initiated; and
date of completion.
6. General Plan Classification. Describe the General Plan classification of the subject and
comparable properties.
7. Zonin~. Describe the zoning for the subject and comparable properties. Note any
discrepancy between General Plan classification and zoning. If rezoning is imminent, discuss
further under Item 8 below.
8. Analysis of Hi¡:hest and Best Use. The report should state and support the highest and best
use to which a property can be put and recognize that land is appraised as though vacant and
avaiJabJe for deveJopment to its highest and best use, and the improvements are based on their
actual contribution to the site.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 11
/Z,
9. Statement ofVaJue. The appraiser's opinion of the value of the specified property rights,
prepared according to all relevant and reliabJe approaches to value consistent with commonly
accepted professional appraisal practices. If a discounted cash flow anaJysis is used, it should be
supported by at least one other valuation method such as sales comparison approach utilizing sales
of properties that are in the same stage of development. If more than one valuation approach is
used, the appraiser shall include an anaJysis and reconciliation of such approaches to support the
appraiser's opinion of vaJue.
10. Certification. Certification of appraiser and pennission to reproduce and use the appraisaJ
report as required for bond issuance.
MAXIMUM AGGREGATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS
It is the policy of the City that the maximum annual speciaJ tax installment applicable to
any parcel used for residential purposes shall not exceed one percent (1 %) of the sale price of
newJy developed properties subject to the levy of the special tax (the "NewJy DeveJoped
Properties ") as of the date of the close of escrow of the initial sale of any residential dwelling~ unit
to such residential home owner. As a distinct and separate requirement, the total of the following
taxes, assessments described in 4. below and special taxes appearing on the property tax bill, shall
not exceed two (2 %) of such initiaJ sales price of Newly Developed Properties:
1. Ad valorem property taxes.
2. Voter approved ad valorem property taxes in excess of one percent (1 %) of the
assessed value of the subject properties.
3. The maximum annual special taxes levied by the community facilities district under
consideration and any other community facilities district or other public agency excepting
therefrom special taxes levied by a community facilities district fonned or under consideration for
formation for the purpose of providing services such as open space maintenance, landscape
maintenance and preserve maintenance.
4. The annual assessment installments, including any administrative surcharge, for any
existing assessment district where such assessment installments are utilized to pay debt service on
bonds issued for such assessment district. Annual assessment installments for maintenance and
services shall not be included in the assessments calculated in detennining the aggregate tax,
assessment and special tax obligation for a parcel.
The applicant for the establishment of any Development Related CFD shall be required to
enter into an agreement with the City or the community facilities district requiring the prepayment
by the applicant of that portion of the special tax obligation applicable to any parcel used for
residential purposes in order to reduce the annual maximum special tax obligation so that the
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 12
/3
" --- - _.__.~'-'--"-"'-""'--'---"-'."----~----'---'-_.._'-.....-..---- --
maximum annual special tax installment shall not exceed 1 % of the sales price for such parcel and
the totaJ taxes, assessments and special taxes does not exceed 2 % of such sales price.
SPECIAL TAX REOUIREMENTS
The rate and method of apportionment of the special tax for any community facilities
district shall adhere to the following requirements:
1. The maximum special tax shall be adequate to include an amount necessary to pay
for the expenses incurred by such community facilities district in the levy and collection of the
special tax and the administration of the speciaJ tax bonds and the community facilities district.
2. The maximum projected annual special tax revenues must equal 110% of the
projected annual gross debt service on any bonds of the community facilities district.
3. A backup special tax shall be required for any Development Related CFD to protect
against changes in density resulting in the generation of insufficient special tax revenues tó pay
annual debt service and administrative expenses. The City Council may additionally or
aJternatively require that as a condition of approval of the downsizing of the development in a
Development Related CFD at the request of the applicant or the applicant's successor-in-interest,
the applicant or the applicant's successor-in-interest, as applicable, may be required to prepay such
pomon of the special tax obligation as may be necessary in the determination of the City to ensure
that adequate debt service coverage exists with respect to any outstanding bonds or otherwise
provides security in a fonn and amount deemed necessary by the City Council to provide for the
payment of debt service on the bonds.
4. All deveJoped and undeveloped property within any community facilities district
which is not otherwise statutorily exempt from the Jevy of special taxes shall bear its appropriate
share of the community facilities district's aggregate special tax obligation from the date of
fonnatíon of the community facilities district consistent with the other goals and policies set forth
herein.
5. A partial andlor total prepayment option shall be included in any rate and method
of apportionment of special taxes to pay for public facilities. No prepayment shall be permined
of a special tax levied to fInance authorized services or maintenance.
6. The maximum special tax to pay for public facilities shall be Jevied against any
parcel used for private residential purposes in the fIrst fIscal year following the fIscal year in
which the building pennit for the construction of a residential dwelling unit on such parcel is
issued and such maximum special tax may not escalate after the fIrst fIscal year in which such
special tax is so levied.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 13
If
7. The rate and method of apportionment of a special tax to pay for public facilities
shall specify a fiscal year beyond which the special tax may not be levied on any parcel used for
private residential purposes. A special tax to pay for public services or maintenance shall have no
termination date unless estabJished by the City Council.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL TAX BONDS
All terms and conditions of any special tax bonds issued by the City for any community
facilities district, including, without limitation, the sizing, timing, term, interest rates, discount,
redemption features, flow of funds, investment provisions and foreclosure covenants, shall be
established by the City. Each special tax bond issue shall be structured to adequateJy protect bond
owners and to avoid negatively impacting the bonding capacity or credit worthiness of the City.
Unless otherwise approved by the City Council, the following shall serve as minimum bond
requirements :
a. A reserve fund shall be established for each bond issue to be funded out of the bond
proceeds in an amount equal to 10% of the original proceeds of the bonds or such lessor amount
as may be required by federal tax law.
b. Interest shalJ be capitalized for a bond issue only so long as necessary to place the
special tax installments on the assessment roll; provided, however, interest may be capitalized for
a term to be established in the sole discretion of the City Council on a case-by-case basis, not to
exceed an aggregate of 18 months, taking into consideration the value-to-debt ratio, the expected
timing of initial residential occupancies, expected absorption and buildout of the project, the
expected construction and completion schedule for the public improvements to be funded from the
proceeds of the bond issue in question, the size of the bond issue, the deveJopment pro forma and
the equity position of the applicant and such other factors as the City Council may deem relevant.
c. In instances where multiple series of bonds are to be issued, the City shall
determine what improvements shall be financed from the proceeds of each series of bonds.
d. Neither the faith, credit or taxing power of the City shall be pledged to the payment
of the bonds. The sole source of revenue for the payment of the bonds shall be the special taxes,
capitalized interest, if any, and moneys on deposit in the reserve fund established for such bonds.
DISCHARGE OF SPECIAL TAX OBLIGATION
It is the policy of the City that the speciaJ tax obligation reJated to the financing of the
acquisition or construction of public improvements may be prepaid and discharged in whole or in
part at any time. The applicant for the formation of a Development Related CFD must provide
notice and opportunity for the purchasers of property within such community facilities district to
prepay the special tax obligation applicable to such property at the time of the close of escrow.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 14
16
.._~-_.._._----
The applicant for the fonnation of a Development Related CFD must prepare and present
a plan, satisfactory to the City Council, prior to the public hearing to consider the fonnation of
such community facilities district describing how the prospective purchaser will be notified of the
existence of the special tax lien and the options which the prospective purchaser has regarding the
prepayment and discharge of the special tax obligation.
DISCLOSURE TO PROPERTY PURCHASERS IN DEVELOPMENT RELATED CFD'S
The applicant for the fonnation of a DeveJopment ReJated CFD will be required to
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Manager (when the tenn City Manager is used herein
it shall mean the City Manager or his designee) that there will be full disclosure of the special tax
obligation for such community facilities district and of any and all other special taxes or
assessments on individual parcels to prospective purchasers or lessees of property within such
community facilities district, including interim purchasers, merchant builders, residential
homeowners and commerciaJ or industrial purchasers or Jessees.
Such notice must include all of the following in addition to such other provisions asr may
be required by the Act, the MunicipaJ Code of the City or the applicant may deem necessary:
a. Provide for full disclosure of the existence of the special tax lien and any other
assessment or special tax obligation applicable to the properties within the community facilities
district (whether imposed by the City or any other public agency), including the principaJ amount
of the special tax obligation and any other applicable assessment or special tax obligation, renn
of each of the assessment or special tax liens and the amount of the expected payments of the
special taxes and the maximum authorized special tax.
b. Disclose the option to prepay the special tax to pay for public facilities or allow the
special tax to pay for public facilities to be passed through to the purchaser of such property and
the adjustment, if any, in the sales price of the homes or other property which will apply if the
special tax lien is passed through. Provide the ability for the prospective purchaser to elect to
exercise the option either to prepay the special tax obligation for facilities at the close of escrow
or to have the special taxes included in the property taxes for the property. Such disclosure shalJ
be placed in all sales brochures, all other on-site advertising and all purchase documents.
c. Specify in all disclosure documents the name, title, telephone number and address
of a representative of the City as provided to the applicant who may be contacted by any
prospective purchaser of property within the community facilities district for further infonnation
regarding the community facilities district and the speciaJ tax liens.
The applicant must agree to provide an original copy of all applicable disclosure documents
to the City prior to initiating property saJes.
, , /24/98 Marked to Show Changes 15
/6
PREFORMATION COST DEPOSITS AND REIMBURSEMENTS
Except for those applications for community facilities districts where the City is the
applicant, all City and consultant costs incurred in the evaluation of applications and the
proceedings to form a community facilities district and issue special tax bonds therefor will be paid
by the applicant by advance deposit witl1 the City of moneys sufficient to pay all such costs.
Each application for the formation of a community facilities district shall be accompanied
by an initiaJ deposit in an amount to be determined by the City Manager to be adequate to fund
the evaluation of the application and undertake the proceedings to form the community facilities
district and issue the special tax bonds therefor. The City Manager may, in his or her sole
discretion, permit an applicant to make periodic deposits to cover such expenses rather than a
single lump sum deposit; provided, however, no preformation costs shall be incurred by the City
in excess of the amount then on deposit for such purposes. If additional funds are required to pay
required preformation costs, the City Manager may make written demand upon the applicant for
such additional funds and the applicant shall deposit such additional funds with the City within five
(5) working days of the date of receipt of such demand. Upon the depletion of the funds deposited
by applicant for preformation costs, all proceedings shall be suspended until receipt by the City
of such additional funds as the City Manager may demand.
The deposits shall be used by the City to pay for costs and expenses incurred by the City
incident to the evaluation of the application and the proceedings for the formation of the
community facilities district and the issuance of the special tax bonds therefor, including, but not
limited to, legal, special tax consultant, engineering, appraisal, market absorption, financial
advisor, acimini<trative and staff costs and expenses, required notifications, printing and
publication costs.
The City shall refund any unexpended portion of the deposits upon the occurrence of one
of the following events:
a. The formation of the community facilities district or the issuance of the special tax
bonds;
b. The formation of the community facilities district or the issuance of the special tax
bonds is disapproved by the City Council;
c. The proceedings for the formation of the community facilities district and the
issuance of the special tax bonds are abandoned at the written request of the appJicant; or
d. The special tax bonds may not be issued and sold.
Except as otherwise provided herein, the appJicant shall be entitled, at the option of the
applicant, to reimbursement of or credit against special taxes for all amounts deposited with the
, , /24/98 Marked to Show Changes 16
/1
----.-.......-
City to pay for costs incident to the evaluation of the application and the proceedings for the
fonnation of the community facilities district and the issuance of the special tax bonds therefor
upon the fonnation of the community faciJities district and the successful issuance and saJe of the
special tax bonds for the community facilities district. Any such reimbursement shall be payable
solely from the proceeds of the special tax bonds.
The City shall not accrue or pay interest on any moneys deposited with the City.
SELECTION OF CONSULTAJI.'TS
The City shall seJect and retain all consultants necessary for the evaluation of any
application and the proceedings for the fonnation of a community facilities district and the issuance
of the special tax bonds therefor, including, but not limited to, special tax consultant, bond
counsel, fInancial advisor, underwriter, appraiser, and market absorption analyst after consultation
with the applicant.
LAND USE APPROVALS -
Properties proposed to be included in a Development Related CFD must have received such
discretionary land use approvals as may, in the determination of the City, be necessary to enable
the City to adequately evaluate the community facilities district including the properties to be
included and the improvements proposed to be fInanced. The City will issue bonds secured by the
levy of special taxes within a Development Related CFD when (i) the properties included within
such community facilities district have received those applicable discretionary land use approvals
which would permit the development of such properties consistent with the assumptions utiJized
in the development of the rate and method of apportionment of the special taxes for such
community facilities district and (ii) appJicable environmentaJ review has been completed.
It is the policy of the City Council in granting approval for development such as zoning,
specifIc plan or subdivision approval to grant such approval as a part of the City's ongoing
pJanning and Jand use approval process. In granting such approval, the City reserves such rights
as may be permitted by Jaw to modify such approvals in the future as the City Council determines
the public health, safety, welfare and interest may require. Such approval when granted is subject
to a condition that the construction of any part of the development does not, standing alone, grant
any rights to compJete the development of the remainder of such development. Construction of
public improvements to serve undeveloped land fInanced through a community facilities district
shall not vest any rights to the then existing land use approvals for the property assessed for such
improvements or to any particuJar level, type or intensity of deveJopment or use. Applicants for
a DeveJopment Related CFD must include an express acknowledgment of this policy and shall
expressly waive on their behalf and on behalf of their successors and assigns any cause of action
at law or in equity including, but not limited to, taking or damaging of property, for reassessment
of property or denial of any right protected by USC Section 1983 which might be applicabJe to the
properties to be assessed.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 17
. /£"'
APPLICATION PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT RELATED CFD'S
Any application for the establishment of a community facilities district shall contain such
information and be submitted in such form as the City Manager may require. In addition to such
information as the City Manager may require, each application must contain:
1. Proof of authorization to submit the application on behalf of the owner of the
property for which the application is submitted if the applicant is not the owner of such property.
2. Evidence satisfactory to the City Manager that the applicant represents or has the
consent of the owners of not less than 67 %, by area, of the property proposed to be subject to the
levy of the special tax.
3. For any Development Related CFD proposed to fInance improvements to benefIt
new deveJopment, a business pJan for the development of the property within the proposed
community facilities district and such additional fmancial information as the City Manager may
deem necessary to adequateJy review the fmancial feasibility of the community facilities district.
For Development Related CFD's proposed to finance improvements to benefIt new development,
the applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Manager the ability of the owner of
the property proposed to be developed to pay the special tax installments for the community
facilities district and any other assessments, special taxes and ad valorem taxes on such property
until full build out of the property.
It is the intention of the City Council that applicants for a community facilities district have
an early opportunity to have the application reviewed by City staff for compliance with this policy.
In that regard, the City Council hereby directs the City Manager to create a community facilities
district application review 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 may deem necessary. The committee shall meet on request with the applicant
for a community facilities district for the purpose of reviewing an application to form a community
facilities district following the determination by the City Manager that the information contained
in the application for such community facilities district complies with the requirements of this
policy. Following the review of such an appJication, the committee shall prepare and submit a
report to the City Council containing the fIndings and recommendations of the committee
regarding the application.
Following completion of the committee report, the City Manager shall place the application
on the City Council agenda for review. After review of the application and consideration of the
committee report, the City Council shall determine whether or not to approve the initiation of
proceedings to form the community facilities district. The decision of the City Council pertaining
to the application shall be fmal.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 18
/1
-...------ -. -- ..- .".---.-- . .-.'" -,------_. ----.----... -.-" .-.-.-". -.... --.
The ability of a property owner or developer to obtain financing of public improvements
from the proceeds of tax-exempt bonds provides substantial economic benefits to such owner or
developer not the least of which may be the financing of such improvements at interest rates
substantially lower than conventional financing interest rates, if such conventional financing is
available, and/or the ability to obtain financing without providing equity compensation to the
lender. In providing such financing for a Development ReJated CFD the City CounciJ believes that
the City is providing valuable consideration to the property owner or developer and should be
receive consideration in exchange. It is the goal of the City to insure that the City and the
remainder of its residents, property owners and taxpayers are compensated for the consideration
provided to the property owner or deveJoper of a Development Related CFD and that such
compensation should be one percent (1 %) of the total authorized bonded indebtedness for such a
community facilities district. Prior to the issuance of special tax bonds for any Development
Related CFD, the applicant shall pay to the City the pro rata amount of any compensation payabJe
to the City as consideration for the City's agreement to provide the financing mechanism for the
financing of the authorized improvements and eligible incidentaJ expenses and to acquire the
authorized improvements pursuant to the terms and conditions of an agreement between the City
and the property owner or developer as appropriate. For example, if the compensation payable to
the City for such consideration is $100,000 for a Development Related CFD where the totaJ
authorized bonded indebtedness is $10,000,000 and the series of special tax bonds to be initially
issued is $5,000,000, the compensation payable to the City prior to the issuance of the intiaJ series
of bonds will be the principal amount of the initial bond issue ($5,000,000) divided by the total
amount of the authorized bonded indebtedness ($10,000, (00) multiplied by the total compensation
for such Development Related CFD ($100,000). In this exampJe, the compensation payabJe prior
to the issuance of the first series of bonds would be:
$5.000 000
$10,000,000 X $100,000 = $50,000.
11/24/98 Marked to Show Changes 19
;2()
ITEM NUMBER: 02¿;,
RESOLUTION NUMBER: fiLL ~
ORDINANCE NUMBER: cQ768'
OTHER:
CONTRACT: .ß-VL. ~
CONTRACT/RESOLUTION DATE:
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE WAS CONTINUED FROM
(DATE): ¿)éC!.. 08 /998
AGENDA PACKET WAS SCANNED ON (DATE): Dé c.. oS /996'
WA-5 DE:C- /5 /q98
THIS ITEM !:iAS-BE'E'N CONTINUED TO (DATE):
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION (TITLE OF CONTRACT, ORDINANCE, RESOLUTION, ETC):
~ /C;30ð ~ ~4ñ-r.x. 9g--cf([)S-
/CJ2ð/ /( /r 9ð"-':<5~
. fJAA'.-i:JPt;:(...I~ -<Jp'n~ ~~~
bEe!.- 08 /998
. <..
t!Jt~ ~ 97-3
~~ tP~ ~ SPv9 ð7U-
c26~O
-_._."-,--_._..,_..,._-~...------_. .__..._--_._-~~---_._.._-
ITEM NUMBER: 02'1
RESOLUTION NUMBER: ~
-
ORDINANCE NUMBER:
OTHER: ~
~
CONTRACT:
CONTRACT/RESOLUTION DATE: -
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE WAS CONTINUED FROM
(DATE): {)G~ oÆ ¡C:¡C:::¡8
AGENDA PACKET WAS SCANNED ON (DATE): D£::C!... c8 1996'
THIS ITEM ~ CONTINUED TO (DATE): /)t;c.... /'5 / c¡c:¡e
Wrt5-
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION (TITLE OF CONTRACT, ORDINANCE, RESOLUTION, ETC):
~AA~Ø~~ ~ ~
tø ~ æ. ~~~
~ ~~
~~ 8- /9'7~ ~
,/ .
