The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet 1995/02/14 Tuesday, February 14. 1995 Council Chambers 5: 15 p.m. Public Services Building Snecial Meetin. of the Citv of Chula Vista Citv Council CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Fox _, Moot _, Padilla _, Rindone _. and Mayor Horton - CLOSED SESSION Unless the City Attorney, the City MafUlger or the City CouncU states otherwise at this time, the CouncU wUI discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are permitted 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 CouncU 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 termifUlted at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from closed session, reports of fifUll action taken, and a4joumment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report of fifUll action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office. 2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54956.9 . Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: 1. 3. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn to the Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, February 14. 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Notice is hereby given that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista has called and will convene a special meeting of the City Council on Tuesday, February 14, 1995 at 5:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA. ~ '" ~eclar.? ":"'I~~r p;nalty of perjury that I am em",o e., ,~J ttie City of Chula Vista in the l?,'ic·a OJ L~o City (;:Ier~\ End that I os d t "" f\" . ,',. .. P tc ..,;; ,1 .:t;~;1 .~:::! ."o~l2'e on the Bu!!etin Board at the "U"'~\~0\;ce3 Bu:JJin t C't H DA'E~ I> ~ I Y al . "' SiGN ED .. ".'1.... ~_"._"":, J.~. __.. ....._IfJ...._ ...:".1..."." ~:...........:_":" .._1...... ... "'_.._-:1............J...... ... ............1...._ "ç ,,'1.... .....J.1:.. ..._ r:h. .."....çç U¡ ¿c::a!'.;,! :'cr 1~","3Ity of porjury that I am cm~~(),'/o~! ~~1 tho CP::/ 0'1 Chu!a Vista in the OL:Gt:! 0'1 .~::ç C!ty C!er¡~ and that I posted t:·,¡s AG~n-,k~/ND.'i.ice on the Bulletin Board at Tuesday, February 14, 1995 the Public erv'ces Building and at Cit Ha Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. DATED. ..J. 9 ....- SIGNED Public Services Building Reoular Meetin. of the Citv of Chula Vista Citv Council CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Fox _, Moot _, Padilla _, Rindone _' and Mayor Horton - 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 7, 1995. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Oath of Office: Mobilehome Rent Review Commission - Steve Epsten (Ex-Officio). ***** Effective April 1, 1994, there have been new amendments to the Brown Act. The City Council must now reconvene into open session to report any ibJ!ll actions taken in closed session and to adjourn the meeting. Because of the cost involved, there will be no videotaping of the reconvened portion of the meeting. However, final actions reported will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office. ***** CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5 through 14) The staff recommendations regarding the foUowing items listed under the Consent Calendar will be efUlcted by the Council by one motion without discussion unless a CouncUmember, 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 Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) 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 business. 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter from the City Attorney stating that there were no observed reportable actions taken from the Closed Session of 217/95. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed. b. Letter requesting Council form a task force to propose a plan to set up an organization to deal with approvals and permits - Pastor Rick Johnson, Risen Savior Lutheran Church, 625 Otay Lakes Rd., Chula Vista, CA 91910. It is recommended that the ombudsman meet with Pastor Johnson and address his specific concerns to the extent there are still outstanding issues and to verify that the streamlining proposals might avoid future problems. ----~~.._--~-----,._-_.._'--'---~-_.- "--.... Agenda -2- February 14, 1995 c. Letter requesting financial support for the Bonita Vista High School's Music Machine to perform at the Cultural Exchange Tour in Australia and New Zealand - Ron Bolles, Director, Vocal Music Department, Bouita Vista High School, 751 Otay Lakes Rd., Cbula Vista, CA 91913. It is recommended that $1,500 of the Council Contingency Account be granted to the Bouita Vista High School Music Machine in exchange for which the entire ensemble will perform at the City's Cultural Arts Festival on 5/20/95, the Holiday Festival on 12/9/95 and selected individuals from the group will perform at the Community Pride Fair on 7/4/95. 6.A. ORDINANCE 2621 CREATING A IDGH TECH/BIO TECH ZONE, CREATING A SUBCOMMITTEE TO GOVERN CERTAIN MATTERS WITHIN THE IDGH TECH/BIO TECH ZONE OF THE CITY. AND DELEGATING CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO SAID SUBCOMMITTEE (second readiDl! and adontion) - The proposal is to officially implement previously approved project processing streamlining measures within the EastLake Business Center and EastLake Planned Community. Staff recommends Council place the ordinances on second reading and adoption. (Director of Planning and Director of Community Development) Continued from the meeting of 2/7/95. B. ORDINANCE 2622 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND ADOPfING NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON IS-95-11 (second readiDl! and adontion) 7. ORDINANCE 2623 AMENDING SECTION 10.56.040 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - METER ZONES - DESIGNATED FEES - SCHEDULE XI (second readiDl! and adontion) - Staff conducted an analysis on the need to convert additioual short- term meters to long-term meters in some of the downtown parking lots. The City Attorney determined that the authority to determine the proper configuration can be delegated to the City Engineer and could be done through an ordinance. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Community Development, Director of Finance, and Director of Public Works) 8. ORDINANCE 2624 AMENDING CHAPTER IX-A.l, PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES OF THE RANCHO DEL REY SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) I PLAN PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS (second readiDl! and adontion) - The proposed amendment is to allow dental offices as an accessory use to a permitted dental laboratory and dental appliance manufacturing. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Planning) 9. ORDINANCE 2625 AMENDING CHAPTER 18.16 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR THE POSTING BY DEVELOPERS OF ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF SECURITY FOR PUBLIC OR PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRING COMPLETION GUARANTIES IN FAVOR OF THE CITY AND MAKING MINOR TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS (second readiDl! and adontion) - The developers of the Cbannelside Shopping Center (which includes a 120,000 square foot Wal-Mart) are requesting that a Wal-Mart "corporate guaranty" be accepted as security for the public improvements that the City and the Redevelopment Agency are requiring for the Project. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Community Development, Director of Public Works, and City Attorney) _._-~--_. - ----~-- ---_.-_._--_.__..__._------~-- Agenda -3- February 14, 1995 IO.A. ORDINANCE 2626 AMENDING ORDINANCE 2613 BY INCORPORA TING MODIFICATIONS TO THE LAND USE PLAN AND BA YFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN AS ADOPI'ED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY ~ 1995 FOR THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMEND NT NUMBER 12 (firs~readiR - At the 2/9/95 California Coastal Commission meet~, Local oasta rogram Amendment Number 12 was approved with m ifications. Council is now accefting the Commission's action and adopting the suggested modifications. Staf recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution. (Director of Community Development) B. RESOLUTION 17806 ACCEPI'ING AND AGREEING WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION'S FEBRUARY :œ.1995 ACTION ON THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMEND NT NUMBER 12 AND ACCEPI'ING AND AGREEING WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION'S MODIFICATIONS TO THE BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN 11. RESOLUTION 17807 APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $223,400 TO THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATEDW ASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 - The City has received two rT¡ional grants funded ~ the Used Oil Enhancement Act totalinr $371,850. e grants are fundinf, e recruitment, support, an1r,romotion 0 30 used oil recycling centers in Chu a Vista, Imperial Beach, and ational City. The City has also submitted a 1995/96 block rant application ($73,130) which is under consideration. The ~plication ~22 ,400) would establish an educational partnership with the weetwater nion High School District and fund the residential collection of used oil in Chula Vista and Imperial Beach. Deadline for filing the grant al?olication is 2/17/95. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. ( onservation Coordinator) 12.A. RESOLUTION 17808 APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR 1996/2000 NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM ~PDES) STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN/PERMIT APPLICA ION TO THE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD (RWQCB) - On 2/19/91, Council passed a resolution approving the City's "partiQi~al1on in its first NPDES ~rmit. Said permit was considered an "early NPD S permit issued by the R QCB prior to the promulrtion of final United Stales Environmental Protection A~C(¡ r~lations. Staf recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of b ic orks) B. RESOLUTION 17809 APPROVING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE FISCAL YEAR 1996/2000 REGIONAL NPDES STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING B.A. REPORT CONSIDERATION OF A ~UEST FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR PROCESSING A MINOR S RE AMENDMENT AND ANNEXATION PRIOR TO COMPLETING THE CITY'S PENDING COMPREHENSIVE SPHERE-OF-INFLUENCE UPDATE - EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - The two parcels totaling 22.7 acres were acquired by EastLake Development as part of a land exchan¡,e with the Baldwin ComJ¡any. Since the parcels are included in a LAFCO pecial Study Area for tay Ranch and thereby subject to the pending Sphere-of-Influence Update Study, EastLake ori~inallb delayed its annexation application. The timetable for¡C,rocessing the Sp ere ~date StudtIchowever, will be more ..¡;rotracted an originally anticipa ,and East e is requesting to move ead with the application. Staff recommends Council accept the report and approve the resolution. (Director of Planning) B. RESOLUTION 17810 SUPPORTING LAFCO PROCESSING OF THE PROPOSED "EASTLAKE GREENS ~XPANSION SPHERE AMENDMENT AND ANNEXATION" ~A95-~ A95-3k PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF THE CITY'S OMP EHENSI SPHERE-OF-INFLUENCE UPDATE AND REQUESTING WAIVER OF CONDUCTING AUTHORITY PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER _~~~~_~~ :~ _~~~~Ã ~"n.~ wU'oIO....___.........1... .......... ..........1:.. ............:_~ ....... ..............:........... ...... Agenda -4- February 14, 1995 14. REPORT CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS TO BE THE PRESERVE OWNER/MANAGER FOR THE OTAY RANCH PROPERTIES - On 10/28/93, Council and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors jointly approved the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP)/Subregional Plan (SRP). The GDP requires the selection and retention of a Preserve OwnerlManager (POM) prior to approval of the first City Sectional Planning Area or County Specific Plan Area. The POM will be responsible for resource management, restoration, and enforcement of the 11,375 + acre Otay Ranch open space preserve. Staff recommends Council accept the report and direct and authorize staff to transmit the Request for Qualifications to potential Preserve Owner/Managers. (Special Planning Projects Manager, Otay Ranch Project) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the stsff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. 15. PUBLIC HEARING PCC-95-16; REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN UNMANNED CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE SITE OF THE OTAYWATER DISTRICTW ATER TANK, LOCATED AT THE EASTERLY TERMINUS OF GOTHAM STREET - AIRTOUCH CELLULAR - AirTouch Cellular is requesting permission to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility at the southwest corner of the water tank parcel located at the easterly terminus of Gotham Street. AirTouch has requested a continuance because additional research is needed. Staff recommends the Dublic hearilU! be continued to 3/14/95. (Director of Planning) Continued from the meeting of 1/24/95. 16. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION TO DETACH FROM OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NUMBER 1 AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NUMBER 10 THOSE TERRITORIES WITIßN OPEN SPACE NUMBER 20, TO BE EFFECTIVE FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 - The open space maintenance district that was created for the Rancho del Rey development overlapped two existing open space districts. This action will eliminate the overlap and was requested by Rancho del Rey Investors so that the ultimate property owners will ouly have one open space district on their disclosure statement and tax bill. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Continued from the meeting of 1/24/95. RESOLUTION 17788 ORDERING THE DETACHMENT FROM OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NUMBER 1 AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NUMBER 10 THOSE TERRITORIES WITIßN OPEN SPACE NUMBER 20; TO BE EFFECTIVE FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 _ __.____~_~__..___..~,____,__....__. __"_"__.'__._'__.___"_'_'__"__M'_' . --"--..-,----.,.-------..-.-,..----.--.-,.-------."