~~ cæ~
c17-0 ¡\
I
,.-,
\'
----- --.-.---- --"
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
It.m~;¿7
Meeting Dat:: /8/98 J.ý;f'1 Y
ITEM TITLE: Report for Consideration to Amend the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code--
to create a Kiosk Sign Program.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building- ¡~t
REV1EWED BY: City Manager ~ þt~J (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No....K.)
The Planning and Building Department is in the process of drafting an ordinance for Council review
which would amend the Municipal Code to allow the establishment of an off-site real estate
directional Kiosk Sign Program to provide directions to master planned communities on the east side
of Interstate 805. The proposed program will allow the City to enter into an agreement for the
installation, maintenance, and enforcement of off-site real estate directional signs located within the
public right-of-way in the eastern area of the City_
RECO.'\1:\fENDATION:
1. Direct staff to prepare an ordinance establishing a Kiosk Sign Program for consideration by
the Planning Commission and City Council.
2. Direct staff to process a Request for Proposals and select an administrator for the Kiosk Sign
Program.
, Approve in concept the draft Kiosk Sign Plan (Attachment 1) with the understanding that it
~.
will be fine tuned by the Director of Planning and Building in final negotiations with the
proposed administrator.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Currently there is a proliferation of signs, many illegal, advertising new residential developments
in the eastern part of the City. In an attempt to address this visual 'blight, there is reason to develop
an ordinance which will establish criteria for the placement of off-site kiosk signs and will allow the
City to enter into an agreement for the administration of the Kiosk Sign Program. Jn partnership
with the major developers in that area of the City, the Planning and Building Department has met
with developer representatives to discuss a program which will not only assist in the elimination of
the visual blight created by illegal signs by actually removing the current and future illegal signs but
will also benefit the developers and potential buyers in the eastern part of the City.
The following is an abbreviated summary of the proposed plan for the installation of kiosk signs
found in Attachment 1:
d-/
ft-/
-~,---_._-.._..~-
.-..'---.'--"'-
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 12/8/98 ~
Section I of the plan establishes the Administrator as the party responsible for soliciting participants· .
in the program and for installing and maintaining all kiosk signs in the number and locations"·
appro\'ed by the City.
Section II discusses the specifications of the sign structures. This proposed plan would include a
total of 34 signs along the major arterials east of 1-805, each not exceeding J 2 feet in height and 7.5
feet in \\idth. The signs are to be made of wood and painted shades of brown with white lettering.
The name of the City, and possibly the City's logo, will be identified on each kiosk structure as a
reminder that the various advertised developments are "lithin the Chula Vista city limits and that the
sign is part of an authorized sign program endorsed by the City.
Section III identifies the requirement to obtain appropriate building and encroachment permits and
pay fees as required. These are one-time fees specifically associated with the initial plan review and
field inspection of the installed kiosk sign structures. The location and number of kiosk signs will
be thoroughly evaluated through this permit process to ensure traffic safety and aesthetic
considerations are appropriately addresses.
Section IV outlines the administration of the program, including a requirement for the Administrator
to reimburse the City at the full cost recovery rate for staff time associated with administering and
monitoring the agreement. Staff estimates the annual reimbursement cost for monitoring the
program to range from S3,000 to S5,000.
Section V discusses the time for erection, maintenance and removal of the signs and panels. In
addition. it identifies the maintenance and administration responsibilities of the Administrator. The
Administrator will be responsible for maintaining the kiosks signs as well as removal of any illegal
directional signs throughout the area.
Section VI provides for adjustments to the plan as may be warranted and approved by the Director
of Planning and Building.
Attachment 2 is a diagram of the kiosk sign structure as recommended by staff. This proposed sign
is similar to that recommended by the developers. Staff has modified the developers recommended
sign by adding the City's logo and name to the top of the sign. -
FISCAL [\IPACT: The cost to administer this program will be reco\'Cfed by fees assessed upon
the administrator of the kiosk sign program.
Attachments
I. Draft Kiosk Sign Plan
.
') Proposed Kiosk Sign Diagram
II:SJI^RED BLD !!SG J..:.JOSKWrD .27
December~. ;9n (N9^~1)
~/;L
ATTACHMENT 1
KIOSK SIGN PLAN
.
The purpose of this program is to provide directional signs to residential developments in the
portion of the City ofChula Vista which is east ofInterstate 805. It will provide a uniform, _.
coordinated method of offering the development community directional signage to residential
projects. Aesthetics, traffic safety and removal of illegal signs are of great importance to this
plan.
I GENERAL SCOPE
The administrator shall maintain all kiosk structures and panels as well as administer the
kiosk sign program. Administration shall include the coordination of new kiosk structures
and their location, solicitation of participants in the kiosk program and the placement of
kiosk panels. Construction of new kiosk structures and/or kiosk panels shall be
manufactured and erected within 10 working days from the date a signed contract with
developer/purchaser.
II KIOSK STRUCTURES AND PANELS
A. Each kiosk structure shall be a maximum of 12 feet high and a maximum of7.5
feet wide. The structure sh.all be constructed in conformance with a design which
is to be approved by the Director of Planning and Building (Director). The height
and/or width of the kiosk structure may be adjusted within the maximum allowable
heights and widths based on location and the number of panels. Each sign
variation shall be approved by the Director.
B. Sign panels shall be a maximum of 3 square feet in total area and shall measure
approximately 6 feet horizontal length by 6 inches vertical height. The maximum
number of panels per structure shall be 8. Only one panel per development may be
placed On a single sign structure face.
C. The kiosk structures and panels shall be constructed of wood, be one or more
shades of brown, and shall have white lettering. Each structure and panel shall
have an anti-graffiti material applied.
D. Each kiosk shall have the City logo at the top of the structure and the words "City
of Chula Vista" in a prominent location at the top of the structure. In the event it
is a dual faced kiosk, the words shall appear on both sides of the kiosk at the top.
E. Wording on the kiosk panels shall be limited to thé name of the subdivision and a
directional arrow. Minor size variations may be permitted to accommodate text.
All directional arrows shall be aligned on the street side of each panel. Copy is
comply with the approved design.
F. There shall be no illumination of kiosk structures or panels.
~~5
__.._~.,_..._..._.._~. m_ '.__""
ATTACHMENT 1
~
Page 2
G. No kiosk structures shall be placed within 300 feet of another, except when they
are located across the street from one another. The City Planning Director may
grant special consideration to those locations where the demand for the number of
kiosk panels exceeds the capacity of the structure.
H. There shall be no changes to the face of any kiosk structure or panel without first
obtaining approval from the Director. . .
I. All sign locations shall be approved by the Director and the Director of Public
Works. No kiosk sign shall be placed within the clear sight triangle of a public
right-of-way or private driveway. The administrator shall comply with all
requirements of any open space areas to the satisfaction of the City. Prior to
approval for any kiosk sign which is located either wholly or in part on private
property, the administrator shall obtain written consent of the effected property
owner for such placement as well as for maintenance and/or removal by either the
administrator or the City. A copy of said consent shall be filed with the Planning
Director prior to approval of sign locations
J There shall be no additions, tag signs, attention-getting devices, or other
appurtenances added to the structures or panels as approved. Should such occur,
the administrator will remove them forthwith.
K. Sign panels shall be allowed until all units or subdivision lots are sold or for a
period of 36 months, whichever occurs first If all lots are not sold within 36
months, a request can be made and the Director will consider an extension after
reviewing its need in comparison with other requests.
III. PER!\1ITS
The Administrator shall obtain encroachment and building permits as may be required by
the City and shall pay any fees so required.
IV. ADMINJSTRA. TION OF PROGRAM
A. The Administrator shall administer the Kiosk Sign Program in accordance with the
Chula Vista Municipal Code, the Kiosk Sign Program Agreement, and with this
plan. 0
B. The Administrator shall establish a deposit account with the City on the initial and
subsequent anniversary dates of the contract in the amount of $4,000 to defray the
cost of monitoring and enforcing the Kiosk Sign Program. The City shall debit
from the account those costs incurred by City staff in monitoring the program at
full cost recovery rate. Administrator shall be responsible for maintaining a
balance in the deposit account of no less than $1,000.
:J?
#rlj
ATTACHMENT 1
~
Page 3
V. SIGN ERECTION, MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL
A. Administrator shall erect, or cause to be erected, new, City approved, kiosk
structures and/or panels within] 0 working days from the date of a signed contract
with the purchaser.
B. Administrator shall maintain, repair, replace and repaint each kiosk structure
and/or panel as necessary so that they remain in good condition and repair. A
weekly monitoring of each kiosk sign shall be required.
C. At such time that repairs are needed, the Administrator shall undertake everything
necessary to repair or replace any kiosk structure and/or panel within 3 business
days of its knowledge of such need for repair or replacement.
D If the needed repair is the result of graffiti, the Administrator shall promptly, not
exceeding 24 hours, undertake everything necessary to remove the graffiti.
E. Administrator shall take necessary action to remove any illegal off-site real estate
directional signs which are in the public right-of-way within the area of the Kiosk
Sign Program. Administrator shall make every attempt to remove said signs that
are located on private property. If there is no voluntary compliance on private
property, Administrator will notifÿ the City of the illegal sign and what steps have
been taken to attempt compliance. In addition, Administrator shall remove any
sign panels which an offending developer may have on any and all kiosk sign
structures.
F. In the event that it reasonably becomes necessary to physically move one or more
of the kiosk structures, then upon the request of the City, Administrator agrees to
promptly move said kiosk at its sole cost and expense and to reinstall it at such
location as directed and authorized by the City.
G. While this original program identifies 34 kiosk structures, the City may require
construction and installation of additional structures and panel. Administrator
agrees to install any such kiosk structures at its sole cost and expense in the
location directed by the City.
VI. PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS
The Director reserves the right to make modifications as rrecessary to assure that the
intent of the plan and needs of the developers and the City are met.
tl '.sI¡"VŒD13LD_HSGJ..:.JO$}.: PLS
;-';,wcmn.::r :::5. 199~ (3 17pm)
)7
¿G-/'ç
ATTACHMENT 2
-
---.------
J?
~~b-
ATTACHMENT A ?J)1J
Consultant Ratin~ Form for Proposals
Materials Testing an Geotechnical Consulting
Services in the City of Chula Vista
Consultant Rating
Max.
Item Points A B C D E F G
I. QuaIificationslExperience of Professional & Technical Staff:
a. Test Methods listed in R.F.P. 10
b. Geotechnical/Soils Engineer observation during site preparation 10
c. Quality Assurance Program (QAP) per Local Program Manual 15
d. Resumes of staff personnel 10
e. Expertise and Specialization 5
f. In-house training/certification program as part of QAP 5
g. Brief history of fmnlLength of time in San Diego County 5
II. Performance of Similar Work:
a. References for similar type work 15
b. Familiar with local area 5
c. Professional performancellevel of care and skill statement 5
m. Ability to Provide Services:
a. Internal QAPIReference standards and equipment calibrations 10
traceable to National Institute of Standards (NIST)
b. Laboratory proximity to Chula Vista 5
Responsiveness to request for services within 24 hours 10
~. % of test methods, as listed in R.F.P., performed "in-house" 10
e. Ability to provide written test reswts within 3 working days 10
f. Ability to perform on-site testing (mobile laboratory) 10
IV. Facilities and Equipment:
a. Laboratory layout and work flow 10
b. Inventory of equipment 10
c. Inventory of vehicles 5
d. Mobile laboratory for on-site testing 5
V. Fiscal Stability lInsurancelIndemnity !Non-Discrimination:
a. Annual gross earnings past 5 years 5
b. Accounting and billing system 15
c. Ability to post with City the required insurance (liability, errors 10
and omissions)
d. Hold hannless statement 5
e. Non-discrimination statement 10
VI. Quality of Proposal:
a. Satisfactorily addresses a1l requirements of R.F.P. 15
B. Presentation. clarity, nearness 20
SUBTOTAL 250
VII. Schedule of Charges:
Personnel hourly rates 25
D. Materials testing unit rates 25
TOTAL 300
NOTE: POINTS SHOWN ABOVE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. WEIGHT OF PROPOSAL IN OVERALL SCORE = 100
/ -"----- "-------.-.-"--.."---. .--"-----
ATTACHMENT B
MATERIAL TESTING AND GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS/EV ALVA TOR COMMENTS
1. Your fIrm is highly respected. We are sure that developers doing, or that will be doing, business in the City have
or will offer you contracts. We are sensitive to potential conflict of interest that may result if you were our material
testing consulting. Please address this potential situation and what would be your fIrm's position and/or procedure
to resolve such potential conflicts of interest.
2. In addition to material testing services, from time-to-time we may turn to you for other consultant services dealing
with materials, soils, or geology. What other services would your fIrm be able to provide to us and who would
perform such services?
3. Would you have a problem if the City, instead of awarding a "sole provider" contract, awarded contracts to other
fIrms to provide consulting services on an as-needed basis?
4. The prices you listed in your proposal are competitive, but may not be the lowest. Are you willing to negotiate
your fees?
5. The contract has options for annual renewals. How likely will it be that you would expect or request higher fees
at the time of renewal?
6A. RFPs, many times, are interpreted as an "Open Book" test which a potential consultant must take and pass to be
eligible for further review and evaluation. The degree to which a respondent pays attention to the clearly stated
requirements to be contained within the proposal says a lot about a fIrm's attention to detail and their ability to
follow a client's instructions. Please share with us your fIrm's thoughts on how well the proposal you submitted
portrays your fIrm as it mill¡ will perform tasks required by the City.
Is your real way of doing business different? In what way?
6B. Follow-up Question: Your proposal omitted the following items which really matter to the City.
How would you have addressed these items?
7. If awarded a contract with the City, we are fairly certain that this would not be your largest contract. How can
you assure us that the City will be a priority to you, especially when we encounter circtullstances which require
immediate and efficient action on your part?
8. Would your fIrm be willing to enter into a contact with the City which specifIes turn-around times for basic
services?
9. If your technician shows up on a job and observes improper compaction techniques are being used and the soil's
maximtull density has not yet been determined, how would your technician handle this situation?
IO. Does your fIrm have thin lift nuclear gauges for asphalt concrete compaction testing?
11. Does your f1nn maintain fIles on materials suppliers showing historic compliance data? If so, how far back does
this data go?
12. Does your fIrm have any experience with latex-modifIed slurry seals? If so, please describe that experience.
13. Please explain how your accounting system avoids duplicate billings. How does your accounting system correlate
(1) billings to testing reports and (2) billings to individual projects?
14. Who will the project manager for this contract? How much involvement will he/she have?
15. Have their been any changes in your staff since your proposal was submitted?
16. Let's aSStulle that the decision to enter into an agreement is between you and one of the other fIrms interviewed
today What can you tell us about your fIrm to convince us that your fIrm is the one we should partner with?
Z
~ ~
:MO ('fj MV) O"'d"~5
.. s ~ ~ ~ ('. 0\ ~ N":
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ M M a~
Z < . ""
<
... ~
.... '" ~
~ ~ '* ~
tI) "æ\DOO 0 DO\N 0-1.()0
Z ~....... r- N ....... CO "d'" N M 'V.c
- - N N _
o . -&'7~ ....... M~i.I'} -V7i00'7ú"7t-.
U '" ~ v
~ ""
Q
~ ~ ~
f:3 =~** V) 0*0 V)**5
""---- ,,-COO ("j 0'Itr'lV) O'IV¡Vì..=
~ ~Q ~ N - _ ~ ....... 0\ ('fj
=' - """4 -EI7 - -V7 Y'7 vt Y'7 -fA- -V7 Y'7 t-.
~ Z~ ~ ~
...
Z
-
~ '"
~~ ~
-Q.J 0 * I.r) * * * 0 ='
o ·=~OO ('f) OV)lr) I.()MLf)]
r..... 1;;.:..... N _ r- \D 'V "d'" _ "d'"
- Q.JÞlI""9-- Y'7 -MY'7 -vtY'7t-.
I ~C Y'7 Y7 Y7 Q,)
~ ~ ""
...¡
<
~ -
o "i_
~ ="i ~
o ;rg'OO 0 80* o0I,(jO
cz:: -Q.~::! ~ NOO~ ??;~"d".c
~ UC-e.q.VC7 Y7 {;17Y'7Y7 Y7VtY'7t-.
~ ~ v
~~ ""
"'~
...¡
$
- ~
-~ '"
'" - 0
=5 '* * * * :~ ~
=60* V) *:!.. * 0 00 8
-Q.J:::g ~ ~o* ~~v:.c ~
Utvt- M -r;~ -MO~ c:
== Ol) Y'7 M ~ Vt ~ 0.. .-
~< "0
~- *
~;.:J
E '"
._ v
u.. .~
"'::I II) ~ ~ "'0 ~
~ ~ t-. 0 Q,)
t.: 0 =' {/) c .... CL)
.- := >< Q,) .- .~ 0.0
-g ·8- .- '¿;j ¡:: ...¡ r!
~ co 3 ..!.. Q.)
::E .a ~ ~ .-::: '-'>
B v æ ~ 00 ¡,;:¡ .2<
cIj -= .- ~ "0 V,I tI) _
CD..... 1+.0 >........ ( ) CL) .....
r.....' ( J co 0 cIj ..... t-. '-< cIj
~ 60.5 >. Q.¡;g ~ .3 z:- g -5
~ co r.f. .~ tr.I._ c.. 1< = u.. t-.
jooio ...¡ -<::> 5 5 ~ § ~ ~ š s¡~
r....... t;r; ( ,).- CI .S c U B V,I 0.. -= 0
~ Z ~ 0 E cIj 11) 0.'- '- .....:I
~ ~ "t:I :j fI) 'õ s g g. Oil.}
~ Zo U 0 ¡;¡ .~ "§... .£.- ¡¡¡ v .;,¡
~ ..... .- 8 ~ t-.
tI.) "0 v.: >. tI).-..o;::s bD '""" .c..
cz:: =.:: .1::: 'õ '- ~ .:g.":::.5 p.. =:
~ C':S.~ ~ co( ) CI)!:C:"O .":::i:tI
~ Q) t-. t-. 0 ~ Q >. ,-.E ='"CI
00 .5 B 0 ...... - "0 ..0 0 g ~ ;
t..... ~ ~ C,) ~ ~ = VJ C ) ~ .........
L'" ~ 10.0 to co:I ~ co:I ._ =' -- VJ U
CI) 0 co:I..... .::": VJ 10.0 ..... >. (I) 0 ëa t:: ~ :>
~ .::: v v C ) r"'l ::: ..... aJ CI) """-- co:I .... ....
E-4 (I) U 0 C ) '"" \vi C ) .-.... ~.- 0 co:;!
.~ _£ ~a ~ ëa ~a ~ .... ]" ...¡~
~ - aJ ~ > '"" aJ
¡;;¡ ~ .9 "'" 8'- = .- ".~ v Q¡
-< =ü~=,~.9g.u~~e~ *:
... -< ~o 800 tS ¡¡¡ ¡¡::oo "- 0 E-<
II!!:; aJ c.. ..... ._ I:: ¡;d ._:: ~ ::::
;¡ > e u X·- 10.0 ""0 u._ .D.£':!
aJ 0 m > ..... ::: aJ > ¡;d.-
._ 0 10.0 ~ co;: x co;: c.. co;: ct _ 0
~ '" u~ ""~ ¡¡¡ '" "'~ , '" '"
3
.-- -,,_._.._-~_._---
ATTACHMENT D
Parties and Recital page(s)
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
LAW Crandall, A Division of
LAW Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.
for
Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
This agreement ( n Agreement n ) , dated January 1, 1999 for the
purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last
executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on
Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such (nCityn) , whose place of business
is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on
the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business
form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of
business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A,
paragraph 6 ( n Consul tant n) , and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City desires to have geotechnical services and
construction material testing in conjunction with various capital
improvement projects in which it engages and in conjunction with
specification compliance on construction projects engaged in by
various private parties which the City is required to review; and,
Whereas, Consultant desires to perform these services for the
City at the price and terms herein specified; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are
experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can
prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City
within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement;
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 1
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
f-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant
do hereby mutually agree as follows:
l. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the
attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties" ; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General
DutiesTl, Consultant shall also perform all of the services
described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled " Scope of Work and
Schedule" , not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to,
and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8,and
deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being
of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties and the work
and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and Schedule shall
be herein referred to as the "Defined Services" . Failure to
complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not,
except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this
Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from
time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by the
Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and
Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose
of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation
associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set
forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional consulting
services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"),
and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of
services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 2
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
5
..-..-. .-----..-.-.... ".--. -- _._-_._--.------_.~--------_.._._,------_._~-_._---"-
tiT:"~e and materials basis at the rates set forth in the 'IRate
Sc::J.edule" ir: Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C) , unless a separate fixed
fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional
Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement,
whe~her Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in
a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under
similar conditions and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and
subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services
required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by
the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and
to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance
Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or
shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's
Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the
attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9.
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business
Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each
project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which
names City and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is
primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry (" Primary
Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and
Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public
("Cross-liability Coverage") .
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 9 , unless Errors and Omissions coverage is
included in the General Liability policy.
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 3
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
0
G. Pro()f of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein
required, prior to the commencement of services required under this
Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating
same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional
Insured.
(2) Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage,
Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under
Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy,
Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City
demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the
Risk Manager.
H. Security for Performance.
(1) Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by
a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the
subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond") , then Consultant shall
provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a form
and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which
amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance
BondI! , in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(2) Letter of Credit.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by
a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the
subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit") , then Consultant shall
provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the
City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the bank a
letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 4
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
1_ - - _____.__...__..._.___.___"'"__'_.___0'__'. _ _____...._
ir.. breach 0: the terms of this Agreement. The letter of credit
shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount satisfactory
to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in
the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit" , in said
Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide security other than a
Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark
in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph
entitled "Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City such other security therein listed in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
I. Business License
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City
and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of
reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule therein
contained, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the
objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its
office facilities, files and records by Consultant throughout the
term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees to provide
the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A,
. Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the
provision of these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to
proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the
Consultant's performance of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant
submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A,
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 5
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
?
Payagraph 12, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the
day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall
compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant
according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship
indicated by an "X" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to
the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit
A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as
provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient
information as to the propriety of the billing to permit the City
to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper,
and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated
on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such
payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ( "Contract
Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said
party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied
wi th all executory provisions hereof.
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages
Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence
in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate
the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The
parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount
to compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted
time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the
Agreement Between the City of Chu1a Vista and LAW Crandall Page 6
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
f____ -----~-_._--_._------ --------_._-_.,._.._~_._---_.._._---~ -~-
fc~~owing penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of
ths: time specified for the completion of the respective work
assignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City, or
have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages Rate
provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate") .
Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control,
other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing
to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the
expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when
granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work and
will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it
can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the
work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an
"FPPC filerlr I Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the
purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the
City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such
reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of Exhibit A,
or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in
any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a
governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to
know Consultant has a financial interest other than the
compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has
diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 7
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/0
.
promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has
de::ermined ::hat Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with
Consultant's duties under this agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the
term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of
interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant
learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in
a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political
Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant,
nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's
employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any
interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which
may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any
property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any
property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services,
( "Prohibi ted Interest") , other than as listed in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 15.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of
future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other
reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates
in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement.
Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be
made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months
thereafter.
Agreement Between the City of Chu1a Vista and LAW Crandall Page 8
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
II
- -------_._-,-~_.,._--~_._~,..- -.-'..'-'---..-"'-"-' ..--
Consul~ant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire
any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with
the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any
party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in
conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless
the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from
and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense
(including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the
negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the
Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in
connection with the execution of the work covered by this
Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole
negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City, its officers, or
employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all
costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the
City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such
claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further,
Consultant at its own expense shall , upon written request by the
City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its
officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of
City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by
the Consultant.
8. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a
timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this
Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to
Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such
termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents,
data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 9
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/Z
.
prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the
property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive
just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily
completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective
date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable
hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach.
9. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the
Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of
work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater
than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors,
omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional
expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended to limit
City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any
reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such
termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least
thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In
that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other
materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City,
become City I s sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is
terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall
be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials
to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby
expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation
arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
1l. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and
Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and
shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment
or novation), without prior written consent of City. City hereby
consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined Services
identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants
identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants".
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 10
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/3
..____.'__. _,,_'____m____ ""--.-...-.-- ""----,,-_._-,_..._--~~-~-_._-_......-
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms,
designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties
produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject
to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the
United States or in any other country without the express written
consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to
publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of
the Public Records Act) , distribute, and otherwise use, copyright
or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data,
statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under
this Agreement at the sole risk of City and without further
liability to Consultant.
13. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant
shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the
manner and means of performing the services required under this
Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept
Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's
agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under
this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed
to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to
any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not
limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation
benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City
will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax
or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely
responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City
harmless with regard thereto.
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this
agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented
in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 11
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/if
am-=:nded, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference
as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used
by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good
faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the
terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in
litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of
the claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or
participates in the preparation of a report or document in
performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause
the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the
numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and
subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document.
17. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant
shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any
contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the bÒx on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the
Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State
of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker
or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither
Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate brokers
or salespersons.
Agreement Between the City of Chula vista and LAW Crandall Page 12
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/5
.n ._.____ m ."_....~ _ _ ____ _ _._______ ____..__~___.____....._
C. No:ices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to
be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All
notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served
or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of
business for each of the designated parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document
referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and
understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter
hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may' be
amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in
writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such
amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents
to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and
direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that
all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it
to enter into this Agreement.
F. Governing Law/Venue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action
arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State
of California, and if applicable, the ci ty of Chula Vista, or as
close . thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 13
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/0
18. Field Representative
Should another contractor(s) not retained by Consultant be
involved in the project, City will advise such contractor(s) that
Consultant's services do not include supervision or direction of
the means 1 methods or actual work of the contractor (s) , his
employees or agents, and the presence of Consultant's field
representatives for project administration, assessment, observation
or testing will not relieve the contractor of its responsibilities
for performing the work in accordance with the plans and
specifications. It is agreed that Consultant will not be
responsible for job or site safety or security on the project,
other than for Consultant's employees and subcontractors, and that
Consultant does not have the duty or right to stop the work of
another contractor.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 14
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/7 ._------_._._--~_.._---~_.__..-
._.'n.__"___
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall
for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this
Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood
same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms:
Da¡:ed: , 19 City of Chula Vista
-
by:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as ~o form:
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
Dated: LAW Crandall, A Division of
LAW Engineering and
Environmental Services, Inc.
By:
Lawrence E. Carroll
Assistant Vice President/
H: \HOME\ENGINEER\INSPECT\RFP\LAWAGREE. 001 Engineering Services Mgr.
Exhibit List to Agreement
(X) Exhibit A.
(X)Exhibit B: LAW Crandall January 1998 Standard Schedule of Fees
Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and LAW Crandall Page 15
for Materials Testing and Geotechnical Consulting Services
/'Z
Exhibit A
to
Agreement Between
City of Chula Vista
and
LAW Crandall, A Division of
LAW Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.
l. Effective Date of Agreement: Januarv 1. 1999
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of
the State of California
( ) Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a
political subdivision of the State of California
( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula
Vista, a
( ) Other: , a
[insert business form]
("City")
3 . Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant: LAW Crandall, A Division of LAW Engineering and
Environmental Services, Inc.
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(X) Corporation
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-l
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
/f
-..----.-.-.--.,,---.-,------...--
6. Place ~= Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
9177 Sr.y Park Court, Suite A
San Diego, California 92123
Voice Phone (619 ) 278-3600
Fax Phone (619) 278-5300
7. General Duties: Consultant shall provide materials testing and
geotechnical engineering services at the direction of the City
Engineer at construction sites and facilities designated by the
City of Chu:a Vista.
The Consultant is to provide:
A. Materials testing laboratory facilities staffed with
personnel qualified to perform sampling and testing of
portland cement concrete, soils, treated soils, crushed
aggregate base, and bituminous materials, as required.
The materials testing laboratory must have a documented
Quality Assurance Program (QAP) in conformance with
Chapter 16 of the CALTRANS Local Assistance Procedures
Manual.
B. Geotechnical/soil engineering services for City-funded
projects during earthwork construction operations,
including geotechnical/soils engineering observations
during site preparation for placement of fill and
construction of sub-drainage systems.
C. Personnel that are experienced in the testing of
materials used in the construction of public works
facilities and familiar with the San Diego Area Regional
Standard Drawings and the Green Book. The City shall
have the right to make a determination as to the
qualifications of individual personnel and shall have the
right to require substitution of non-qualified
individuals with qualified personnel.
The Consultant's QAP must include procedures and policies
in which personnel are certified to perform the materials
testing and sampling requested by City.
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-2
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
;2tJ
D. Ca!lsultant is to provide material testing services in
response to the City's request far such services at the
times and locations as determined by the City Engineer.
Requests for material testing services shall be made with
prior working day's notice by the City.
E. Have a documented internal laboratory QAP for all
required laboratory analyses and procedures. All
reference standards and equipment calibrations shall be
traceable to the National Institute of Standards and
Technology.
F. Assure that all instruments and devices to be utilized in
field and laboratory analyses are properly maintained and
calibrated in accordance with the Consultant's QAP.
G. Provide the City of Chula Vista with all original data,
reports, records, etc. of field and laboratory analyses,
as well as certified copies of all calibration and
maintenance records. Further, the Consultant shall
maintain copies of all records related to field and
laboratory testing performed under the contract for a
minimum of five years from the date of the sample,
measurement, report, etc. This period may be extended
during the course of any unresolved litigation or when
requested by the City of Chula Vista.
H. Billing forms and procedures used shall be acceptable to
the City.
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
I. Materials Testing
The Consultant shall perform the required American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and State of California
Department of Transportation (CalTrans) Standard Test Methods as
required by the City Engineer. The work shall be paid for on a per
test basis, which shall include all costs such as testing, reports,
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-3
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
:21
-----..-.-...--..-.... ------_._--~_...._---- ~
s~oring of specimens, furnishing test cylinders, etc. as listed in
the following fee schedule:
I TEST METHOD I PRIMARY TESTS I FEE I
ASTM C11 7 Fine Sieve Analysis with 200 Wash $ 60
ASTM C136 Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregate $110
ASTM C1856 Abson Recovery Method $630
ASTM C39 Compressive Strength - Concrete Cylinder $ 42
(Set of Three)
ASTM D1557 Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using $130
the Modified Proctor Method
ASTM D1559 Marshall Apparatus $150
ASTM D2041 Maximum Specific Gravity and Density of $135
Bituminous Paving Mixtures
ASTM D2170 Kinematic Viscosity of Asphalts $150
ASTM D2172 Extraction of Bitumen from Bituminous $175
Paving Mixtures
ASTM D2419 Sand Equivalent Value of Soils and Fine $ 70
Aggregates
ASTM D2726 Specific Gravity and Density of Compacted $ 40
Bituminous Paving Mixtures
ASTM D3910 Consistency Test & Wet Track Abrasion Test $300
CA TEST 202 Sieve Analysis of Fine & Coarse Aggregates $110
CA TEST 216 Relative Compaction of Untreated and $130
Treated Soils and Aggregates
CA TEST 217 Sand Equivalent $ 70
CA TEST 226 Moisture Content in Soils by Oven Drying $ 20
CA TEST 301 "R" Value of Soils by Stabilometer $160
CA TEST 304 Preparation of Bituminous Mixtures for $ 0
Testing
CA TEST 307 Moisture Vapor Susceptibility of Bituminous $165
Mixtures
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-4
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
20
I TEST METHOD I PRIMARY TESTS I FEE I
Ch TEST 308 Specific Gravity and Weight of Compressed $ 40
Bituminous Mixtures
CA TEST 310 Asphalt and Moisture Contents of Bituminous $150
Mixtures by Hot Solvent Extraction (or
Equivalent Methodology)
Ch TEST 312 Design and Testing of Class '\A" Cement $800
Treated Base (Complete CTB Design,
including aggregate conformance testing)
CA TEST 366 Stabilometer Value of Bituminous Mixtures $135
CA TEST 367 Recommending Optimum Bitumen Content (OBC) $ 50
CA TEST 375 In-Place Density and Relative Compaction of $40.50
Asphalt Concrete Pavement per hour
CA TEST 379 Asphalt Content of Bituminous Mixtures $ 70
CA TEST 521 Compressive Strength of Concrete Cylinders $ 14
CA TEST 540 Mixing, Storing, and Handling Concrete $40.50
Compressive Strength Specimens in the Field per hour
CA TEST 643 Estimating Service Life of Metal Culverts $115
ASTM C131 Abrasion and Impact in the L. A. Machine $150
ASTM C289 Potential Reactivity of Aggregate $575
ASTM C40 Organic Impurities in Fine Concrete $ 42
Aggregates
ASTM C42 Testing Drilled Concrete Cores (Compression $110
Testing and Preparation of Specimens, Set
of Three)
ASTM C78 Flexural Strength of Concrete $ 38
ASTM C88 Soundness of Aggregates by Use of Sulfates, $ 85
Per Size Fraction
ASTMD422 Particle-Size Analysis of Soils $215
CA TEST 205 Percentage of Crushed particles $110
CA TEST 211 Abrasion of Coarse ( 500 Revolutions) $150
Aggregate - L.A. Rattler (1,000 Revolutions)
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-5
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
;¿'3
~.,_..,- __,._,_ .__..___..'__'_...m.~__·__. .-.-.-
I TEST METHOD I PRIMARY TESTS I FEE I
CA TEST 213 Organic Impurities in Concrete Sand $ 42
CA TEST 214 Soundness of Aggregates by Sodium Sulfate, $ 85
Per Size Fraction
CA TEST 227 Evaluating Cleanness of Coarse Aggregates $ 70
CA TEST 229 Test for Durability Index (1 Fine/1 Coarse) $155
CA TEST 311 Determination of Moisture in Soils, Mineral $200
Aggregates, and Bituminous Mixtures by
Xylene Reflux (or Equivalent Methodology)
CA TEST 533 Ball Penetration in Fresh Portland Cement $40.50
Concrete per hour
II. Geotechnical Engineering
Consultant shall provide Geotechnical Engineering services for
City projects during earthwork construction operations which aRE
necessary to meet finished grades shown on the plans and cross-
sections. Consultant shall provide geotechnical engineering
observation during site preparation for placement of fill and
construction of subdrains. Consultant shall make recommendations
regarding the removal of unsuitable material for fills and methods
of compaction based on previous geotechnical investigations and
Consultant's observations. Consultant's services will be on an as-
needed basis. Payment shall be on an hourly basis for time spent
on each City project.
III. Accounting and Billings
Consultant shall provide separate invoices for each City
project identified. Every invoice will list all work performed on
project. Invoice shall show total amount billed to date for
project, payments received, and amount due. All work elements
shall be itemized, Le. tests performed, personnel charges/hours,
equipment costs, etc. City shall be billed within four (4) weeks
of work performance.
The Consultant shall forfeit payment for work performed and billed
to City more than sixty (60 ) calendar days after performance of
work.
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-6
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
;21/
IV. Persor::lel
Mr. David C. Wilson shall serve as Project Manager and single
point of contact for the City. The City shall reserve the right of
refusing personnel assigned to a project by the Consultant.
V. Reports
City to receive written reports on test results within 3-
working days after completion of test results. Test results are to
be faxed as soon as final test results are available.
VI. Conflict of Interest
Consultant shall refrain from having clients who may be doing work
under permits or contractual agreements with the City of Chula
Vista.
VII. Work not listed in Schedule
If an occasion arises whereby the City requests work to be
done which is not listed in this schedule, the price/cost of
providing this work shall be negotiated in good faith between the
City and the Consultant. The negotiated price(s) shall not exceed
the January 1998 Schedule of Charges labeled as Exhibit B to this
agreement between the City and Consultant.
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Other:
C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Deliverable No. 1:
Deliverable No. 2 :
Deliverable No. 3 :
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-7
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
~5
.. .~.~_.__..____.,._ ._ __ . ._ .·'_"~W'_··'_'·' .._---,_.--_._,.,.~._._.-.--_.._----
D. D--¡::, for completion of all Consultant services:
a~_
December 31, 2000. City has the option to extend this
agreement for one additional year (from January 1, 2001 to December
31, 2001) . Said extension shall be by mutual agreement between
City and Consultant. The City Contract Administrator shall give
notice of election to extend this agreement by sending notice by
letter to Consultant not later than three months prior to
expiration of the term.
9. Insurance Requirements:
(X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
(X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
( ) Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included
in Commercial General Liability coverage) .
(X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $500,000 (not included
in Commercial General Liability coverage) .
10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: To be
determined on a project-by-project basis, mutually agreed to by
City and Consultant.
11. Compensation:
A. ( ) Single Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant
as herein required, City shall pay a single fixed fee in the
amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount: , payable as
follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
( ) l. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make
interim monthly advances against the compensation
due for each phase on a percentage of completion
basis for each given phase such that, at the end of
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chu1a Vista and LAW Page A-8
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
2iÞ
each phase only the compensation for that phase has
been paid. Any payments made hereunàer shall be
consiàered as interest free loans which must be
returned to the City if the Phase is not
satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is
satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive
credit against the compensation due for that phase.