----- Agenda -5- February 14, 1995 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City CouncU on any subject matter within the CouncU'sjurisdiction thai is!l!l1. an item on this agenda for public discussion. (State law, however, generally prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the CouncU on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oml Communications Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your fUlme and address for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for considemtion by one of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees. None submitted. ACTION ITEMS The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and delibemtions by the Council, staff, or members of the geneml public. The items will be considered individually by the Council and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alteTfUltive. Those who wish to speak, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form available In the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public comments are limited to five minutes. 17. REPORT UPDATE ON SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be given by staff. 18. REPORT UPDATE ON REGIONAL SEWER ISSUES - An oral report will be given by staff. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR This is the time the City CouncU will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers. Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual. OTHER BUSINESS 19. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT IS) a. Scheduling of meetings. 20. MAYOR'S REPORTIS) a. Report on funding and attendance at special events. 21. COUNCIL COMMENTS -,-_.._---_..,,---_.....~-_.__._-_._'- -.-,,--.--,-..--..------ Agenda -6- February 14, 1995 CLOSED SESSION Unless the City Attorney, the City MafUlger or the City CouncU states otherwise at this time, the CouncU will discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are permitted by law to be the subject of a closed session discussion, and which the CouncU 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 fifUll 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 fifUll action taken, and a4joumment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report of fifUll action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office. 22. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING: 1. Existing litigation pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54956.9 · Chula Vista and nine other cities vs. the County of San Diego regarding solid waste issues (trash litigation). · City of Cbula Vista vs. the Couoty of San Diego regarding approval of a major use permit for Daley Rock Quarry. 2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54956.9 · Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54957.6 · Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented. Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of Engineers (WCE). Unrepresented employee: Executive Managemeot, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54956.8 · Property: 855 Maxwell Road, Cbula Vista, CA (Parcel Number 644-040-16) or 894 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA (Parcel Number 644-182-07 and 644-182-08). As and for tomsfer station. Negotiating parties: Director of Community Development. Under negotiations: Price and terms of payment. 23. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on February 21, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council Meeting. -.-.--- February 8, 1995 TO: The Honorable Mayor and city council ')1 4:..-. FROM: John D. Goss, City Manager~ ~ jU SUBJECT: city council Meeting of February 14, 1995 This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular city Council meeting of Tuesday, February 14, 1995. Comments regarding the written communications are as follows: 5a. This is a letter from the city Attorney stating that there were no observed reportable actions taken from the Closed Session of 2/7/95. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED. 5b. This is a letter from Pastor Johnson of Risen Savior Lutheran Church complaining about City staff project processing by Planning and Engineering, entitlements and exactions, and fees associated with the development of their church. Complaints are also made regarding the Bonita Country Day School. Staff would note that the overall processing process was recently reviewed by the Economic Development Commission and significant recommendations made and implemented to streamline the review process, DRC, etc. One of those recommendations was also to have an ombudsman in the City Manager's Office to resolve issues and disputes in a timely manner and facilitate processing. On new projects, applicants would be adised of this service at the front end of their project processing. In the case of this church and the day school, we are now responding after the fact. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE OMBUDSMAN MEET WITH PASTOR JOHNSON AND ADDRESS HIS SPECIFIC CONCERNS TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE STILL OUTSTANDING ISSUES AND TO VERIFY THAT THE STREAMLINING PROPOSALS MIGHT AVOID FUTURE PROBLEMS. 5c. This is a letter from Ron Bolles, Music Director for Bonita vista High school, requesting financial support for the Music Machine to perform at the Cultural Exchange Tour in Australia and New Zealand. In the past, Council has granted from $1,000 to $2,000 to the Music Machine for their participation in various festivals and events. Based on past practice and the criteria set forth in council Policy 159-02, "Funding Private Organizations or Individuals", IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT $1,500 OF THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT BE GRANTED TO THE BONITA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL MUSIC MACHINE IN EXCHANGE FOR WHICH THE ENTIRE ENSEMBLE WILL PERFORM AT THE CITY'S CULTURAL ARTS FESTIVAL ON MAY 20, 1995, THE HOLIDAY FESTIVAL ON DECEMBER 9, 1995 AND SELECTED INDIVIDUALS FROM THE GROUP WILL PERFORM AT THE COMMUNITY PRIDE FAIR ON JULY 4, 1995. In accordance with the Council Policy, prior to the distribution of funds the Music Machine and the city will enter into an agreement stipulating the specifics of their performance requirements. __._M_____._____________ .___ ~~~ ~.d::~ ....::~~~ .......~~........ ~- -~ CllY OF CHULA VISTA OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Date: February 8, 1995 To: The Honorable Mayor and City coun~ From: Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney Re: Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session for the Meeting of 2/7/95 The City Attorney hereby reports to the best of my knowledge from observance of actions taken in the Closed Session, that there were no actions taken in the Closed Session of 2/7/95 which are required under the Brown Act to be reported. BMB:lgk C:\lt\closses8.no ~.) 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5037 '] . ~. ,-~ ¡! t~ .~; :¡ <~, ;'), ~r~:"-~Ú~'~~~ ~ \, ;) ¡! .' ...t_:..¡ Thursday January 19, 1995 RECEIVED ~ JAN 2 3 19C1Si.'! L ' ' ..-.~,,,.",- ! Mayor Horton and City Council Clf+' : 7.) FEB -2 P3:14 r City Council Offices --_ -"0"_-.,", 'H_ ,. _._.