The retention amount or percentage set forth in
Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim
payment such that, at the end of the phase, the
full retention has been held back from the
compensation due for that phase. Percentage of
completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole
and unfettered discretion by the Contracts
Administrator designated herein by the City, or
such other person as the City Manager shall
designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the
City that has been provided, but in no event shall
such interim advance payment be made unless the
Contractor shall have represented in writing that
said percentage of completion of the phase has been
performed by the Contractor. The practice of
making interim monthly advances shall not convert
this agreement to a time and materials basis of
payment.
B. ( ) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined
Services by Consultant as are separately identified below, City
shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in
the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set
forth . Consultant shall not commence Services under any Phase, and
shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless City
shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said
Phase.
Phase Fee for Said Phase
l. $
2. $
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-9
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
27
-----_.~...._-_._...__.._._-_._---_.._-_._-_._----.-------
( ì 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make
interim monthly advances against the compensation
due for each phase on a percentage of completion
basis for each given phase such that, at the end of
each phase only the compensation for that phase has
been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be
considered as interest free loans which must be
returned to the City if the Phase is not
satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is
satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive
credit against the compensation due for that phase.
The retention amount or percentage set forth in
Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim
payment such that, at the end of the phase, the
full retention has been held back from the
compensation due for that phase. Percentage of
completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole
and unfettered discretion by the Contracts
Administrator designated herein by the City, or
such other person as the City Manager shall
designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the
City that has been provided, but in no event shall
such interim advance payment be made unless the
Contractor shall have represented in writing that
said percentage of completion of the phase has been
performed by the Contractor. The practice of
making interim monthly advances shall not convert
this agreement to a time and materials basis of
payment.
C. (X) Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as
herein required, City shall pay Consultant as to a specified
materials test the fee as listed in paragraph 8 .A. I. For
materials testing and other services requested by the City, such as
plant inspection and geotechnical engineering, the City shall pay
Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in
the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts set forth
in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow according to the following terms
and conditions:
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-IO
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
::zç
(1) ( ) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials
Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of
time and materials in excess of said Maximum Compensation
amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform
all of the Defined Services herein required of Consultant
for $ including all Materials, and other
"reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation") .
(2) (X) Limitation without Further Authorization on
Time and Materials Arrangement
At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time,
materials, and fees equal to $200,000 ( "Authorization
Limi t ") , Consultant shall not be entitled to any addi-
tional compensation without further authorization issued
in writing and approved by the City. Nothing herein
shall preclude Consultant from providing additional
Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
Rate Schedule - Personnel
,..~..;>........................ > ~/................... ....- .~2~:- >.ii i(·> ··22 ii
Staff Professional $ 78.00
project Professional $ 95.00
Senior Professional $105.00
Principal Professional $126.00
Chief Engineer/Geologist/Scientist $140.00
Senior Construction/Senior Program $130.00
Manager
Senior Technical Writer $105.00
Certified Industrial Hygienist $140.00
Senior Consultant $110.00
Corporate Consultant $210.00
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-II
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
~!1
d-
"'-"~-"-'-"-'-'-"'--"-'-"
Category of Consultant Employee Hourly Rate
Special Registered Inspector* $ 50.00
Materials Field Technician ( Incl uding $ 40.50
Testing Equipment) *
Senior Materials Field Technician $ 60.30
(Including Testing Equipment) *
Ultrasonic Technician (Including Testing $ 49.50
Equipment) *
Coring Technician - Concrete, Asphalt $ 99.00
(Includes Coring Equipment and Truck) *
Soil Foundation Quality Control $ 52.20
Technician (Including Testing Equipment) *
Field Exploration Engineer/Geologist/ $ 73.80
Technician*
Laboratory Technician (Materials, $ 65.00
Geotechnical, Environmental) *
Senior Laboratory/Senior Field Technician $ 90.00
(Materials, Geotechnical, Environmental) *
Word Processor* $ 49.50
Draftsperson* $ 56.00
CADD Operator (Includes Computer)* $ 65.00
Accountant* $ 55.00
Project Administrator* $ 62.00
Notes:
1) Time for all categories of employees will charged on
a portal-to-portal basis, with a two (2) hour
minimum charge per callout
2) Employee Categories with an "*" will be charged at
1.5 times the above hourly rates for over 8 hours
worked and for work on Saturdays, Sundays, and
holidays
( ) Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services
rendered after [month] , 19 , if delay in providing
services is caused by City.
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-12
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
30
12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant
in the performance of services herein required, City shall pay
Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
( ) None, the compensation includes all costs.
Cost or Rate
( ) Reports, not to exceed $ :
( ) Copies, not to exceed $ :
( ) Travel, not to exceed $ :
( ) Printing, not to exceed $ :
( ) Postage, not to exceed $ :
( ) Delivery, not to exceed $ :
( ) Long Distance Telephone Charges,
not to exceed $
( ) Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
, not to exceed $ :
, not to exceed $ :
13 . Contract Administrators:
City:
Roberto Saucedo or Kirk Ammerman, Construction Engineering
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Voice Phone: (619) 476-5380
FAX Phone: (619) 476-5381
Consultant:
Lawrence E. Carroll
Assistant Vice President/Engineering Services Manager
14. Liquidated Damages Rate:
( ) $ per day.
( ) Other:
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-13
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
3/
. -.....--.-" _._.._._,_.~-_.- --- ---~---_."
15. Stat.ement of Economic Interests, Consultant Report.ing
Cat..egories, per Conflict of Interest Code:
(X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income.
( ) Category No. 2. Interests in real property.
( ) Category No. 3. Investments, interest in real
property and sources of income subject to the
regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the
department.
( ) Category No. 4. Investments in business entities
and sources of income which engage in land
development, construction or the acquisition or
sale of real property.
( ) Category No. S . Investments in business entities
and sources of income of the type which, within the
past two years, have contracted with the City of
Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide
services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment.
( ) Category No. 6. Investments in business entities
and sources of income of the type which, within the
past two years, have contracted with the designated
employee's department to provide services,
supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
( ) Category No. 7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property
within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any:
Exhibit. A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-14
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
32.--
.
16. () C~nsultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
17. Permitted Subconsultants:
18. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following
period of time:
(X) Monthly
(X) Quarterly
(X) Other:
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
() First of the Month
(X) 15th Day of each Month
() End of the Month
() Other:
C. City's Account Number: Varies from Proiect to proiect
19. Security for Performance
() Performance Bond, $
() Letter of Credit, $
() Other Security:
Type: Amount: $
(X) Retention. If this space is checked, then
notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary
requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant
sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their
option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or
"Retention Amount" until the City determines that the
Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred:
(X) Retention Percentage: 10%
() Retention Amount: $
Retention Release Event:
() Completion of All Consultant Services
(X) Other: ComDletion and Deliverv of Reports
Exhibit A to Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and LAW Page A-1S
Crandall for Materials Testing & Geotechnical Consulting Services
3:3
_ __.. _ __ __ ____._ _.'___.___._~_~___..'..__'·W.__·"______·__~·"_~'__·___'_...._..___
EXHIBIT B
LAW CRANDALL
LAWGIBB Group Member ~
SCHEDULE OF CHARGES FOR PERSONNEL SERVICES
FOR THE OTY OF CHULA VISTA
The fee for our services performed by employee or contract personnel will be based on the charges listed below. All fee
quotations are applicable for a period of 90 days from the date of the proposal to which this schedule is attached. The rates
below have been negotiated specifically for this contract and are valid through December 31, 2000.
PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL HOURLY RATES
(Engineers. Geologists Scientists)
· Staff Professional................................................... $ 78 Senior Construction/Senior Program Manager.......... $ 130
· Project Professional................................................ $ 95 Senior Technical Writer ........................................... $ 105
· Senior Professional ................................................ $ 105 Certified IndustriaI Hygienist.................................... $ 140
Principal Professional............................................... $ 126 Senior Consultant..................................................... $ 180
Chief Engineer/Geologist/Scientist ...........................$ 140 Corporate Consultant................................................ $ 210
TECHNICAL AND SUPPORT PERSONNEL HOURLY RATES
.
Special Registered Inspector .................................. $ 45.00 Soil Foundation Quality Control Technician
· Materials Field Technician (Incl. Test Equipment).....................................$ 52.20
(Incl. Test Eqnipment) .................................... $ 40.50 Field Exploration Engineer/GeologistfTechnician...$ 73.80
Senior Materials Field Technician Laboratory Technician (Materials,
(Inc. Test Equipment) ..................................... $ 60.30 Geotechnical, Environmental) .........................$ 65.00
Ultrasonic Technician (Incl. Test Equipment)........ $ 49.50 Senior Laboratory/Senior Field Technician
Roofing - Waterproofing Inspector (Materials, Geotechnical, Environmental)........$ 90.00
(Incl. Test Equipment) .................................... $ 49.50 Word Processor ......................................................$ 49.50
Coring Technician - Concrete, Asphalt Draftsperson...........................................................$ 56.00
(Incl. CoreEquipment and Truck) ................... $ 99.00 CADD Operator (includes computer)......................$ 65.00
Asbestos Technician/Air Monitoring Technician... $ 58.50 Accountant............................. ................................ $ 55.00
. Primary Categories Project Administrator .............................................$ 62.00
These rates apply to regular time worked and travel time in the continental United States. A maximum travel time of 8
hours will be charged in any day. A premium charge will apply to time in excess of 8 hours per weekday and all time on
Saturdays. Sundays, and holidays, when such time represents time worked on the project or travel time to or from the
project. The premium charge will be charged at the above rates for professional personnel and at I. 5 times the above rates
for technical and support personnel. In the event of adverse weather conditions or other factors beyond our control, a
standby charge of 4 hours will be made for field personnel when the field personnel are called to the site and have begun
work. The minimum daily charge for field inspectors or technicians, other than field exploration personnel, when working
at a project site, will be 2 hours for each job.
Travel time for all personnel will be charged on a portal-to-portal basis for all personnel.
The incidental services of an engineer and/or geologist, project manager or administrative staff where required on the
project for normal field supervision or office and field administration, will be not invoiced. This includes basic review of
laboratory and field test results. Charges for engineering services will be made for consulting and analysis time spent in
analyzing project discrepancies, conducting investigations, resolving technical conflicts, attending special meetings, and
exercising engineering judgement in the interest of the project.
Field services that require specially trained personnel, because of the presence of hazardous materials, as defined by the
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Act, 29 CFR 1910.120, will have a surcharge imposed Required
levels C & D personal protection will be surcharged at 10% of the above hourly rates, and required levels A and B personal
protection will be surcharged at 25% of the above hourly rates.
Page 1 of2
A Division of Law Engineering and EnVIronmental ServIces. Inc.
9177 Sky Park Court, Suite A
San Diego, CA 92123
619-278·3OOJ . Fax 619-278-53CX)
31
- ATTACHMENT--1--- rfr/?
-- ML\1JTES OF A REGULAR MEETI\'G OF THE CITY COU"iCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHl.'LA "1ST A
Tu~y. June 3. 1997 Council Chambers
4:04 p.m. Puhlic SGr\'ic.:s Building
CALL TO ORDER
I. ROLL CALL:
PRESEJ\ T Councilm::mh:rs: Moo! (arrived at 4: I] p. m.). Padilla (arrived at 4:55
p.m.), Rindone and Ma)'or Honan.
ABSEKT: Coun:ilml::mh~rs: :\'on::::
..oJ..SO PRESE.'\T: Cit)' Mana~~r. John D. Goss: Cit)' Attorney. John M. Kah~ny: and City Cbk.
Be\'~rl)' A. Authdel
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIA\'CE TO THE FLAG. ~ O~IE\T OF SJLE\'CE
3. APPROVAL OF MP\TTES: Non:: suÌ1mitl::.ù.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DO. Y:
a. Proclaimjn;:: the: week {If June J thrnu;!h June 7,1997 a!\ '1J\lana;!~mt:nt \\"et.'k.1I Tn:: pro:lamation was
pn:s:.ntt.d t'ly Mayor Horton to Kathy Bak::r. Pr~sic.J:nt of In: R{ nr Chula \'i~l¡.¡ Chapl::r {)f th:: ~aljonaJ .~1aml..;;::m~nt
Asso:jation.
b. Pre$entation of he)" to the: City. Mayor Horton pr::!-::nt::ù a k::y to th:: Cily 10 Miss Chu]a ViSl.ä.. ]ana
Suu:.. v.:ho won th:: ::ro","n fOT th=: "rairt:st of th:: Fair" for San Di::£o County at th:: Dd Mar FaiT. who \I.'iIl go
on 10 ::Jmp=lc for Miss California.
CO\'SE\T CALE\'DAR
(}¡cm... Pulll'd: .\'011(')
(!1C'111 A,k!n!: 11"/11 13(/)
CO:\5£.\1 CALE!\1)AR OFFERED BY COlJ:\CILME~IBER RI\'DO\'E. re¡¡din;: uf'texL< ",¡¡ived. tille.< r""d,
pa.<.<ed and approved ~-O-I (Padill;¡ ;¡h<enl),
S. \\1UTTE" CmIMUJ\ICATIO:-:S:
a. Letter from the Cit)" AUonlt:'~' st;'ltin;.: that lu tht IH.st of his kTHI\\·It'd;.:t' frum IIhscn'anct' of' .actj( f1.I';
taken in Closed Ses.sinn nn 5l17/97 in which the Cil~' Attllrnt')' p;'lfticipatl.'d. that thcTt' were nu repurtahle
.actions which an: required under the Brown Act to he rt."ptlrtt'd. J I i~ r:::;;ol11m::nJ¡;:J that th¡;: h:l1:::r n::: rI:Ce:Î\'a!
and filed.
6. RESOLVTJO:-ll8684 AME:\DI!'G THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA EMERGE:\CY PUS - Chapt~r
2.]4 Œm:rgency Organization Depanment) of the Municipal Code prO\'id~, fur: the pr~pardtion and carr:'in~ out
of plans for the pTot~tion of pt:Tson!' and prop::::rty ,,,'jthin th:: City in th::: r;:'\'t:nl of an t:m::r~:::n::y: the: diTI:Ction of
the cm=¡~cnc)' organization: and tht: coordination of tilt: e:m:::r~:::nC'y functions of this City \.I,:ith all otht:r puhlic
a,gen:i:.s. :orporations. oT,ganizations. iind tlff¡;:.:I!:Ù prival::: r::.~ons. Th::: ChuJtI Visttl Em¡;:r~:::ncy Plan. ori£,in<1J1y
adopt=-d in June of 1992. has h::c.n am::ntl::ù in conjunction wilh tht= San Di::~o ('ounly OfficI:: of DiSCtsl:::r
.L-.
M inutts
June 3. 1997
Page 3
-
ORAL COMMUN'ICATlONS
· Emerald Randolf, 276 Fourtb Avenue. Chula Vista, Director of the C.A.S.T. program, announced that
on June 25, tbey will be baving a CAST Chula Vista Day at the new White Canyon Water Park. She stated that
sp~iaJ coupons worth S5.00 were available. }[ was their m~ior fund raiser for the yt:ar; they will get a perceD:.t!ge
ofv.'nat the Water Park will get for the day.
· Mary Quartiano, 4080 Hancock Stroet, No 43 J I, San Diego, 921 J O. representing the Revolting Grandmas,
requ'5ted that the Cil)' Council pass a resolution in support of deploying the California National Guard troops along
tht border re!!ions of San Die"o Count\' and send it to GO\'t:mor \ViJson.
_ c.
· Muriel Watson, 3120 Anderson Street, Bonita, 9J902, Founder of Light Up the Border, Slated that there
are a number of families of Border Patrol Agents who are now under great jeopardy a" a result of intelligence
p~ for'oA!ard that Border Patrol Agents an: now primt: t2.rf't:t!' for tht: drug smu:;gbrs. Sh:: ur£ed Council 10 comt
up with a resolution that will match those by other cities.
PUBLIC HEARNGS .0,1\1) RELATED RESOLUTIO\'S A\'D ORDI'\'A\'CES
9....... PUBLIC HEARNG POI 97-20: CO\'SIDERA TIO\' OF A.\' MIE1\1)~IE\'T TO THE OTA Y
R.\.."CH SPA OSE PLAN O\' PROPERTY GE\''ERALLY LOCATED O\' 1.]]0 ACRES SOLTH OF
TELEGRAPH c..\..\-¡·OS ROAD BET\\'EE" 'PASEO RA\'CHERO A\'D THE FUTURE SR-125
.- AL!G:-'·MENT - McMillin bas submitted an amendment and tentative map for the portion of SPA One owned by
WCLF to subdivide 290 acres creating 1.877 residential units in Villages One and Five. The SPA Amendment
proposes deleting Pedestrian Park P-5 and Santa Delpbina Avenue as a promendate street in Neighborhood R-ll
of Village One. Staff r=mmends appro"al of the resolutions. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION ]8685 ADOPTNG THE THIRD ADDE1\'Dml TO THE fL'\AL SECO!\'D-TŒR
E\',1RONMEI\TAL IMPACT REPORT (FErR 95-01) FOR THE OTAY RANCH SECTION PLANKI.....'G
AREA (SPA) Œ'Œ PLAN AI\'D APPRO\'I."G AN A~IE\'D~IE\'T POI 97-20 TO THE OT A Y RA\'CH
SECTIONAL PLA!\":\1NG AREA (SPA) 01\'E PLAN, IMPOSISG CO\'DITIONS ON \\RICH INCLUDES
THE O\'ERALL DES]GN PLAN, VILLAGE DESIGN PL:>'\" PUBLIC FACILITIES n\;ANCING PLA"
A."'D SUPPORTNG DOCUME!\TS, PARKS. RECREATlO\'. OPE" SPACE A~ TRAILS PLAN,
REGIONAL FACILITŒS REPORT, PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGBIENT PLAN .0,1\1) SUPPORTl'\G
PLA. '\S, NON-RE!\'EWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN, RANCH· WIDE AFFORDABLE
HOUSNG PLAN, SPA 01\'£ AFFORDABLE HOVSI."IG PLAN AI\1) THE GEOTECHNICAL
RECO!\'NAISSANCE REPORT
B. PUBLIC HEARING PCS 97-02: CONSIDERA TIO\' OF A TEI\'T A T!\'E SUBDI\'ISION MAP FOR
290 ACRES OF THE OTAY RA:-/CH SPA ONE, TRACT 97-02, GE!'\ERALLY LOCATED OFF THE
SOLTHERN EATE\'SIO" OF OTA Y LAhTS ROAD SOL'TH OF TELEGRAPH CA\'YON ROAD
RESOLUTJO:-/': 18686 ADOPTING THE THIRD ADDENDUM TO THE n"AL
E!\,'IRO!\'ME1\TAL IMPACT REPORT f'EIR 95-01 (SCH #95021012) A"D APPRO\'ING A TE"TAT]\'E
SUBDIVISION MiI.P FOR PORTIONS OF THE OT A Y RA'iCH SPA ONE. TRACT 97-02, AND MAI,:ING
I\TCESSARY FTh'DNGS ;
Councilmember Moot stated he needed to excuse himself because this involved McM illin, and the)' were clients of
his company.
-.
Riel:: Ros:aler~ Senior Planner, prt$t:ntdl the staff n:port and slah:d that the application hy McMiIlin has h::::n
revi~wed by staff and the Planning Commission anù is rocommt:nd~ fOT approval. The appli::.ation has ~n found
consistent with the SPA Plan t:XCt:pl for the two am::ncJm;:nts which art: propos;:u. Tht: It:ntati\'t: map propos::~ 527
.3
Minut:::s
June 3, J 997
P2ge 5
.-
r,,!uired to be a p-...dostrian access between R-IO and R-I J. With the Pedestrian Parks, there would he some
res'~';:tjoD sinœ they are private parks and would be owned and maintained by the resident¡; of those nei~hborhoods.
As far as park c,...,dits, we do nót know at this time because tbe small park criteria hasn·t h""n developed_ If they
came in with a proposal similar to Villa~e Development's, staff would probably be recommending 50% b=use it
has a1l of the facilitios which are required by the SPA] Parks Plan. The development of that criteria is on the work
ageDda for the Parks and Re::reation Department in the c~ming year.
· Holh'Wood Drivewavs: should tbe required number of Hollywood driveways b.: reduced?
).1,. Rosa!er stated tn" a HolI)'Wood Driveway in the SPA Plan is a plan that requires an "L. shaped home with
the ga"'ge pushed to the ba:. of the unit. In some cases, there is a landscaped strip in the middle of the drive or
it ::an be other de::orative material. McMillin was concerned about the marketability of th.:s.: types of units and
pro¡>ased alternative language to what is in the .:xisting SPA. Staff is concerned and ha.s addressed the marketability
îssu~ by indicating that th~ Pianning Dir~tor. if th::y can provid:: ~viù::nco::: that tho~o::: typo:::s of units ar:: not
mrk~:.abJe. b2.S th~ ahiliry to wai\': th:: r::quir::m::nt and r::plii::: it with anoth::r d::si~n that Îs consist::nt with tn::
\'i1!2f't d~jgn p1an.
· Parkv."2\'s: snouJd r:::sid::ntial str::::t$ with parkwtl)'s h= uS::ù in th:: arpii..;ant \; n:siJ::nlial n::ì~hhorho()ds?
M:-. RO$éiI~r stat::.d tha: 2 R:::sid::nti¿d Str::.::t S::':lion A is it ~tr::d with parb1,,'ays, McMilìin h<!s intli:at::.d to staff
tha: :.ht R~sid~nt¡a] 5::::::t 5::':lion A is a:c:::ptahl:: to th::m <!!' lon~ as tho::: mui\'iulIal h{ m~o\.\'n:::r m<:tin:ains th~
P<i;-k'\.1..'2Y. and th=r~ is nai .a ma..,t~r hom::.own::::s ~sso:;jatjon.
· ParJ..'V.'2\' 5tr~ts: should a mast::r hom=own:::rs asso;;iation h: n:.quir::cl 10 maintô1in th::: op::n SPô1:t: and
Janå=ping?
Mr. Rosaler stated that the Engineering Depanment hdieved that all the parkway'. m~jor slopes. and th.: additional
Jands.::aping that is in tn:: SPA Plan should h:: maintain~d h)' the: nomèOwn::rs. Th:: conditions of appro\'al ha\'e: h::t:n
pr~par~ to pTovid:: fl::xihility to aliow Coun:iJ to pTO\'id~ staff dir~ti()n. \\'hat::v::r dir:::ction Î~ pTo\'íd::d wh::n th~
Op:n Spa:.e Maint::nan::::: Distri:t is fonn:::d. slaff will :::n~un: that Ihos::: faciliti::s ar::: inclutl::d ::ilh::r in a
Hom::.ov.'ners Asso:jatjon or in th~ Op:::n Spa::: Mainl::nanœ District.
Coun:ilmembor Rindone asked why would Council want 10 inoluu: the poue'trian parkway in with th: Homeowners
As.'o::ation or th:: Community Fa:jJiti~s District. \\'hy nol 1::.3\':: it to h::: th:: r:::sponsihililY of thc: hom:;:( \1"TI::r.
Mr. Rosaler stated that would he acceptahl.: 10 staff. Th:: Plannin,g Commission was con;;::rn::d ahout common
maint~ance of it; that th::::rc=: h:: uniform mainh:.nancc: of the p:trkwaY$ throu~hmJl the: nc:i~hh(Jrhood. If th::r:: wa$
commOD mainlt:nan:c: that would insure: a h:::tt::r quality of p~:::~trian cn\'ironm~nt.
Mayor HOi1on expr:::ss.::..d that she had a conc::rn v...ith this and that tht: PlannÎn~ Commission's r:::comm::ndalion war-:
mos: piUd~nt. Not .,dJ hom::.ov.TI:::r~ tr::.at th::ir la.......ns equal. Th~ purpos:: 01 h4i\'inl! thest: prom:::nau::s is to cr::.al::
ë ni:::.r amhience for tn::: communÎty, Th::: only way We wi1l h¡¡\'c :10 assuran.::: In u()in~ thiil is to incluJ::. il in th:::
common maint~nan:::.
Tnis. h:::ing the tim::: and plact: 3., advt:Ttis::u, th:: puhlic h::.arinl! was opt:n::u. Auurt:ssing Council wcrt::
. Craig Fuh-uyama. 2727 Ho\'~r A\':::nu::. ~atjonal City. r::pfl;~scnting Mt.:Millin Companies. He staled that
tn~re W2.S an article in the pap::r which question::d th~ir intent and commitm::.nl to the: Plan. Ht: want::d to pn:sent
for the record a list of the do:um.nts Ihat govern the design of the Pr"ject and that they were in compliance of <:ach
and everyone. They do have four issu::s which ar:: ve:ry minor in natur::. and tht: intt:1:;rily of th::: Plan is still in
p!~:-ç; th~'y 2íB cDnsist~nt with the G:::n~rd.1 Plan. the GDP. and the ()\':::rall D:::sil!n Plan. He want::d to ë.ssure
Coun:il that they were committed to these Plans. H:: addrt:ss::d tht: fnur iSSllt~S:
.5
---..-. .--..- - ., -'~'-'-"-'~--"-'--'---'-'--'~--","-"-"
Minutts
June 3. 1997
Pa.ge 7
-
Mr. Rosaler slated thai in the past, McMillin in Rancho del Rey h,,-, proposed OSMD; EastLake has proposed BOA.
Village Development's portion of Village One and Five was proposed to be maintained by OSMD. but when they
WCDt 10 the guarded entrances, then everything b=me privale so they had to have the HOA. So, there bas boen
a mix.
Assistant City Attorney, Anne Moore, stated that what they negotiated with Sunhow is that the)' have the option of
do::iding wbether or not they want to form a CFD or an HOA. The developer has indicated that they want to form
a CFD. They are proposing the same thing with Salt Cr""k which is giving them an option of doing a CFD or an
HOA. It was ber understanding that Salt Cr""k preferred an HOA. The way they have structured the agreement
witb Sunoow and Sa1t Cre.ok is that they havo the option of d~iding one or th" other. If th"y d~ide they want to
do a CFD that would ~ subje::t to Council's approvaL If Council decides thai they don't want 10 do a CFD then
tbey would bave to form an HOA. Since that is a future legislative action. staff cannot gua:-.mtee that a CFD would
~ approved by the CounciL
Mayor Horton stat~ that it would b~ h~r r~omm::nd<l.lion in this siIu<l.tion Ih<l.t McMillin should have. the option
of gomg fOf'\oVard with th~ir preferenc~. 5ho:: had a conc::rn ahout thr. m<l.int::n<l.n::: of th:: p<l.rkv.·3)"s. ]t is easy to
say that all the homeowners will make sure this is a well maintained area through the CC&Rs. hut that is
cum~r:.Om~. Persona1Jy. she 2gr~ with th:: Planning Commission to h~\.':: this includ::cl in a t)'p:: of assessment
dis:rict. She also fell the concerns of SDG&E should be addressed.
CO;.L'1:jj::1~mher Rinàont stat~ h::: had rn~ior con:::ms <l.hout th:: dimm<l.1ion of P::.J::strÎan ?.<!:-ì: P·5. H::: wouJd lik::
to 5~ ¡h:s Tetain~ b::.::aus:: th~ con-.:::pt thaI Coun:il has hlon:::cl o\'::r w~s 10 maintain th::: ViJJag:: ::::on::::~pt with
a~:.ss to public pzrks. He was suppOr1jv~ of ::\'::rythin.:; t:X~::pi In:: ::ÌiminalH1I1 of th:: pa:L
-
Coun:ilmem~r Salzs stated that this has been a point of disagr""ment hetw""n s:aft' and the developer of Village
One, but sbe felt that when Village One was proposing these small residential parks, it w,,-, h-..:ause their idea of
wbat would be n",,-traditional and staff felt that it would tako away from that. She felt that this does retain the sense
of community more than the elimination of the park would do. She was willing to give the applicant their request
and not put an imposition on them on making a 30% T::.qujT~m::nt on th~ Hollywood drjv~v.:a)'s in r::turn fOT the
reœntion of Park P-5.
"Motion on Holh'wond Drivf'\\'3vs:
MSC (HortonlP~dilla) to ~dopt for first rt:<ldin~ an ~mendn;ent tn the PC District Re;!ulatiom in n~~rds 10
Hnl!)'wood Dr¡"ew~)'s in the I~n~ua:!e set rorth in the stairs report Ihat mirrors McMillin's prupos~l. Motion
approved 4..Q-0-1 (Moot abslaining).
1\{otinn on Par'kw¡n· 'Mainten::mce:
MSC [Padil!alHorton) to prO>'ide directinn on the is.sue or m~inlen~nœ ror park\\'~)'s throu~h ~ Communit)'
Facilit~" Di..é;trict con.'\istent with the rec(lmm~ndatilln (If tht' Plannil1~ Clllnmission. MolÌon approved 4-0·0·1
(Moat abstaining).
:Motion on Pedeçtrian P;trk P·5:
MSC (Padilla/Horton) to retain Pedestri¡m Park P-5 ¡md I"''''e the m¡lÎntenanre up 10 the developer to decide
how the)' w~ntcd to maintain the p~rk either with an HOA or n CFD. Motion approved 4-0-0-1 (Moot
abst.ainiDg).
RESOLUTIO:'\S 18685, 18686, A!\'D ORDlNA!\CE 2709 OFFERED BY ~IA YOR HORTON AS AMENDED,
titles re:Jd, texts waived.
Coun::::ilmember Rindone stated he h<l.d canct:ms with Ih~ z.::ro lot line: procJu::::l. He thought thai this was not
finaliz:.d and would have a chance faT anoth~r rc:vie:\'/"". Since this was a n::w product. he: v.'<l.nh:d to he: assurèd that
'7 .
Minut::s
June 3, J 997
Page 9
-
b. As an informational item, Mr. Goss stat::d that he had an opportunity to talk with the Current Adrrunistrator
of tbe local Scripps Hospilal. He slated that they were proceeding with their proposals under the revisions of the
project at Scripps in Chula Vista as approv::d hy the Redevelopment Agency on January 7. They have had a
su::cessful fund ",ising drive of over $2 rrullion. They feel that the letter in the newspaper was filed hy certain
doctors wbo were Dot tOlally happy with what Scripps was doing. hut there are olher physicians who are very
supportive. They will be moving ahead with the Emergency Room. I CD. and lhe Cancer Cenler. They feel that
by October they will have State approval for these pr~iecls.
COUDcilmember Rindone asked that. in addition to a report, we find a way to dissemjnate this information 50 that
th~rt is aD official public r::spons::.
Mr. Goss Slated that perhaps lhe other physicians in the Scripps family may he responding which may be more
appropriate than the City responding.
12. MA YOR'S REPORT(S)
M2)'or Horton tha.nkod th~ DOv''I1tov,'I1 Busin:::ss As~o=iation and st3ff m::mh:::r5 ,"'ho work::d v::ry hard to put
to£~tb=r the Lemon F::sti\·al. Jt was on:::: of th:: mort: su=::::::ssfuJ ::\'::::nt5 thaI W:::: h~vc had.
13. COlNCTL CO\gfE'\TS
Coun:ilm::mher Rindon::: He also con~r¿tuJalt:d th:: D3.A. for th:::: Lt:l11on F::stiqd. Ht: ntlli:.:::U on:: thing distinctly
diff:::r~nt in that th:::r~ w:::r:: a numh::r of m::::rchants who r:::main:.d op::::n.
Coun=ilm~mher Moot: He attendt:.d th~ \\'atc:r Park op:::ning. It will h~ a wclcomd.! adJitional to the community.
Councilm~mher Salas: Consideration to oppo~:::: lif¡in~ of han on tripl::: trdil:::r \':::hicJc:s. Item was add::d 10 the
Co=ut Caleudar.
AD1OUR!\ME\T
Th~ rn~ting adjoum::d al 6:28 p.m.
Respectfully suhmitled.
Be\'erly A. AÜlhdd. CMC/AAE
City Clerk
r-;)
-- . .'-2'..... ___ _... .__..___.. ________ ___._.___..._..___u_._..__ ______.__.~__.__._.__._.._
ATTACHMENT 2.
MINUTES OF A REGULAR ~£ETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
,........ OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
'CU8::>r.!;,'i I Jdy g, 1998 council Chamb.
6:02 p.m. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
l. ROLL CALL:
PP£SENT: Councilmembers: Moot., Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and
Mayor Horton..
J.':¡SENT: Counc:ilmembe::-s: None
ALSO PRESENT: City Manage::-, David D. Rowlands; City Attorney, John
M. Kaheny; Deputy City Clerk, Cha=line Long; and
Administrative Secretary, Carla Griffin.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE F1J<G , MO~7 OF SILENCE
_. k??ROVAI. OF MINUTES: June 15, 1998.
- ~$UC (RiDdoDe/Moot) to approve the June 16 minutes.
~. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
A. Oath of Office: Cul~ural Ar~5 Commission - Hec~o~ c. Molina. Deputy
City Clerk Long adminis~ered the oath of office.
5. Proclamation commending Sweetwater Union High Scbool District:.s South
Ray Gain Employability Center. ~ayo= Horton presented the proclamation to Dr.
Tom Teague and Melinda Templeton.
C. Proclamation expressing congratulations to the Cbula Vista Woman's Club
upon the occasion of its eighty-fifth anniverEary~ Mayor Horton presented the
proclama~ion to Helen Stokes, presiòent, and four members of the Chula Vista
Woman's Club.
D. Presentation of an award from the u~s. Pepartment of HousiDg aDd Urban
Development to the City as the winner of the John J. Gunther HUD Blue Ribbon
Best Practices in Housing Community Development Award. Mayor Horton presented
the a~ard to Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, and David
Palmer, ~ibrary Di=ector~
CONSE~7 CALE~~~R
(I 'Oem pulled: 11)
-' BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALEND~R OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, beadings read, texts
waived, passed and approved unanimously 5-0, except for Items No~ l6A aDd l6B
with CouDcilmember Moot abstaining, and Item No. 11 which was pulled.
/Cl - -
Xinu:.es
July 14, 1998
Page 3
.-,
'- 8. P~SOLUTION 19071 RECI:rING = FACT OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD
0/1 JUNZ 2, 1998, DECLARING TIlE RESULT, AND SUCH OTIIER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW
At the June 2, 1998 General ~unicipal Election, ~ayor Hor~on won by 71.82\ over
the other candida~es; and Steve Padilla, candida~e for Seat 2, won over t:he other
candida~e by 60.30\. Therefore, according to the Charter, a Runoff Ele=~ion will
not be required for these two positions. However, all candidates for Seat 1
received less than 50\ of the votes cast. Therefore, a Runoff Election for Seat
1 will be necessary. Staff recommends approval of'the resolution. (City Clerk)
---
9. RESOLUTION 19072 ADOPTING CITY COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING DISTRIBUTION OF
AMPHITHEATER TICKETS - On September 4, 1997, the City en~ered into a Sublease
Agreemen~ wi~h Universal Concerts, Inc. ("Universal"). The Sublease set forth
various ~erms and conditions for the development and operation of a 20,000 seat
amphitheater on Otay Valley Road. In Section 11.3 of the Sublease, Universal
agrees ~o give ~he City twen~y-four (24) tickets to each event promo'ted by
Universal at the amphitheater. Twelve of the tickets pro,,"ide access to a twelve-
seat ~City box.- The other twelve tickets provide access to prime seats in the
best thi"d of the fixed seating a.rea. Staff recommends approval of the
resol1Jtion. (Assistant City Attorney and Di"ec~or of Community Development)
10. RESOLUTION 19073 APPROVING AGPXEMENTS WIT!! VARIOUS COMMUNITY PROMOTIONS
GROUPS FOR EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS - ~he 2998/99 buàge:. incluòes :.he ~undin;
of various communi:.y promo:.ions organi:ations. The coun=il consiàe:ed :eques:.s
from these groups and, as part of the adoption of the budget on June 23, 1998,
the following amounts for funding were approved: Miss Chula Vista Pageant
S2,OOO; Gretchen Evans Library Concerts Sl,650; United Nations Day Committee
S350; and Bonitafes~ S2,410. Staff :-ecommends approval of the resolution. (City
Manager)
11. RESOLUTION 19074 APPROVING A RESOLUTION OF INTEN'IION TO CONSIDER GRANTING
A WASTE KANAGEMEIfX FRANCHISE RENE"oiAL TO THE YEAA 2002 AND SETTING A PUBLIC
BEARING TO CONSIDER SAME FOR AUGUST 4, 1998 - Council conditionally app:-oved the
assignment of the solid waste franchise from Laidlaw to hllied in June, 1997.
Staff and Laidlaw were directed by Council to discuss various financial, service
and ope:-ational issues prior to consideration of any franchise extension.
Council only authorized extension of the Franchise on a month to month basis
pending this item being brought back for consideration. A public hearing for the
first reading of the Ordinance is proposed to be scheduled for August 4, 1998.
No discussion of the item is necessary at this time. Staff recommends approval
of the :esolution. (Deputy City Manager anà Conservation Coordinator) Item waE
pulled by Councilmember Padilla.
Councilmember Padilla stated that he initially pulled the item for clarification
from st.aff; they have provided that clarification.
RESOLUTION 19074 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER PADILLA, heading read, test waived.
Councilmember Rindone indicated that. this item is very significant, and wanted
to make sure that Councilmembers read the one page memo from Mr. Powell. He also
expressed a special appreciation to Yor. Powell and Mr. Krempl for a resolution"
that is very detailed and professional.
VOTE: Passed and approved unanimously 5-0.