__ 276 4th Avenue my ßr CHUlA VIS~ Chula Vista, CA 91910 . Y LERK'S OFFI I- Dear Mayor Horton and City Council Members, I am the pastor of Risen Savior Lutheran Church in east Chula Vista but I am writing to you today not in that capacity but as a concerned --no more than that, an irritated and upset-- citizen ofChula Vista, Last evening while I was channel surfing, I happened on the Cox Cable broadcast of the City Council meetings. I am not sure whether this was live or taped but it doesn' matter. I am certain that when I describe what I watched you will be able to recall the meeting, At the podium was a representative of South Bay Chevrolet He had come to the City Council seeking relieffrom demands that Planning, Design Review and other City departments had made upon his business as a contigency for being delivered pernúts to build in the new auto park It was obvious from what he said that he considered these demands to be unfair and burdensome, Councilman Rindone was speaking to him and said and I am paraphrasing what I heard, "This is not a matter of money but a matter of process. This should have been handled at the Design Review stage and not brought to CounciL" I believe that that is a fair representation of the gist of what the Councilman said, I am not certain whether this businessman's needs were recognized, I could not stand to watch any longer. It made me so angry, It is obvious that Jerry Rindone has never led a business through the mess that he so generously called "process," Having been processed--something akin to being run through a food processor and chopped into little bits and in addition being liberated ftom a great deal of money set aside to build a building and set up a community serving ministry--Iet me put into simple words what being processed means, It means being given a counselor £Tom the planning staff who makes demands over and above what you want for your purposes on your property, Although you are paying the bills and are well aquainted with what your new building will do, the planning staff is the expert and of course knows better than you and well, hang the cost After all, the staff does not have to pay for it From this gouging, your project makes its way to the Design Review Commission (DRC), It is here that citizens --who probably have never gone through the process-- add further expense by demanding more expensive finishing touches, expanded landscaping and hang _ the cost because they're not paying for it cctlI!Þ;~ WïUf~ _ 50~~'~}1'¡C~\iS Or> -¿5 ~~ --- . __" "_"'__,'n_'______. - -----...,--'-- - ----.- --.--.-. It is after DRC that the fun really starts, Engineering reviews the plans and makes further costly additions such as raised center medians in streets, oversized storm drains and huge fees such as Impact Fees, Plus, you get the distinct privilege of having your project delayed and delayed and delayed over and over again. And with each delay, the money slips from your pocket as you pay more rent on the rented facilities you currently use than you ever supposed you would have to pay, Minor beaurecrats in Engineering and Building and Housing play games and what you were assured would be finished in a week or so somehow takes 4 or 5 weeks, This is the process to which Mr. Rindone referred and Mr, Rindone, it is not just a matter of process, It is indeed a matter of money for that is what process sucks into it like a bottomless black hole. Allow me to retell for you some horror stories about the process. Risen Savior Lutheran Church is a small church of 100 or so communicants and a couple of hundred souls, We built a building of about 4000 square feet with seating for 150 plus offices, classrooms and so on. But we have the distinct disadvantage of being directly across from Bonita Vista Middle SchooL On a typical Sunday there will be 50 or 60 cars using our lot. On a typical weekday, less than 5, However, Bonita Vista Middle School generates a great deal of traffic. To handle our weekday traffic load of5 cars, we were forced by engineering to put a raised center median in Otay Lakes Road similar to the one by the Bonita Point Plaza where Ralph's is, As a condition of being granted permits, we were forced to design and pay for this median and were required to use in it black colored, stamped concrete, The cost of the process for just this one item added almost $20,000 to the cost of building a 4000 square foot building. And then, to add injury to insult, we were forced to pay for a permit to put in what the City of Chula Vista was requiring as condition of getting permits to handle a traffic flow of 5 cars during the week when traffic might be considered heavy, And by the way, our median is the only one on Otay Lakes Road north ofH street aside from the shopping center. Other developments were allowed pylons but not us, Such road improvements are normally credited against Transportation DIF fees but we were informed by engineering that because it was only temporary (Otay Lakes Road would one day be widened), the cost could not be credited, It was only when I complained rather loudly to the City Manager's office that the credit was given, This is the process. And it is indeed a matter money, Bonita Country Day School is a small private tax exempt school that specializes in helping children with special needs gain a quality education, It is a one of kind school in the South Bay and the City Council itself under Mayor Nader recognized what a wonderful addition to the community its campus would be, The School entered into an agreement with Risen Savior Lutheran Church to build a temporary campus for a 5 year time period on the undeveloped part of the church property, The church's property is already designated as church and school site. The School wanted to put up attractive modular classrooms and an office, put in landscaping and a play area and in general improve the appearance of what had been bare, undeveloped property, They were assured by City Staff who of course know well the process that they would have all necessary permits and approvals and be in their modular classrooms no later than September 19th. All they wanted to do was put modular buildings on an already approved church and school site, 5j;-.2 .._.m______ -- ----.-------.-----.--"'-..--,-.----.-----...-.----"-- --.- Today's date is January 19 and they are still not in their buildings, At every step of the process they have encountered changing demands, personal pettiness, excessive permits, What should have been a done deal 6 months ago is still not done, I wonder how long the parents of these children will wait for the City to get their jars on the shelf Will Bonita Country Day School still have a student body when they are finally allowed to occupy their buildings? Or will our business fiiendly city have caused them to bankrupt? The process has cost them 6 months of rent that they did not count on because they were assured that the process would be completed by September 19, The process may very well cost them revenue rrom tuition as impatient parents look elsewhere to meet their children's educational needs? The process has processed the administration of the school so that they are beaten, battered and broke, Mr. Rindone, it is not a matter of process but is indeed a matter of money, I am sure that others who have been processed by the process of securing approvals and permits rrom the City of Chula Vista could add other horror stories about fÌ1¡strations, delays and huge monetary costs incurred, The process is a mess, It is no wonder that businesses are fleeing this sort of process for New Mexico and Arizona, Perhaps the City of Chula Vista should hang a sign by the city limit sign that says new businesses will be processed so bring lots of money. I am calling upon the Mayor and City Council to deal with the process head on and not delay making a decision as they did when they delayed making a decision on impact fees for not for profit organizations, I call upon the City of Chula Vista to set up a task force responsible to the City Council alone to propose a plan to set up an organization to deal with approvals and permits that will not chew up those seeking the permits and suck up money without any thought of costs, And appoint to this task force those who recently have been processed. I might suggest that you start with the gentleman rrom South Bay Chevrolet who sought the assistance rrom his elected City Council for a burden that was imposed upon him, Incidently, when I purchase my next car and drive to South Bay Chevrolet of Fuller Ford, I could care less whether the driveway is stamped colored concrete or not That is what he was seeking relief rrom, Such requirements are utter nonsense and you ought to have the common sense to know that as well, I am incensed by the process. Nobody who is currently going through permitting with the staff will complain, It might cost them even more in time and money and fÌ1¡stration, My building project is completed, I think: it is time for somebody .to speak up, And one more thought, if you have the courage to face this issue head on, don't put staff on the task force, They are the problem and not the solution, You might as well ask the wolves to come up with a better way to guard the sheep, Sincerely yours, ~ Rick Johnson (0 ce tel. 482-7748; home tel. 422-4944) 5b~3 -...- _.~._. m__' ...__ . --,.--.---,..--.....---.- - - ,----_._-~----~-,._- --~ .-..... ŒJAN (;0 1995 1'T'Ie") :::IiI::r:: ::O:c ~ J'TI BONITA VISTA HIGH SCHOO~~ - < ;1::0 rr¡ VOCAL MUSIC DEPARTMEN~ \0 0 Ä ..., RON BOllES MICHEllE TOlVO, & GARY WITHEM - DIRECTORS ...';.... REINA BOllES - CHOREOGRAPHER LADYTONES (619) 421-8730 BARONTONES FAX (619)482-2698 THE SOUND UNUMITED THE MUSIC MACHINE 761 OTA Y LAKES ROAD THE BARON CONCERT CHOIR CHULA VISTA. CA. 91813 City of Chula Vista 276 4th Ave. Chula Vista, CA. 91910 Dear Councilmen, WE NEED YOUR HELP! THE MUSIC MACHINE of Bonita Vista High School in Chula Vista, California is a 50 member song and dance troupe: As indicated on their enclosed photo/resume, they have represented their community and state in numerous national and international events. As a result of their strong peñormance tradition and competitive successes over the past 18, years, (166 competition awards), they have moved from being the focal point of their small community to a position of v..or1dv.ide recognition. In recent years, they have received numerous invitations from organizations around the \Wrtd v.ishing to foster a cultural exchange v.ith this fine troupe. Using music as the universal language, these culturally diverse young ambassadors have touched the hearts of people in eight different countries, The mayor of Meersen, Holland recently had this to say about The Music Machine: "Your President Clinton recently nominated Mr. Terry Dornbush as his ambassador to the Nethertands, Property speaking, there was no great need to do so, because you, THE MUSIC MACHINE, ARE THE BEST AMBASSADORS MR. CLINTON HAS!" This year alone The Music Machine's international involvement v.ill find them hosting groups of young peñormers from Hungary, Spain and New Zealand! More and more they find themselves the focus of a global village united in song. The awareness and understanding fostered by these exchanges has created an attitude of global citizenship in these young peñormers. The Music Machine has shared the music and spirit of America on three continents. This year they have been invited to travel to a fourth continent ... AUSTRALIA! The group must entirely finance their travel expenses through fundraising efforts. THEY MUST RAISE $100,000 FOR THIS YEAR'S CULTURAL Ð<CHANGE TOUR TO AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND. A variety of fund-raisers and parental pledges have raised approximately 213 of this goal. Consequently, members of The Music Machine have turned to potential corporations, community organizations, and personal benefactors W10 might provide assistance in helping the troupe attain its goal. If you have had the pleasure of seeing them in action, I am sure you v.ill agree that THE MUSIC MACHINE REPRESENTS WHAT'S RIGHT WITH AMERICA'S YOUTH! More importantly, they are dedicated to continuing to serve as musical ambassadors through international cultural exchange tours. To that end, _ are requesting that you consider making a donation. Your contribution can help make their dream come true! PLEASE PROVIDE WHATEVER SUPPORT YOU CAN I THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP! If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at the numbers found in the enclosed brochure. Sincerely, 2/2/95 Copies to: City Council ~ ~ Ci ty Manag€r._.. ___,. ,'. . - ..__."U_. t ¡ .J ¡,-"ì ' , ..... ' , ccgJi¡fif) !; ~'.! ~ I 10' 'i ,Vii I TT,EN C,OMM IÇAtíO~$ ~ 5é. -j /l" ~ø..!7 ! ., -..-. -', . ~~._-~..- //"r ... C""")ç-. - THE MUSIC MACHINE DONATLON CA'ttGOR.1.t:s PLEASE HELP US RAISE FUNDS FOR OUR CULTURAL EXCHANGE TOURING EXPENSES! THE I¡IONITA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL MUSIC MACHINE BOOSTER CLUB IS A NON.PROFIT CORPORATION. DONATIONS OF ANY TYPE AND QUANTITY ARE GREATLY APPRECIATED. DONORS ARE LISTED IN OUR PROGRAMS ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES: CONTRIBUTOR $25 - $99 DONOR $100 - $499 SPONSOR $500 - $999 PATRON $1000 - $4999 ANGEL $5000 AND UP PLEASE MAKE CHECKS PAYABLI TO "MUSIC MACHINE BOOSTERS" AND SEND TO: MUSIC MACHINE BOOSTERS BONITA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL 751 OTAY LAKES ROAD CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91913-2005 IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, OR WOULD PREFER TO DONATE A GIFT. PRODUCT, AND/OR SERVICE, PLEASE CONTACT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: GARRY BOWMAN PATSY JEZAK RON BOLLES BOOSTER CLUB PRESIDENT BOOSTIR CLUB VICE-PRESIDENT VOCAL MUSIC DIRECTOR .70-8183 421-90478 421-9730/0979 THANK YOU HELPING TO MAKE OUR DREAMS COME TRUEI 5 G ~..2. 1(\'O~ f>..oO ,,\,\G f>..~\) ORDINANCE NO. 2621 ~t.¡>"\) '-- O~\) ~~1~u>~ ':,t.C ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CREATING A HIGH TECH/BIO TECH ZONE, CREATING A SUBCOMMITTEE TO GOVEAN CEAT AIN MA TTEAS WITHIN THE ð \~ /)Y HIGH TECH/BIO TECH ~ONE OF THE CITY, AND DELEGATING CEATAIN AUTHOAITY TO SAID SUBCOMMITTEE ÇI,9Ÿ WHEREAS. in order to attract certain targeted High Technolo , Bio Technical and Bio Medical businesses and promote economic development in the Ci ,the City desires to form, for economic incentive purposes (not in the planning/entitleme/Ít context), a High Tech/Bio Tech Zone ("Zone"' in the territory of the Ea~Æusiness Center of the City. . diagrammatically represented on Exhibit A attached her and incorporated by this reference; and. WHEREAS, currently, as to property 10 ted within the Zone ("Zone Properties") and elsewhere within the City, the Planning mmission and Design Aeview Committee has certain authority to make certain discref ary approvals or recommendations to the Council for approval ("Planning and Design hority") over land use; and, , W . e y intends to form a subcommittee of the City Council consisti of two council per' n t t$ke certain discretionary actions within the territory of the Zone ,. ". committee" or "Subcommittee"' and re-delegate Planning and Design Aut on y currently vested in the Planning Commission and the Design Aeview Committee of the City to the Subcommittee as to all Zone Properties; and, WHEREAS. on December 21.1994, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the proposal in accordance with Aesolution PCM-95-06; and, WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing, and notice of said hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 21 days prior to the hearing; and, WHEREAS. the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely on January 24. 1995, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW. THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain, find. declare. order and resolve as follows: SECTION I. Create High TechlBio Tech Zone. There hereby exists an area of the City of Chula Vista ("Zone") the territory of which is shown in Exhibit A. inclusive of the EastLake Business Center ("Center"), both Phase I ("Phase I Center", and Phase II ("Phase II Center"', which Zone may be expanded from time to time by the City Council by written ordinance, in their sole discretion, and when so amended shall be included in the meaning of the term Zone as used herein. &,9 -/ - Ordinance No. 2621 Page 2 ~ECTION II. Create High TechlBio Tech Subcommittee. ~ {c A High TechlBio Tech Subcom~ittee ("Subcommittee") is hereby declared to exist consisting of a permllnent member being the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista and another member of the City Council that would rotate on a yearly basis, to rotate off not in the middle of any parti~ar project and the third l'ÌIember would be the chair of the Chula Vista Planning Commission. The Subcommittee shall operate in all respects in the manner required by law, including the rovisions of the Brown Act, and in that regard shall be deemed to be a standing subcommittee Of the Council and shall conduct the meetings of their members in an open manner and pursuant to a posted agenda describing in legal detail the subject matter of their deliberations. SECTION III. Delegation of Authority to the Subcommittee. Subcommittee is hereby vested with the following authorities: A. Planning Commission Authority. All matters which are otherwise vested in the Planning Commission of the City by virtue of the Zoning Chapter of the Municipal Code or any Planned Community District Regulations or other rules of regulations adopted thereunder ("Planning Commission Matters" ) are hereby redelegated to the Subcommittee for applications for entitlement affecting Zone Properties exclusively wherein the application for entitlement indicates that the Zone Property is intended to, designed and planned to be put to a. High Technology, Bio-Technical or Bio-Medical use as defined in Section IV.1 of the Eastlake Planned Community District Regulations. B. Design Review Authority. All matters which are otherwise vested in the Design Review Committee of the City by virtue of the Zoning Chapter of the Municipal Code or any Planned Community District Regulations or other rules of regulations adopted thereunder ("Design Review Matters") are hereby redelegated tothe Subcommittee for applications for entitlement affecting Zone Properties wherein the application for entitlement indicates that the Zone Property is intended to, designed and planned to be put to a High Technology, Bio-:rechnical or Bio-Medical use as defined in Section IV.1 of the Eastlake Planned Community District Regulations. ,.. ('- ' \. "-- ''0 G x"" - -)", - C. Economic Development Agreement Authority</ Ex~ePt a~' to matters other than legislative matters required to be vested in the City Council" all matters related to !;D....rl'hi...I~i'r'll·b]'l, fir A. . recommended level of economic support as permitted or required by one or more agreements between the Eastlake Development Company and the City of .Chula Vista and/or by City poliçy. I. IA) Ij ," ,..J 0', " . .' " "" . . ~ 'I . /.. O"'c..·" l'¡-CtJ..4,' c.? <lULl... SECTION IV. Exercise of Authority by Subcommittee Not Mandatory. ' The Subcommittee is not obligated to use the authority regarding Planning Commission Matters or Design Review Matters, and if it surrenders or refuses to exercise same in gross ¿,/l 'CJ - --~-_.._.._, .. _._.__._-_._.~._---,------_._._---- -.-------.----- Ordinance No. 2621 - Page 3 or as to a specific application, the authority to decide such Matters reverts back to the body from which it was originally delegated. SECTION V. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Presented by Robert A. Leiter Chris Salomone Planning Director Community Development Director Approved as to form by Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney ¿,/I :J ,_........._-_.._.~._---_.._..._._-,-_._--_._-~.._,._----.,...~_.__.._. .._.~-~-_._.- Ordinance No. 2621 Page 2 'I ' <;;:, " _'. 'I ",i ~-"(,_L{ l/l\ ?' .:¡ / " - ! () I' ¡;. /) I -" l(J '-rC"¡ -~ ti:",~ \, COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO February 17, 1995 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: John Goss, City Manager~~~'Í[,/7;1 FROM: Bob Leiter, Director of Planning ;/. /{ SUBJECT: High Tech/Bio Tech Subcommittee Authority on Planning Commission and Design Review Committee Issues This is in response to the request made by City Council on February 7, 1995 regarding clarification of final decision making authority to be delegated to the High Tech/Bio Tech Subcommittee for the Eastlake Business Park, with regard to matters normally handled by the PlaIU1Ìng Commission and Design Review Committee. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 2621, which was given first reading in its revised form on February 14, 1995, the High Tech/Bio Tech Subcommittee is authorized to act in place of the Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee on discretionary applications for high technology, bio technical and bio medical projects located within the High Tech/Bio Tech Zone. As such, the Subcommittee will have direct decision making authority on the following types of applications: · Conditional use permits requiring approval by the Planning Commission · Minor administrative land use actions (upon appeal of a Zoning Administrator decision) · Variances (upon appeal of a Zoning Administrator decision) · Development plans for the establishment, location, expansion or alteration of uses or structures requiring approval by the Design Review Committee · Minor design review applications including signs and building additions which constitute less than 50 percent increase in floor area (20,000 sq.ft max) and new projects with a total floor area of twenty thousand square feet or less (upon appeal of a Zoning Administrator decision). All actions taken by the Subcommittee would be appealable to the City Council. m:\HOME\PLANNlNG\AMYW\lUBJSUB.CIM - ,..,- {,¡9 - / - !:? COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Co# Meeting Date 11 / 5 ~ ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: PCM-95-06: Consideration of a proposal to establish a ;y?fß,5' High Tech/Bio Tech Zone; create a City Council Subcommittee to govern certain matters within the High Tech/Bio Tech zone of the City; amend the EastLake Planned Community District Regulations - City Initiated ,\\Q~ A. Ordinance .2~ J.J Creating a High TechlBio Tech~~htmg a subcommittee to govern certain matters within the ~ ech/Bio Tech zone of the City, and delegating certain authø~ said subcommittee ~~'V IJ. Ordinance .2. ¿. .1. ~ Approving eÍ1dments JO the EaStLak~~ Community District Regulations and adopting Negative D~ non IS- 95-11 ~ SUBMl'ITED BY, Di=t~ of PI_Ii! ~ #~ Director of Community Development<;¡! . REVIEWED BY: City Manager 1 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.1O In October 1992, the City Council directed staff to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a biotechnology/biomedical "incentive zone" in order to encourage the location of emerging high- growth industries jn Chula Vista and promote economic development in the City. A Task Force was fonned with representatives from the City, including Council Members Horton and Moore, Economic Development Commission Chainnan Tuchscher and Planning Department and Community Development staff, the EastLake Development Company, the biotech industry and industry supporters, legal expertise, Southwestern College and UCSD Connect. The Task Force met for over a year and examined industry needs and impacts/benefits to the City, as well as potential "incentive zone" locations and incentives for targeted industries. In April 1993, the EastLake Business Center Phase I and II (Attachment #2) was identified as the "incentive zone" for light industry, including but not limited to high technology, bio technology and bio medical manufacturing uses. An issue paper was developed that contained infonnation relating to the targeted businesses, outlined issues pertinent to the incentive zone and included specific recommendations for the implementation of the Zone Programs (Attachment #5). On May 24, 1994, the City Council approved in concept a number of fast-tracking and fmancial and business development assistance incentives for targeted uses within the proposed High Tech/Bio Tech incentive zone. The incentives were outlined in the attached 5/24/94 Council report which has been provided for infonnation (Attachment #4). ---f .- , '-- I _ _ _______"_____.._,. .._ _..___.___~__".___._..u_.______··_______ P.., '. ~ Meeting Date 5 The present proposal officially implements previously approved fast-tracking recommendations; creates a High TechlBio Tech zone, establishes a subcommittee to govern certain matters within the High TechlBio Tech zone and amends the EastLake Planned Community District Regulations to streamline project processing. The Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study, IS-95-11, of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the project. Based on the Initial Study, and comments thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that there would be no significant environmental impacts and recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on IS-95- 11. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Ordinances approving the High TechlBio Tech proposals based on the findings contained therein. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On December 21, 1994 the Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend that Council approve the High TechlBio Tech proposals in accordance with Resolution PCM-95-Q6 attached hereto. On January 9, 1995, the Design Review Committee voted 5-0 to approve the High TechlBio Tech proposals relating to design review processing. , On January 9, 1995, the Resource Conservation Commission voted 4-0 to approve the Negative Declaration issued on 95-11. DISCUSSION: The High Technology and Bio Technical industries constitute a significant component of San Diego region's economic and employment base. The research conducted by the Task Force has brought forward information that proves the viability and importance of High TechlBio Tech industries in San Diego's economic future. . San Diego is the fourth largest biomedlbiotech center in the U.S. with 77 biomedical and 116 biopharmaceutical companies and an employment force of approximately 20,000 people. An estimated 91 % of San Diego's companies are small and medium size, many of them poised for growth over the next five years largely due to the number of drugs approved in 1992 and the growing demand for chronic care medicines. It is estimated that for every biotech manufacturing job 2.5 spin-off jobs are created. The San Diego area also ranks fourth in the nation in concentration of High Tech industries with 517 high technology companies of over 10 employees and an overall employment force of . 100,000 people. The High Tech sectors of the industry are growing at an average of 10-15% annually with the target growth in the areas of computer/electronics manufacturing, software and ./i"~ <. "'2- Page 3, Item Meeting Date telecommunications. Presently high technology fields are being targeted by finns seeking economic/defense conversion, i.e. commercialization of defense dependent products and services. In order to effectively compete and recruit high technology and bio technical finns in Chula Vista, and thus encourage quality job generation, spin-off employment opportunities and diversification of the City's industrial tax base, the City Council has conceptually approved a program that intends to address a number of industry needs and concerns among which is reliable and expeditious development review. This is intended to be accomplished by: · Establishing the boundaries of a High Tech/Bio Tech incentive zone within the EastLake Business Center, inclusive of Phase I and II. · Creating a City Council subcommittee to govern certain matters within the High Tech/Bio Tech incentive zone and delegating certain authority to the subcommittee. · Amending the EastLake Business Center (phase I) Districts Section and Administration Section of the EastLake Planned Community District Regulations. 1) Him Tech/Bio Tech Incentive Zone The program proposes the fonnation of a High Tech/Bio Tech incentive zone in the territory of the EastLake Business Center. The feasibility of the site was previously examined by the High Tech/Bio Tech Task Force and the EastLake Business Center was conceptually approved as the "incentive zone" by the City Council due to its upscale, improved campus-like setting, EastLake's commitment to offer an unintenupted water supply which is critical to certain targeted businesses and the developer's willingness to negotiate/participate in numerous zone programs. Adoption of the attached draft ordinance will formally establish the High Tech/Bio Tech zone. 2) High Tech/Bio Tech Subcommittee The program proposes the creafÏon of a City Council subcommittee to expedite project development review within the High Tech/Bio Tech incentive zone and provide to qualifying businesses immediate personal attention from the highest level. The High Tech/Bio Tech subcommittee is, intended to act as a recommending body to City Council on discretionary planning and other approvals and be given authority currently held by the Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee. The process is intended to operate as follows: .;1fT ,...~ u-. "-- --~-'-"- ,- ---- --...--...-.---.,....----.- Page 4, Item Meeting Date 1 '1195 · City staff works with project applicant to defIne project scope and required approvals, and to assist in preparation of necessary applications. Staff notifIes the City Council Subcommittee of the potential project; · Applicant and staff meet with Council Subcommittee to review project proposal; · Applicant mes environmental "initial study" application; this activates 60 day target project processing turn-around time, unless an EIR or other special studies are required; · Staff processes applications for site plan and architectural review (and conditional use pennit if required). EastLake Business Center Owner Association conducts its own design review process concurrently; · City Council Subcommittee holds a public hearing, at which time it reviews and makes recommendation on site plan and architectural review (and conditional use pennit if required); and · City Council holds a public hearing, at which time it reviews and acts on all required project approvals. · Adoption of the attached draft Ordinance will create the High Tech/Bio Tech Subcommittee and delegate the authority described therein. 3) Planned Community District Rel!Ulations Amendments. 1be program proposes to minimize duplication of industrial performance standards within the High Tech/Bio Tech incentive zone by amending the EastLake Business District performance standards as well as mlnimize the discretionary land use pennit review process within the EastLake Business Center by refIning the listing of allowable uses and changing certain uses from conditional to pennitted. · Section IV.3 of the EastLake Planned Community District Regulations is therefore proposed to be amended to implement Council's direction by deleting the present performance standards where overlapping occurs between City and County/State/Federal regulations, and instead incorporating those County/State/Federal regulations by reference. SpecifIc infonnation on the different performance standards and justifIcation for the proposed amendments is contained in the High Tech/Bio Tech Issue Paper (Attachment #5). Section IV.l, the list of pennitted and conditional uses within the EastLake Business Center Districts is proposed to be expanded to clearly identify high technology, bio · 'tt - - ...... ~ Meeting Date 1 / 5 technical and bio medical uses as permitted uses and to permit by-right certain manufacturing uses that are adequately regulated by the performance standards. Section IV.O is proposed to be amended to acknowledge the establishment of the High Tech/Bio Tech zone. Section IX.l is proposed to be amended to include references on the development processing procedures applicable to qualifying projects within the "incentive zone." The proposed language amendments are outlined on Attachment #3 in a strike-out/shaded format. Status of other incentives As discussed, the three items listed above for action contribute to ~e goal of providing quick, reliable development review within a maximum 60 day period for qualifying projects which do not require aI!l Environmental Impact Report. It should also be noted that as part of the High Tech/Bio Tech program's "fast tracking" incentives, staff is in the process of implementing City Council's directive for the establishment of a "One-Stop Early Assistance" program, which would involve project pre-submittal as well as multi- jurisdictional permit process review and assistance in partnership with the San Diego EDC "One-Stop Assistance" program. This process is intended to identify project processing issues and permit requirements upon initiation of a proposal, avoiding potentially costly and time consuming discoveries of additional requirements later on during the process. Additionally Council has identified the Assistant City Manager as the High Tech/Bio Tech Ombudsman to provide top management level assistance in the project review process as needed. Council has also approved $100,000 towards the preparation of a Master EIR for phase 2 of the Business Park to help fast-track targeted businesses in that later phase. Regarding water supplies, EastLake has committed to arranging an agreement with Otay Water District to ensure an uninterrupted supply to Zone tenants. Regarding the contract biotechnology pilot ~ufacturing facility, BioShare Inc.(A private entity) has been endorsed in concept by Council and is completing a full Business Plan which will be brought to Council in the near future. Regarding land donation and discounts for targeted businesses, the City is finalizing negotiations· with EastLake Development Company regarding an agreement which acts similarly to a development agreement for the EastLake Business Center, i.e., it will establish a basis for identifying and quantifying "trade off" items (Concessions) between ~ G:...5 tolAVIAW L;nmml"AA~ nAIAn:lTAn vvnllA ::Inn$lfAnTIV TnA l:::Innll:::lnA In ~PMlnn I _ III \A/tlc: Ilnl"'U::I!:IIr Tn.cr. nrnln!:llnl"Co _6'~ Meeting Date 24/9 the City and EastLake. This agreement will allow the City to offer land write downs as incentives to targeted companies, based upon EastLake selling at a discounted rate in return for certain City concessions pertaining to matters such as infrastructure fInancing, renegotiation of existing development agreements, and priority processing of other Eastlake projects. A draft agreement is under review and a deadline has been set for approval by April 1995. The proposed role of the City Council Subcommittee in this process will be deimed in the agreement and submitted for Council approval at that time. Finally, regarding tbe creation of a BUD Section 108 Loan Guarantee program, the deadline for consultant proposals was Ian 13, 1995. Proposals (for a feasibility analysis and subsequent program development) are currently being evaluated. FISCAL IMPACT: Adoption of the attached ordinances and implementation thereof, is expected to improve the City's ability to attract High TechlBio Tech users to the Eastlake Business Center, which is anticipated to have a signifIcant positive fIscal impact on the City's General Fund. ATTACHMENTS: -,-- I. City Council Ordinances 2, Locator 3. Planned Community DisIric:t Regulations - proposed text amendments 4. May 24, 1994 City Council Report 5. High TechIBio Tech Issue Paper 6. Planning Commission Resolution and minutes 7. Negative Declaration 1S-9S-1l 8. Resource Conservation r....m;ssion minutes 9. Design Review COIIIDIi1Iec minutes (m,lhome\PIamûø&\a113,124) ~ L.. <. ---~_.._~-- .-. ._._..,-_._,.__._,--_._._._.."~~--_.._---- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ¿" Meeting Date 2/14/95 ITEM TITLE: a) Ordinance 2621 Creating a High Tech/Biotech Zone, creating a Subcommittee to govem certain matters within the High Tech/Biotech Zone of the City, and delegating certain aulhority to said subcommittee (second readina and adoption) b) Ordinance 2622 Approving amendments to the EastLake Planning Community District Regulations and adopting Negative Declaration on IS-95- 11 (second readina and adoption) SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning I ç Director of Community Developmentv- ' City Attomey REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No--1 BACKGROUND: Ordinance 2621 and 2622, implementing aspects of the High Tech/Biotech Zone, were introduced on January 24, 1995, and brou9ht to council for second reading on February 7, 1995. Council requested that the language related to the subcommittee's role concerning economic incentives be clarified per Council's input and be returned at the next meeting, RECOMMENDATION: ThaI Council adopt Ordinance 2621, and adopt Ordinance 2622 deleting Section C,IIL BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable, DISCUSSION: On January 24, 1995, Council introduced the above referenced ordinances to implement the High tech/Biotech Zone and related fast-tracking business development incentives as directed by Council on May 24, 1994. Specifically, Ordinance 2622 amends the Eastlake Planned Community District Regulations to eliminate overlapping of multi-jurisdictional regulations and to identify