~__L"':7j - -
Xinutes
July 14, 1998
Page 5
/""'-
Rf!:QUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION AND AUTBORIZING THE MAYOR TO ErE CUTE SAID AGREEME"-
On June 3, 1997, Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Tract 97-l
McMillin Otay Ranch SPA One, Phase One. Condition Number 105 of Resolution 18686
stipulates that the developer may submit and obtain approval of the City of a
master final map ¡"A" Map) over portions of the Tentative Map showing "super
block" lots. The "A" Map is required to show the backbone street dedications and
utility easements required to service the "super block" lots. In addition, the
developer is required to provide security gua~anteeing the construction of said
backbone facilities. All "super block" lots created are also required to have
access to a dedicated public street. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions.. ¡Director of Public Works)
3. < RESOLUTION 19080 APPROVING THE FINAL "A" KAP SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGIŒDŒNT AND SUPPLEMEN'IAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREDŒNT FOR TRACT 97-02,
MCMILLIN OTAY RANCH SPÃ ONE, PHASE ONE, AND AUTBORIZING THE KAYOR TO ErECUTE SAID
AGIŒDŒNT
. . . END OF CONS£N'1' CALENDAR . . .
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
..........
Council adjourned to Closed Session at 6:21 p.m. ~o discuss with legal coun~
anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 5'9.56.9 significant
exposure to litigation to Subdivision B, two cases. Council reconvened at 6:43
p.m. with all members of the Council present.
...........
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
17. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN SPACE DI~TRICTS 1-9, II, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24,
26, 31, 33, BAY BOULEVARD, AND TOWN CENTRE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998/99 - In
accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.07, ~he City Engineer prepared reports
on the spread of assessments for the open space åistricts. The reports were
accepted and the required public hearings were set by Council on Hay 26, 1998.
The first public hearing was conducted on June 23, 1998. This item includes
information related to the above districts and general information related to
Open Space District 10 and EastLake Maint.enan=e Dist:-ict Number l. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
RESOLUTION 19081 ORDERING CERTAIN OPEN SPACE AND ~~INTENANCE FACILITIES
TO BE MAINTAINED, APPROVING MODIFICATION TO THE ENGINEER'S REPORT AND LEVYING THE
ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998/99 OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS 1-9, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18,
20, 23, 24, 26, 31, 33, BAY BOULEVARD AND TOWN CENTER
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, s't.ated that the final hearing to levy
these assessments are within the parameters 0: last year's assessment, plus CPI
and collection will be equal to or less than the assessment.
/:/ - -
Xim..:t.es
July 14, 199B
Page 7
-.
J_Ot.9!1t ':0 increase the Open Space D istr ic~ Number 10 assessment on this
suQd:'v:.sion. Per Etaff' s: recommendation. the 'Public bearinq WAS; continued to the
.eetiDa of Julv 28, 1998. (Director of Public Works)
KSUC (Borton/Rindone) to continue tbe public bearing to July 28, 1998.
21- PUBLIC IŒ1<RING ADJUSTMEIIT 01" THE: TE:LEGRAPB CANYON DRAINAGE: FEE - The fees
established in 1990 for the Telegraph Canyon Drainage Basin improvements were
last updated on April 21, 1998 using the Engineering News Record 'Construction
Cost Index." The fee was increased by 16.75\ to 54,579 per acre~ The last
update using revised cost estimates and benefit areas as a basis was in 1992.
At that time, however, due to various factors, the fee remained unchanged at
53,922 per acre. It is time to revisit this fee after six years and update it
using current improvement cost estimates and remaining benefit areas in
accordance with the provision incluöed within Ordinance Number 2384. It is
proposed that the fee be increased to 54,B46 per acre. This fee increase is
necessary to cover cost increases to build the original facilities. Per Etaff' ¡:
recommendation. the 'Públic bearina was continued to tbe meetina of Auau£t 4.
1998. (Director of Public Works)
MSUC (HortonjRindone) to contiDue the public bearing to August 4, 1998.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
None.
ACTION ITEMS
22A. RESOLUTION 19084 ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION FOR EXECUTIVE MANAGERS
The compensation resolutions for Executive Managers, Senior Manage=s, Middle
Joianage=s I and the Confidential Unit represent three year agreemen~s for salary
and benefit adjustments. The three year agreement provides for salary increases
of 3\ January 1, 1999, ~\ January 1, 2000, and 5\ January 1, 2001. Another issue
which ~ill not be granted in the first year is the Vacation Sell-back program.
This will provide employees who have sufficient vacation balances to sell either
1 or 2 weeks of vacation. This program will not go into effect until July 1,
19!19. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Human
Resources)
3_ PLSOLUTION 19085 ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION FOR SENIOR MANAGERS
C. RESOLUTION 19086 ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION FOR MIDDLE MANAGERS
D. RESOLUTION 19087 ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION FOR CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES
-. RESOLUTION 19093 APPROVING PAY AND BENEFIT INCREASES FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL
AS REFLECTED IN EXHIBIT A
F. RESOLUTION 19094 ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION FOR UNCLASSIFIED BOURLY
EMPLOYEES
/0
---- ._---_.'. .----,...-.- 0' _.....__ .__. .____........,._._"..
P.inu:.es
July 14, 199B
Page 9
Chr is Salomone, Director of Communit.y Development, recommended that Counc: ~
approve ~he encroachment permit as presented and approved by the Design Revi
Commit~ee stressing that he understood the issues raised by the Council and will
continue to negotiate over the season to resolve issues that still exist..
RESOLUTION 19091 OrrERED BY COUliCILMEMBER MOOT, heading read, text waived, passed
and approved unanimously 5-0.
24. P.!:PORT COORS COMMUNITY PROGRAMS FOR RESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR - On June 16,
1998, Council reviewed the Events Management Plan for the Coors Amphitheater and
discussed the company's promotions for responsible behavior in the sale and
consumpt.ion of alcohol. council requested ~hat more s?"cif ic information on
Coors' programs and specific efforts which will be unèertaken in Chula Vista be
brought back. In aèdition to the information in this report, Coors' staff has
prepared a vièeo "composite" for presentation ~o Council which summari~es the
company's promotional and educational effo=ts. Staff recommends Council accept
the re?~~ and direct staff to work ~ith Coors and Unive=sal to insure liaison
",..ith community and education g=oups promoting responsible behavior among youth
in the c::>mmunity. (Director of Communi:.y Developmen":.)
Chris Sal~one, Director of Communi:.y Developmen:., stated that subsequent to the
èirec:'':':J::ì 0: 't.he Council, meet.ings we::-e held ,"·i~h re?rese:n~atives from Coors.
~a~eria15 we::-e ?resen~ed ~o s~a:f and to 't.he C:J:~~cil 't.hat Co.:>rs already has in
pla::e ,;;.imed 0" elemen~a:-y s::hool, rr.iddle 5::::':>01, r.i;:' s::hool and ::o11e;?e
stuåents, as well as va::-ious et.hnic market.s. Meet.ings were held wit.h t'
principal of Montgomery School, Co~n::il me~e=s and rep::-esent.atives of Co~
resulting in a benefit that migh~ not have happened otherwise. Proposing
specific programs that will be èiscussed with the Superintendents, that will make
materials available to the youth of our community_ Staff is satisfied that
Coors ...·ill be providing an ext.ra be:ìefit to ocr communi:.y.
A five-~:"nut.e video encapsulating the Coors program was shown.
Councilmember Rindone concluded tha:. the pledge from Coors included all the
schools in t.he Sweetwater School Dist.rict and t.he element.ary schools t.hat feed
into the secondary program in t.he C:.':y of Chula Vista. ~:t.er meeting with the
Coors representatives, there is no question that Coors has every intent to be a
communi:.y partner and provide suppo::-:. in their campaign for promoting responsible
behavior among youth anè could as well incluàe aàè.ressing the issue of over
consumption by adults. With this commitment, the partnership between the Coors
and Universal Studios will result in a quality facility as well as a communit.y
service educational program.
Councilmember Moo:. responded t.hat. Coors o:'v':"ously is :.aking an extremely
responsible position with :.his issue since i:. ...·as first :-aised and discussed in
the com."T1unity.. One of t.he t.hings that Chula Vista does that promotes an
extremely healthy lifestyle and also promo~es the city and our bi-national
cultures is the lOK Oc~ober Barrio Race. We are always looking for responsible
=orpora~e partners :'0 sponsor events like :.his and "to have a company like Coors
who migh~ be ~illing to take a look a~ an eve~t like t.his and participate would
be a welcome asset t.o this communi:.y.
ACTION: Councilmember Rindone suggested that the report be received and filed
and to direct staff to work with Coors in the promotion of responsible behavior
among the youth as well as the campaign against over consumption by adults.
MSUC (Horton/Padilla) to accept the report.
/? - -
Minc:.es
July 14, 199B
Page 11
r--
B. Ratification of appointments:
Cultural Arts Commission - Gene Clement (to fill vacancy c:::-eated by
Commissioner McAllister, whose term expired on June 3D, 1998)
Ec:onomic: Development Commission - Chris Bitterlin (Ex-Officio) (to fill
vacancy created by Commissioner Sellgren, whose term expired on June 30,
199B)
Housing Advisory Commission - Barbara Worth (Tenant) {to fill vacancy
created by Commissioner Worth, whose term expires June 30, 2000}
!n~ernational Friendship Commission - ¥.ic:hie Crockett (to fill vac:an=y
created by Commissioner Taboaàa, whose te=m expired on June 30, 1998)
MSUC (Borton/Moot) to !atify the appointments.
27. COUNCIL COHMEN'l'S
Councilmember Moot
A. RESOLUTION 19092 URGING THE CREATION OF JOIN"X GOVERNMENTAL TASK FORCE
nITH THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BOARD, 1JID SWEE:rnATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT BOARD - The City of Chula Vista, the Chula Vista Elementa:-y S:::h::l:Jl
Distri:=t, and the Sweetwater Union 2igh Scho:Jl District share a Camm::ln interest
in promoting the well being of area youth. This resolution would establish a
joint governmental task force that would pursue common opportunities and develop
strategies to expand the recreational programs and services available to
c:hildren. It is rec:ommended that the resolution be approved.
Councilmember Moot stated that one of the weaknesses perceived "..ithin loc:al
governmen~ is the inability to cooperate ...-ith agencies with overlapping
jurisdiction. In this particular area, Chula Vista has broken the mold and has
been involved with many collaborative efforts that have gone beyond-the typical
jurisdictional boundaries of local governmental entities. These collaborative
efforts have proàuced tremenàous results and achieved many cost savings. Once
again, ~he City can be a leader in creating these collaborative efforts and, in
particular, with the different school districts that have jurisdiction in Chula
Vista. This resolution proposes that a standing governmental task f oree be
creat.ed that meets quartedy to discuss areas and create common solutions
addressing corrunon community problems that affect all of these agencies.
Specifically, the access to school playgrounàs and athletic fields that. have been
affected by funding and difficult buàget times. ¥.any of the fields are going
unused and are in need of upgraded maintenance. The City working with the sc:hool
districts c:an make these school playgrounås available to youth athletic
organizations through joint maintenance agreements. ¥.aintenanc:e of playgrounds
and city parks that are adjacent to each other can be sent out for bid for joint
maintenance for subst.ant.ial cost savings. We also know t.hat. the after school
programs are important to our youths, that in the critical hours from 3:00 p.m.
to 6:00 p.m. that many of the sc:hools are closed yet paren~ 5 are wo=king. A
lette= from Senator Locklear succinctly outlines the critical nature of these
after school hou=s and the effect that it has on our public safety services and
the effect that good after school programs have on reducing truancy and crime.
There are many areas where elected bodies can work together. The City is in a
unique position to make it work and should take the lead by inviting other boards
to consider creating this task force. 70
---,- -------.-.------ ~----, - ---
.- ..A
, !
. ,- - ~I
- ~.
---- /.1" - ,- , --
J
2~
'..
-
Resolution 18686
ATTACHMENT ..Æ:.- Page 7
Exhibit A
MCMILLIN
Otay Ranch SPA One
Tentative Subdivision Map PCS 97-02
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Unless 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 js 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 first 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 Chuia 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 final "B" Maps. A
Final "B" Map is defined as a final subdivision or parcel map, filed in accordance with
the Subdivision Map Act and the Chula Vista Municipal Code, which proposed 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
conformance 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 department 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 terms, 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 term
"Developer" shall also mean" Applicant".
/î /"'"
.·~ì
.-- -'
_ __ ____ "_''''___'~''m_ ..."._.~_...___.._.__ ...._....
Resolution 18686
Page 8
3. If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contai...~ shall fail to occur
or if they are, by their terms, to be jmplemented and mai~er time, if any of
such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained'" .to their terms, the
City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approv.... granted including
issuance of building permits, deny, or further condltlo~ the ~nt approvals that
are derived from the approvals herein granted, Instttute ~cute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damðil~'"eir violation. The
applicant shall be notified 10 days in advance prior to any ~ove actions being
taken by the City and shall be given the opportunity to~ any deficiencies
identified by the City.
4. The applicant shall comply with all applicable SPA ,. -~ of approval.
5. Any and all agreements that the applicant is required.. in hereunder, shall
be in a form approved by the City Attorney.
ENVIRONMENTAL
6. Prior to approval of each final "8" Map, the ~ shall enter into a
supplemental subdivision agreemen~ to implement all ap~l~atigation measures
identified in EIR 95-01, the CEQA Findings of Fact for this ""and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the approval of each final "8" Map, the ap~"'1I comply with all
applicable requirements of the Phase 2 Resource Manage~""IRMP) as approved
by the City Council on June 4, 1996 and as may be amended_1ime to time by the
City.
8. The Applicant shall comply with any applicable reqUÍ'~ of the California
Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Department of Fish .....dlife and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant shall apply.for and......1I take permit from
the appropriate resource agencies or comply wtth an "-.c MSCP- or other
equivalent 10(a) permit or Section 7 consultation applicable 10 ... property.
DESIGN
9. The secondary emergency access between Neighborlløocl,A-10 and R-11 shall
be surfaced with "grass-crete", "turf-block" or some other cOfllPliJable material unless
otherwise approved by the Planning Director and Fire Chief. BøIIIr4. shall be provided
at the end of the emergency access.
10. In addition to the requirements outlined in the City of ~a Vista Landscape
Manual, privately maintained slopes in excess of 25 feet in heíØIt 'hall be landscaped
and irrigated to_soften their appearance as follows: an equivlltnt of one 5-gallon or
larger size tree per each 150 square feet of slope area, one 1-911IoI, or larger size shrub
per each 100 square feet of slope area, and appropriate groundcov." Trees and shrubs
shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften a~d vary the II.,. plane. Landscape
and irrigation plans for private slopes shall be reviewed and apprOVed by the Planning
Director prior to approval of the appropriate final map.
7('
~/:
---
Resolution 18686
Page 9
11. A comprehensive wall plan indicating color, materials, height and location shall
be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director prior to approval of each
final "B" Map. Materials and color used shall be compatible and all walls located in
corner 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 backing up to
Telegraph Canyon Road, East Orange Avenue and La Media Road, shall be prepared
prior to submittal of the wall plan indicated above. If such fencing is allowable per the
final acoustical analysis it shall be provided at the end of Applegate Street. View
fencing shall be provided at the ends of all other open cul-de-sacs where a sound wall
is not required.
The exposed portion of any combination free standing/retaining wall as measured from
finish grade shall not exceed 8.5 feet. The applicant shall submit a detail and/or cross
section of the maximum/minimum 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 permit. 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.
12. Lots backing or siding onto pedestrian paseos or parks shall be provided with
view fencing such as three feet of wrought iron on top of a three 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 to any public park, the wall/fencing, including footing shall be
located wholly within the park and maintained by the City.
13. 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.
14. Approval of lot widths and the final number of lots in Neighborhood 22 is
subject to building design and product site plan approval by the Planning Department.
A reduction in the number of currently proposed lots may occur prior to approval of
actual building permits for this Neighborhood.
15. Alternative A for Neighborhood R-12 as depicted on the tentative map is the
preferred alternative. The applicant and the adjacent landowner shall make all
reasonable efforts to work together in order to accomplish this alternative. If, after six
months from the effective date of the map, no agreement has been reached, the other
alternate depicted on the map shall be acceptable.
STREETS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
/' '..----r
....- . -. .._.~" ..._.._______ __ ___ _....... _... ._._._.. __ _ __·._..._.·m._....___.___~ .._,____..,._-.._..._
Resolution 18686
Page 1 0
16. Dedicate for public use all the public streets shown on the tentative map within
the subdivision boundary. Prior to the approval of the applicable "B" Map as
determined by the City Engineer, the applicant shall enter into an agreement to
construct and guarantee the construction of all streets shown on the tentative map and
all street improvements as required by the PFFP for each particular phase which could
be a result of the cumulative development within SPA One.
17. Secure in accordance with Section 18.16.220 of the Municipal Code, as
necessary, the construction and/or construct street improvements for all on-site and
off-site streets deemed 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 traffjc
signal interconnection conduits and wiring.
Street cross sections shall conform to the cross sections shown on the Tentative Map.
All other design criteria shall comply with the Chula Vista Design Standards, Chula
Vista Street Design Standards, the Chula Vista Subdivision Manual and the Cjty
Landscape Manual current at the time of approval of the appropriate final "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 East Orange A venue and East Palomar Street west of Paseo Ranchero is not
necessary to provide service to the subject subdivision, their construction may be
delayed.
Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, the developer shall provide a cul-de-
sac in accordance with City standards at the end of all proposed street stubs along the
subdivision boundary. The City Engineer may approve the installation of a temporary
turnaround or other acceptable alternative at the end of those streets that might be
extended in the future to provide access to the adjacent property.
18. Include a fully activated traffic signal at the following intersections as part of the
improvement plans associated with the final "B" Map which triggers the installation of
. the related street improvements.
a. East Palomar Street and Paseo Ranchero
b. East Palomar Street and La Media Road
c. East Palomar Street and East Orange Avenue
d. East Orange Avenue and Paseo Ranchero
e. East Orange Avenue and La Media Road
Install underground improvements, standards and street lights wjth the construction of
street improvements, and install mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment as
. determined by the City Engineer
..-? ,,'~
.:-.-¿
Resolution 18686
Page 11
19. Submit to and obtain approval by the City Engineer of striping plans for all
collector or higher classification streets simultaneously with the associated
improvement plans.
20. All vertical and horizontal curves and intersections of all streets shall 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 shall be resolved by the City Engineer.
21. Prior to the approval of the final "8" 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 shall provide root control methods per the
requirements of the Parks and Recreation Director and 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.
22. Enter into an agreement with the City, prior to approval of the first 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 shall 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.
c. Fund its fair share of the cost of construction of the two pedestrian
bridges connecting Villages One to Village Two and Village Five to
Village Six as determined by the City Engineer based on the
proportionate benefit received from the improvements. The developer
shall also identify the financing mechanism to be used to fund said cost.
23. Prior to approval of the appropriate final map, 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. Include said right-of-way in an open space district.
24. Guarantee 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 final map that requires
construction of La Media Road between East Palomar Street and East Orange Avenue.
The developer shall construct said bridge, at the time when that portion of La Media
_2q -------------~----_._--_._._-_._-_.__.._-_.-
Resolution 18686
Page 12
Road is constructed and may seek, with the concurrence of i¥ City, repayment from
other benefiting property owners through a reimbursemem_ict.
25. In the event the Federal Government adopts ADA -. Lds for street rights-of-
way which are in conflict with the standards and approvals_ained herein, all such
approvals conflicting with those standards shall be updated..flect those standards.
Unless otherwjse required by federal law, City ADA st . J~ may be considered
vested, as determined by Federal regulations, only after c» t:l...t;on has commenced.
26. Prior to approval of the first final map for Neighbor~12 which requires the
construction of the temporary access road to East Palomar _t, the developer shall
accomplish the following:
a. If required by the City Engineer, obtain a c; l_;tion permit from the
City approving the necessary modi~ to any existing
improvements, which are necessary to p~ temporary access to
Neighborhood R-12.
b. Enter into an agreement where the developer 'lJees to:
1. Remove to the satisfaction of the City ålgineer the "Temporary
Access Road" improvements, at such_ as a permanent road
connecting R-12 to East Palomar Strliletilopened for public use.
2. Construct the ultimate East Palomar Street improvements and
regrade the area to be consistent wiIb 1IIe streetscape of East
Palomar Street as directed by the Cibt fngineer and Director of
Parks and Recreation at such time IS a permanent road
connecting R-12 to East Palomar StreetÍl opened for public use..
3. Install signs as directed by the City EnøíIIeer, indicating that the
"Temporary Access Road" will be closed once a permanent road
connecting R-12 to East Palomar Street ÍI opened for public use.
4. Provide a Notice in any residential diselosure document that the
"Temporary Access Road" will be closed once a permanent road
connecting R-12 to East Palomar Street ÍiI opened for public use.
5. Provide for all costs associated with the vacation of the
"Temporary Access Road" located wíthín the proposed future
residential lot.
c. Provide security acceptable to the City in the amount determined by the
City Engineer to guarantee the removal of the Temporary Access Road
improvements and construction of the ultimlte East Palomar Street
improvements as directed by the City Engineer and Director of Parks and
Recreation
30
Resolution 18686
Page 13
27. 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 final "B" Map which triggers the
construction of 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
determined by the City Engineer.
28. Include the easement for the proposed "Temporary Access Road" to R-12 from
East Palomar Street to the northern property line across the proposed future residential
lot. On the appropriate final "B" Map, as determined by the City Engineer, grant said
easement to the City for open space, transportation, and other public uses._
29. 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 properties 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.
30. 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 future
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 agrees to 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 such as the USA Dig
Alert Service.
3. Mark out any private facilities owned by the developer whenever
work is performed in the area.
The terms of this agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns
of the developer.
b. Shutoff devices as determined by the City Engineer are provided at those
locations where private facilities traverse public streets.
31. Include in separate lots the right-of-way required to accommodate the future
grade separation at the intersection of Telegraph Canyon and Otay lakes Road. These
lots shall be granted in fee to the City for Open Space, transportation, and other public
purposes on the appropriate final "B" Map, as determined by the City Engineer. Prior
'7 i
--. .
~._y ---_._....----~ _ ,'_""'_ _ ..__ .._..__,.__,~ _.__m._._._··_,___
Resolution 18686
Page 14
to the approval of the grading plans proposing the grading of the area that would
accommodate said intersection, the developer shall submit a design study, acceptable
to the City Engineer, of the grading required for said grade separated intersection.
32. 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 alley product, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer and
Planning Director. Following is a list of streets where Residential Street Condition A
shall be implemented:
Neighborhood R-11: Santa Delphina Ave., Pacifica Ave., Colusa Drive, Bellena Ave.,
Ballena Court, Montana Drive, Quailsprings Drive and Coalsprings Drive.
Neighborhood R-12: Carmel Avenue, Pleasanton Road, Carmel Court, Applegate Road
and Ojai Court.
Neighborhood R-23: Bridlevale Drive, Ravenrock Drive, Fawntail Drive, Bouquet
Canyon Drive, Strawberry Valley Road, Elk Run Court and Covey Court.
Neighborhood R-24: Bouquet Canyon Drive, Fernwood Drive, Lonetree Drive, Sagetree
Drive, Clovertree Drive Breezewood Drive and Bramblewood Drive.
Residential street Condition B may be used in Neighborhood R-22.
33. 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 final "B" Map that requires construction of La Media Road between East
Palomar Street and East Orange Avenue.
34. Requested General Waivers 1, 2, 3 and 4 and Specific Waiver 1, as indicated
on the cover sheet of the tentative map, are hereby approved. -
35. Right-of-way for the light rail transit line shall provide for spiral curves as
provided by MTDB and approved by the City Engineer.
36. 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 '''quired by the Public Facilities Financjng Plan (PFFP); provided, however,
that such dications shall be restricted to those reasonably necessary for the
constructio f the facilities identified in the PFFP.
37. The "eloper shall be responsible for the construction of full improvements of
that portio )f East Palomar Street contained within the proposed tentative map,
including t nstallation of full transit stop improvements at the Village Five core. In
the event portion of East Palomar Street is proposed for construction in phases,
the Devel' shall: (1) submit and obtain approval of the City Engineer of a
constructi, hasing plan, which shall determine the improvements, facilities, and/or
dedication: De provided with each phase, and (2) enter into an agreement with the
City, prior '1e issuance of any grant of approval for the construction of the initial
3;¿
Resolution 18686
Page 15
phase of East Palomar Street, where the Developer agrees to construct the remaining
phases at such time as required by the PFFP.
38. 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.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
39. 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.
The developer shall submit notarized letters of permission to grade for all off-site
grading.
40. 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.
41. Comply with all the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) and the Clean Water Program.
42. 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 100-year frequency peak runoff.
43. Prior to approval of: (1) the first final "B" Map or grading permit whichever
occurs first for land draining into the Poggi Canyon, and (2) the first final "B" Map or
grading permit whichever occurs first for land draining into the Telegraph Canyon
Channel, the developer shall:
a. Guarantee the construction of the applicable drainage facility, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer as follows:
1. Runoff detention/desilting basin and naturalized channel in Poggi
Canyon; or
2. Runoff detention Basin in Telegraph Canyon Channel
The Developer may agree to construct these facilities at a later time if
approved by the City Engineer and if the developer provides private
33 ...--.-...-. -...-.-- --"-.---- ----...--.--.-
.' -.--.......--...
Resolution 18686
Page 1 6
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 1 DO-year peak
flow. Said temporary facilities shall comply with all the provisions of the
National Pollutant Discharge Eliminatjon 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.
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
applicable 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 jmplement the majntenance program.
d. Enter into an agreement with the City where the developer agrees to the
following:
1. Provide for the maintenance of the proposed detention basin in
Telegraph Canyon and the proposed naturalized channel and
detention basin in Poggi Canyon until such time as mäintenance
of such facilities is assumed by the City or an open space district.
2. Provide for the removal of siltation in (1.)the Telegraph Canyon
detention basin and (2.) Poggi Canyon Channel and detention
basin until all upstream grading of the area contained within the
tentative map is completed and erosion protection planting is
adequately established as determined by the City Engineer and
Director of Parks and Recreation.
3. Provide for the removal of any siltation in (1.)the Telegraph
Canyon detention basin and (2.)Poggi Canyon Channel and
detention basin attributable to the development for a minimum
period of five years after City acceptance of the landscaping
improvements.
44. Enter into an agreement with the City, prior to approval of the first final "B" Map
or grading permit whichever occurs first for land draining into the existing Telegraph
Canyon Channel, where the developer agrees to perform the following activities within
,~.-.j
--, -...:.-
_..J-
Resolution 18686
Page 17
the portion of said eXisting channel extending from Paseo Ladera to the eastern
subdivision boundary:
a. Provide for the removal of siltation until all upstream grading of the area
contained within the tentative map is completed and erosion protection
planting is adequately established as determined by the City Engineer
and Director of Parks and Recreation.
b. Provide for the removal of any siltation attributable to the development
for a minimum period of five years after City acceptance of the
landscaping improvements.
45. Ensure that brow channels and ditches emanating from and/or running through
City Open Space are not routed through private property and vice versa.
46. 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 determined by the City Engineer shall be
provided to public drainage structures located in the rear yard of any residential lot.
47. Provide a protective fencing system around: (1) the proposed detention basins
at Telegraph Canyon and 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.
48. Designate all drainage facilities draining private property to the point of
connection with public facilities as private.
49. 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.
50. Obtain a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency revising the current National Flood Insurance Program maps of
the Telegraph Canyon Channel to reflect the effect of the proposed drainage
improvements. The LOMR shall be completed prior to acceptance by the City of the
proposed detention facility.
51. 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.
52. Prior to the approval of the first final "B" Map, the developer shall submit for the
approval of the City Engineer, a study demonstrating that the proposed detention basin
in Telegraph Canyon is capable of reducing the peak runoff from SPA One to or less
than the present 100-year frequency peak runoff. The City Engineer may require that
said study be reviewed by an outside consultant to determine the effect of the
proposed detention facility on the existing naturalized channel. All costs associated
with retaining said consultant shall be the responsibility of the Developer. The final
7' ç-
~::.,--..:L.-._._...
Resolution 18686
Page 18
design and location of the detention basin shall be approved by the City Engineer,
Director of Planning and Director of Parks and Recreation.
53. Prior to the installation of the regional trail, install a fence along those portions
of: (1) the existing maintenance access roads along the Telegraph Canyon Channel,
and (2) the proposed maintenance access roads of the Poggi Canyon Channel, which
are 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 determined by the City Engineer and Director of Parks and
Recreation
54. 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, the Developer shall obtain approval of landscape/irrigation plans.
55. Landform grading, similar to what has been proposed along Telegraph Canyon
Road indicated on this tentative map and consjstent with City policy and the approved
tentative maps for the adjacent properties, shall be implemented adjacent to all off-site
major roads (i.e., East Palomar Street and East Orange Avenue).
56. Indicate on all affected grading plans that all walls which are to be maintained
by open space districts or other methods shall be constructed entirely within open
space lots.
57. The grading plans for the intersection at East Orange Avenue/Paseo Ranchero
shall include a partial grading of the area that would accommodate the eastbound on-
ramp and off-ramp and the westbound on-ramp of the future grade separated
intersection. The elevations and extent of the required grading shall be determined by
the City Engineer to: (1) allow in the future the construction of any additional grading
necessary for the ultimate intersection configuration, and (2) construct -the Poggi
Canyon Channel at its ultimate location.
58. Prior to approval of the grading and/or improvement plans proposing the
construction of the culvert under La Media Road at the crossing with the Telegraph
Canyon Channel, the developer shall submit a study acceptable to the City Engineer
demonstrating that the proposed culvert will be capable of handling the design flow in
the event said culvert needs to be extended in the future in conjunction with the
grading for a grade separated intersection at Telegraph Canyon Road/Otay Lakes Road.
59. Prior to approval of the first final uB" Map or first grading permit (whichever
occurs first) for Neighborhood R-12 (Alternate A or B). the developer shall submit a
study for the approval of the City Engineer demonstrating that the 100-year peak flow
proposed to be discharged from said neighborhood to the adjacent properties to the
west, is equal to or less than the present 100-year peak flow. The City Engineer may
approve that increased flows be deposited into the adjacent properties if the developer
provides: (1) verification in the form of an agreement with the owners of downstream
properties indicating the acceptance of the increased flows, or (2) evidence to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer that any existing downstream drainage improvements
3b
Resolution 18686
Page 19
will be capable of handling the increased flows in accordance with City standards. The
developer shall limit the flows to non-erosive velocities and provide erosion control to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
60. Prior to approval of any final "B" Map, Developer shall agree to indemnify City
for any liability, claims or actions resulting from the downstream property owners
accepting the increased flows.
SEWER
61. 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.
62. Prior to the approval of the first final "8" Map for any property located within
Neighborhood R-12 (Alternate A), the developer shall construct or secure the
construction, in accordance with Section 18.16.220 of the Municipal Code, of a gravjty
sewer line connecting Neighborhood R-12 (Alternate AI to an approved public sewer
line. 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 western
boundary of R-12 (Alternate A). Prior to the issuance of any grant of approval for the
construction of said "pump station" and associated improvements, the developer shall
comply with all the requirements of Council Policy No. 570-03 (Sewage Pump Station
Financing Policy).
63. Prior to approval of any final "8" 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 Avenue and La Media
Road. Prior to the issuance of any grant of approval for the construction of said "pump
station" and associated improvements, the developer shall comply with all the
requirements of Council Policy No. 570-03 (Sewage Pump Station Financing Policy).
PARKS/OPEN SPACE/WILDLIFE PRESERVATION
General
64. 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 1, 000 residents. Local parks are
comprised of community parks and neighborhood parks. Pedestrian parks are an
integral component of the plan and shall receive partial park credit as defined below.
A minimum of two thirds (2 acresl1 ,000 residents) of local park requirement shall be
satisfied through the provision of turn-key neighborhood and pedestrian parks.. The
remaining requirement (1 acre/1,000 residents) shall be satisfied through the payment
of fees.
r
-,'
--"'-'--"- . _._,--- . ."._~_--.__._-_.- -"~._..._--- - ._~,--_.._-,-- ."..-------..--.'.--
Resolution 18686
Page 20
65. All local parks shall be consistent with the SPA One PFFP and shall be installed
by the Applicant. A construction schedule, requjring aI parks to be completed in a
timely manner, shall be approved by the Director of Parts and Recreation.
66. All local parks shall be designed and constructed consistent with the provisions
of the Chula Vista Landscape Manual and related Parks and Recreation Department
specifications and policies.
67. All aspects of the neighborhood parks, including the applicants fair share portion
of Park P-9 and the paseo, shall be designed in accordance with the City Landscape
Manual.
68. The Applicant shall receive surplus park credit to the extent the combined park
credit for neighborhood parks, pedestrian 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.
69. 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.
70. Unless 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 approval of the first final "B" Map within the phase
identified in the PFFP for said parks.
71. Pedestrian Parks (also known as mini-Darks): Pedestrian parks less than five
acres, with the exception of Park P-9 and the pas eo, as identified in the SPA- One Plan,
shall be maintained by a funding entity other than the Cjty's General Fund. Pedestrian
parks shall receive a minimum of 25% and a maximum of 50% park credit, as
determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation pursuant to the City wide small
park credit criteria which shall be approved by the City Council.
72. Neiahborhood Parks: Developer shall provide the City with an irrevocable offer
of dedication, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for the park identified in the
PFFP as P-6 prior to the approval of the final map in accordance with the PFFP phasing.
a. In addition to those required PAD fees, the Applicant shall pay PAD fees
based on a formula of 2 acres per 1,000 residents for the first 431
dwelling units. In the City's sole discretion, PAD fees may be required
for units in excess of the first 431 dwelling units.
b. Prior to the approval of the first final map which creates residential 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
'2;:
:.; ~
Resolution 18686
Page 21
for the 431 st dwelling unit. The agreement shall also provide the
following:
1. The level of amenities required in the neighborhood park shall be
determined by the Director of Parks and Recreatjon 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
commencing construction of said park.
2. The timing of construction of Parks P-6, P-7, P-8 and the regional
trails shall be addressed in the revised PFFP.
3. At no time following completion of construction of the first phase
of the first neighborhood park shall there be a deficit in
"constructed neighborhood park" based upon 2 acres/1,000
residents. Applicant agrees that the City may withhold the
issuance of building permits should said deficit occur. For
purposes of this condition, the term "constructed neighborhood
park shall mean that construction of the park has been completed
and accepted by the Director of 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 Applicant 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 applicant shall grant to the City, at the "A" Map stage, an
irrevocable offer of dedication for all neighborhood pãrks shown on the
Tentative Map.
73. Communitv Parks: Prior to the approval of each final "B" Map the Applicant
shall pay PAD fees for the Community Park based upon a formula of 1 acre per 1, 000
residents
74. Trails/aDen SDace:
a. All trails shall connect to adjoining eXisting and/or proposed trails in
neighboring development projects, as determined by the Director of
Parks and Recreation.
b. The two connector trails from Neighborhoods R-24 and R-25 in Village
Five to Telegraph Canyon Road shall be combined into one trail in Open
Space lot 1 and shall connect to the regional trail in one location.
c. 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 Parks and Recreation Director.
7';::::;
--..,.:;.. 1
¡
_..._.._m_ --- --..--- ~--------- -"------..----
Resolution 18686
Page 22
d. The graded section upon which the connecting trails are constructed
shall be 10 feet in width. Six feet shall be provided for the trail bed,
with a 2 foot graded shoulder on either side.
e. Landscape and irrigation plans for the transit right-of-way shall be
reviewed and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director in
conjunction with the landscape plans for East Palomar Street.
75. Communitv Gardens:
a. Community Gardens shall be consistent with the guidelines in the SPA
One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan, including
creation of the Community Garden Committee and their responsibilities.
b. Water lines shall be stubbed from the nearest open space water meter
to the site(s) in order to facilitate development of the Community
Gardens.
c. Community Garden sites shall be consistent wjth those identified on the
tentative map.
d. Maintenance of Community Gardens shall be funded by an Open Space
Maintenance District, Homeowner's Association or other funding
mechanism approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation and the
City Engineer.
e. Community Gardens shall not receive park credit.
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 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. pursuant to the 1972
Landscaping & Lighting Act or other financing mechanism approved by
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 first final map.
~l ;J
Resolution 18686
Page 23
c. Submit evidence acceptable to the City Engineer and the Director of
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 76d. The
City Engineer and the Director of 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 Cjty Engineer and Director of 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. All facilities located on open. space lots to include but not be
limited to: walls, fences, water fountains, lighting 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 East Orange Avenue (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.
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 limited to the cost of
maintenance and all cost to comply with the Department 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 limited to the cost of
maintenance and all cost to comply with the Department of Fish
and Game and the Corps of Engineers permit requirements.
d'
/1
- ---------------
Resolution 18686
Page 24
5. Community Gardens
6. Pedestrian Bridges.
7. The proportional share of the maintenance of the median and
parkways along that portion of Telegraph Canyon Road adjoining
the development as determined by the City Engineer.
8. Parkways and open space lots proposed along Santa Cora
Avenue within Neighborhoods R-22, R-23, and R-24.
9. Parkways along Santa Delphina Avenue within Neighborhood R-
11.
10. Trees planted within the 8-foot street tree easement adjacent to
(1 )the western right-of-way line of Santa Delphina Avenue and
(2) Lone Tree Drive to the south right of way of Park 6.3.
e. Submit an initial deposit of $15,000 to begin the process of formation
of the open space district. All costs of formation and other costs
associated with the processing of the open space relating to this project
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. Include in the CC&Rs, if applicable, the obligation of the Homeowners'
Association to maintain all the facilities and improvements within the open space lots
rejected by the City prior to the approval of the final map containing said lots.
78. 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 Parks and Recreation.
79. 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 wall or
encroach onto the open space lots. These restrictions shall also be incorporated in the
CC&Rs for each lot.
80. Agree to not protest formation or inclusion in a maintenance district or zone for
the maintenance of landscaped medians and scenjc corridors along streets within and
adjacent to the subject subdivision.
81. If requested by the City, 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 majntained through the open space district or
the HOA. Provide on the final map a certificate, pursuant to section 66477.2(a) of the
. .--,
.-- -
Resolution 18686
Page 25
Subdivision Map Act, rejecting those open space lots to be maintained by the
Homeowner's Association.
82. Provide documentation, prior to the approval of the first final "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
ChuJa 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.
B4. Prior to issuance of any grading permit which includes Landscaping and Irrigation
(L & I) improvements to be installed in an open space lot to 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 Parks and Recreation. The amount
of the deposit shall 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 City Engineer.
Any unused portion 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. Provide an 8-foot street tree easement adjacent to the western right-of-way line
of Santa Delphina Avenue (within Neighborhood R-11) and to the south right of way
of Lonetree Drive.
86. Ensure that all buyers of lots fronting residential streets constructed in
accordance with Condition A sign a statement, when purchasing their homes,
stipulating that (1) they are aware that the City will be responsible for the maintenance
of the landscaping improvements located between the curb and the sidewalk (including
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
87. 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).
88. Present verification to the City Engjneer in the form of a letter from Otay Water
District that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long term
water storage facilities.
EASEMENTS
43
__"____,_om_n - - ____.________n_______
Resolution 18686
Page 26
89. Grant to the City a 10' wide easement for general utility purposes along public
street frontage of all open space lots offered for dedication to the City unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer.
90. 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.
91 . 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 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.
92. 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 determined 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, band c above shall be accomplished prior to the
approval of the appropriate Final Map.
93. Grant easements to subsequent owners pursuant to Section 18.20.150 of the
City Code on any final map that proposes private utilities or drainage facilities crossing
property lines as directed by the City Engineer.
94. 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 Parks and Recreation and the City Engineer to provide adequate access for
maintenance of said walls.
,
J
-r ¡
, ,
.
Resolution 18686
Page 27
95. Grant on the appropriate final "B" Map the followjng: (1.) a minimum 15 foot
wide drajnage and access easement for stormdrains located between residential units,
and (2.) a minimum 20 foot wide sewer and access easement for sewerlines located
between residential units. The City Engineer may approve that a reduced (stormdrain
and/or sewer) easement width be granted at those locations where stormdrains are
proposed adjacent to sewerlines. All other easements shall meet City standards for
required width.
AGREEMENTS/FINANCIAL
96. 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
Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan have been reached.
2. Traffic volumes, 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 Annual Monitorjng Program, have not been
completed.
c. Defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers
and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or
its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul any
approval by the City, including approval by its Planning Commission, City
Councilor any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard
to this subdivision approval.
d. Hold the City harmless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase
flow of drajnage resulting from this project.
e. Ensure that all franchised cable television companies ("Cable Company")
are permitted equal opportunity to place conduit and provide cable
television service to each lot on public streets· within the subdivision.
Restrict access to the conduit to only 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
/"
. .
~-j
. .../ ---~_.-...-
._--~--"
Resolution 18686
Page 28
affecting the operation of cable television companies as same may have
been, or may from time to time be issued by the Cjty of Chula Vista.
f. Include in the Articles of Incorporation or Charter 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 permitted equal opportunity to
go out to bid to provide a Cooperative Homeowner's Insurance Program
(CHIP).
h. Pay, upon Council approval of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin
Development Impact Fee, the total amount of the fees for those lots of
the final map which are located within the area of benefit of said facility
and that obtained building permits prior to the establishment of said fee.
97. Enter into an supplemental agreement with the City prior to approval of the first
final "B" Map, where the developer agrees to the following:
a. Participate, on a fair share basis, in any deficiency plan or financial
program adopted 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.
98. Prior to approval of the first final Map (including an "A" Map), or as otherwise
determined by the Director of Planning, within SPA One and consistent with the City's
Housing Element, Ranch-Wide and SPA One Affordable Housing Plans, the applicant
shall enter into and execute with the City an Affordable Housing Agreement ("SPA One
Affordable Housing Agreement") containing, but not limited to, the following
provisions: (a.) The obligation to provide the total number of low and moderate income
units required under the City's Affordable Housing Program, based on the number of
dwelling units contained within the Master Tentative Map for SPA One; (b.) Identify
the overall number of dwelling units within the Master Tentative Map for which the
applicant. can receive final map approval prior to the applicant selecting and
guaranteeing, to the City's satisfaction, final affordable housing site(s); (c.) The
number of dwelling units within the master tentative map area which can receive
building permit authorizations prior to the applicant obtaining building permits for a
specified number of the required low income units; and (d.) A description of what
information must be provided in subsequent Project Level Affordable Housing
Agreements. Upon its approval by the City, the terms and conditions of the SPA One
Affordable Housing Agreement shall become conditions of this resolution, and is hereby
incorporated herein by this reference.
99. The Applicant shall pay, prior to approval of the first "B" Map, their proportional
share, as determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation, of a collaborative study
analyzing local park needs for the area east of the 1-805 Freeway.
/'1
'/-·7
-
Resolution 18686
Page 29
100. Prior to the approval of the first 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 noted in the following table. The Improvement Phasing Schedule shall be
consistent with the PFFP.
COST ITEM TO BE INCLUDED IN
IMPROVEMENT PHASING SCHEDULE FACILITY
. Payment of Telegraph Canyon Basin For areas covered by backbone streets and all
Drainage DIF common areas with include, but are not
limited to, parks, schools, paseos and open
space lots.
. Acquisition/dedication of off-site drainage Poggi Canyon Channel (on-site and off-site)
easement. and detention basin
'Construction and maintenance (prior to City
acceptance) .
'Construction and maintenance (prior to City Telegraph Canyon Channel detention basin.
acceptance).
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 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.
SCHOOLS
101. 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
/;,,,........,
~l
Resolution 18686
Page 30
building permit (1 50 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
102. 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 performing 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.
103. Submit copies of Final Maps and improvement plans and storm drain plans 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 prior to the
approval of each Final Map.
104. Tie the boundary of the subdivision to the California System -Zone VI (1983).
105. 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. Saia "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 jn 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.
:L?
. .
Resolution 18686
Page 31
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 "8" Map, shall meet (prior to issuance of a
building 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 to be bonded for with the final "A" Map
which created such lot. However, such improvements will be required to be
constructed under the Municipal Code provisions requiring construction of street
improvements under the design review and building permit issuance processes.
In the event of a filing of a final map which requires oversizing (in accordance with the
restrictions of state law and City ordinances) of the improvements necessary to serve
other properties, said final 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.
106. Prior to approval of the first "A" Map, the Developer shall enter jnto 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.
107. Pursuant to the provisions of the Growth Management Ordinance (Section 19.09
of the CVMC) and the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP). the Applicant shall
complete the following: (1.) Fund the preparation.of an annual report monitoring the
development of the community of Otay Ranch. The annual monitoring report 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 quarter
of the following fiscal year. The annual report 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, corresponding
public facility needs per the adopted threshold standards, and identifying financing
options for necessary facilities.
108. The applicant of each master tentative map shall be responsible for retaining a
project manager to coordinate 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, including but not limited to land use
planning and architecture.
109. The applicant shall submit copies of any proposed C.C. and R's for review and
approval by the Director of Planning and the City Engineer prior to approval of each
final "8" Map.
- ..'"
-,,-~'- -.-1
.
----
Resolution 18686
Page 32
110. Fully accessible handicap access shall be provided at the ends of the following
cul-de-sacs: Fawntail Drive, Sagetree Drive, Montana Drive.
Access via stairs shall be provided at the ends of the following cul-de-sacs: Rimrock
Drive, Thistlwood Avenue, Clovertree Drive, Bramblewood Drive, and Applegate Drive..
111. If developer desires to do certain work on the property 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., final "B" Map and improvement plans) will be approved. All work
performed by the developer prior to approval of the appljcable "B" Map shall be at
developer's own risk.. Prior to permit issuance, the developer shall acknowledge in
writing that subsequent submittals (i.e., final "B" Map and improvement plans) may
require extensjve changes, at developers cost, to work done under such early permit.
The developer shall post a bond or other security acceptable to the City in an amount
determjned by the City to guarantee the rehabilitation of the land if the applicable final
"B" Map does not record.
PHASING
112. The applicant shall submit to the City a revised phasing for review and approval
prior to approval of the first final "B" Map. The PFFP shall be revised where necessary
to reflect the revised phasing plan.
113. 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 Planning prior to approval 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.
114. 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 Transportatjon Phasing
Sù
Resolution 18686
Page 33
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
115. 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.
116. Underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with Municipal
Code requirements.
117. Pay the following fees in accordance with the Cjty 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 DIF
f. Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIF as may be adopted by the City in the
future
g. Telegraph Canyon Basin Drainage DIF
h. Reimbursement District for Telegraph Canyon Road Phase 2
Undergrounding
i. Otay Ranch Reserve Fund fee.
Pay the amount of said fees in effect at the time of jssuance of building permits.
118. Comply with all relevant Federal, State and Local regulations, including the Clean
Water Act. The developer shall be responsible for providing all required testing and
documentation to demonstrate said compliance as required by the City Engineer.
119. 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.
120. Comply with Council Policy No. 570-03 if pump stations for sewer purposes are
proposed.
121. Comply with Council Policy No. 522-02 regarding majntenance of natural
channels within open spaces.
122. The applicant shall comply with all aspects of the City of Chula Vista Landscape
Manual.
123. 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
~
......-; I
I",¿-- ,__~ ,-..-.'- --- --_.~,,_.._--,. _..._--.__._--~.._~_._~--_._---
Resolution 18686
Page 34
chapter includes but is not limited to: threshold standards (19.09.04). public facilities
finance plan implementation (19.09.090), and public facilities finance plan amendment
procedures (19.09.100).
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
(particularly traffic) prior to construction of State Route 125. Said provisions will
require the demonstration, 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.
124. Upon submittal of building plans for small lot single family (5,000 square feet
or less as defined 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.
125. All proposed development shall be consistent with the Otay Ranch SPA One
Planned Community District Regulations.
52-
ATTACHMENT 5_
CITY OF CHDL.A ':15TA DISC....oSL"RE STAl- v~:-r
":'::J':';' £.:"::: n:cr~::.ñ:it.. 5t.T~ Df~ß=.ioEUtt cf::.c::&U: O~ 0':"~U:L.i ::J!-~-:¿. :Je'~. =::0- ~_._
::....~.::lODF:x. a! ~ 'WÍIi.::t; wili ~~. a.:::mm OL tœ: !E": 0:' ~ L1:-.... :~;,;,::::.:... ?;,....n....... :,:--'nl't:l~.
. . . .
z:¡¿ .all OtD=: :::e...;. i boåi5.. 7' œ ioÌÌDwmg :inÍormauan IDllIt De: åic.ìO¡¿:
-' ~ ÛIc mmaa of all peDDDb Dav1ng.a. jm.~.i :imt::rmr m ~ ~.....~.u.." wiU:h 15 xæ mD.j~ Dr ~ J:r\'~_nr'J'r.
or tiE r~_ t..~. t1WIII:. ~ Comm::tDI. mDcomm.::o:. :DB.teIial ~. =c. ..
:.~",,':-'.. ~ -. :..-·-~v -=-:::;:.,-,..-.r-.
-. If 8D!'~ vv-m..; :--"-10 (1) above Ì!;...::orpcmman crpo...-m::sirip, iist tœ """"'" of &1I ~
DWDÎzIg:maretbmlO~ oiiDe.:sharm m:tbe ~l-··-·J.m or ow:aIDgm:ry ~~:im--nc in tile ~.4ÏDp.
'Jc!f.~::'l:'n CDlIIDan;~.s. 1,T,[; (50-:;)
Me:-::ed PEL"""'tners Limited
?2...-:r,.... ",hiD (700::)
,
3. Jf~poaœ;a .......- 11-,,--,-11> (1)alxJve:ioa~à ."" . , ~,. , Dra:tmlt..iíot1he ~ af ""y J8mII.
.servmg- .-: J Ú1he~...:d''''A.£ . ._Id.n ar.al1:rUlree.ar þH~ 1. . f·Dr~tsf1ho> tmr_
, HaYe ~ _ 1IJDIe ~ 5:250 worth afl. _:...-. -wiål .any ..........;.... of tæ City -rf. 1ìcmDI;.
r, , ("~ _.....: ~,.aDd rnnn._l-wiàJin me put tweive 1DCII:I:D&? Y ~ l'tc2 If ya:.. ~ .;..r.~
peaaa(s}:
, Pí=ueDsmy-=i1mdw=yp::n;œ.. w-"~~,~::onsuiIam£, D:'~~ C~ WÌK>
-.
you ~ "';r-' to re;=ocm: you DeÏore tile City:in tiJj¡; UIIII%C:.
'::--E.": ~ ?'ukuvam::; ::....~:::-¡l ~""i~...,:::--'
3 . -- . :·::"rn ::::21i 0::-:
0:> :' ..;.=::~ner
G:::~ r":'T17:i
.. .HIm: ~audI""yaar oñi=s or ageDIE. in 1he a¡:p:pœ.. c. .... : .. more:tban S".L.OOO 10 .. ("~1 .._.~_
in 1he ::zzma: or 1"'~ .,¡.,..;..... pcriod.? 'Y_ No- If y... _ wiDci>. C~~l - ,(I):
~ ..-.
/ ~)'"U
/
I
DI1::: ~D/l'5/98 I
. ,
5Í2D1111Í= oi / ...
cXg ';'. J'Uku~~ =':"=.sid~m;
M .illìl1 CDmD .;~=.s. LLC
1'riBred or T~ of Cam:ra=r,ADDli::mt
~ -.
. ~:: Dif1=d as: :~ inåividual, firm. Cl>:~iúp. joiN """""'. associmiDr... social duD..fr=mDi
org~.::::a::ior:. ::arporarion. ~. IruSr, recriva,~. ZÌIiT anD an:y 0lÌIa ct1ID1Z!', ciTy, or cour.rry', ciry
~'. åis:Ticr. or orner poiirical suDåivision. or any ~i group or comiJin::J.or: aaing as D ¡v.i:.
;;::S:>ME\EN~EV\FORW.s\DISa.DSE.:<'RM ~.-?
-:;. .:;;
" , /
,- , .~
' -.
t,/ -J'.'.,
(i '. .
~ /' ."",
-.-' /: t.,- "..-
i'_" .- t ../
, ,
I
"",'- i
~.
- Cc"'¿ ,
..\\ A++A~Ar"I,¡[:..Jr &,
Mc\1i1lin Land Deve1o,)IDem
:, ':."... ~.'-::" .. :':¡-.:>..."]. .
."ovember : 9. j 998
'):ay Ran:r. ?r~5~rve Ov..'ne;j Iv1anage:r
c' a 1VlL Ra:,eTl Leiter, Director
J:annina ar." 3uii,JJna Dø-'-mønt
- .. =- '.,-' :> .....v.... ';'.<1 ...¡
CITY OF CEUA v1STA
:76 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vist", CA 919JO
RE: lA"ì> COJIirVEYA..1'I/CE TO PRESERVE OWl\'"ER M..-\.NAGER ("POM")
~ear Mr. Leiter:
3y this letter. we fonnal]y request the Otay Ranch POM to h"1iriate the process to accept a tDt¡¡]
0: 200.504 acres of mitigation property as described on the attached maps and Jeg¡¡]
descriprion (..6J>N 647-130-03). The property is generally loc:ated southeasterly of Otay Lake,
jn the Coumy of San Diego, presently owned by Ma..-ian Communities. The mitigation
properry is idenriÍÌed in the Amended Phase 2 Resource JI.Iianagement Pian as first priority
c::mveyance land. McMillin Otay Ranch, LLC is currently in escrow to purc:nase the property.
The calcu]ated acreage needed to satisfY the mirigation requirements for Mc?\llllin Otay Ranch
5?A One Phase J and SPA One Phase 2, is 200.087 acres as shown on the two attached piat
waps. The proposed mitigation property exceeds our cu:-rent requiremem by 0.4] 7 acres.
-v,'rucn can be E :::rtåit against furore: requirerne:n:s.
We further request that our cash deposit being held by the City, to assure future purchase of
mitigation iand, be released upon demand to our escrow acc:ount (Escrow ~o. 98- 7699AS)
"'1th First American Tide Company.
Tne POM must decide quiddy if it will take fee ownership lO the mitigation propel1y or will
require an "irrevocabJe offer of dedication." The conveyance property is pa;1 of a larger parce]
iliat we are purchasing, which will be conveyed as necessa¡'}' in the future. Weare currentìy
preparing a Pbase One Site Assessment and a Preliminary T¡tJe Report for your inspection
lnese documems will be completed next week. We will deüver them to you as soon as they
a:-e avaiJable.
:::~...."'Cir\filesqajÄ\..1:7·dc: ~\\ S.{ ~\\ ~\\
McMillir.. RealI) McMillin Monga~ McMillin lane! ~\'dopment McMillin Homes McMillm Commc:n:ial
:ORPORATE 0--=1::: 2727 HOOVER AVENU:: NATIONAL Clï':' :~. 9~95:¡ TEL (619) JI;'7 ....:~17 FAX. (619) 336-3~~: www.m:mÎJIrn.com
--.-. --.-------^-----~---. ------
::A you havt 2.,;y qUtstÎOTIS :Jf require fun:h~r inÍo:TIlation, pit.?5t ::::ontact Tnt ~: (6 J 9) ~~):._: -: ~
5i:1:~n~J\'.
-_. Rick Rosab, Planning Department
Georg~ Kr~mpl, CiTy Manager's Office
Don Knox, McMillin Land Development
_o\ngeiiqu~ Sizemore, First lun~rican Tit]e Company
". declare under penalty of perjury that I am
employed by the (.j;" 01·:' .,'1 Vista in the
Office of the City (,1... ,_ 1 ·:,·,ot I pos: ed
this Agenda/Notice on '¡':e Bulletin Board at
the Public S vi es Building ~ .
Tuesday, December 15, 1998 . ,;! '/ SIGNED " Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. DATED. ublic Services Building
(immediately following the City Council M ting)
CHULA VISTA CITY 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 final 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 final 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.
t. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
. Existin ( liti (ation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
t. Fritsch v. City of Chula Vista.
2. Rutherford Y. City of Chula Vista.
3. Luna v. City of Chula Vista.
4. Busalacchi v. City of Chula Vista.
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8
. Property: Approximately 7 acres located on Bonita Road adjacent to the
Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course
Negotiating Parties: City of Chula Vista (Chris Salomone and George Krempl) and
Diamond Development Company; University Financial
Corp./AmeriPark; and San Diego County.
Under Negotiation: Purchase pricelh:~ase rate and other terms and conditions for
possihle disposition of City-owned property.
2. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION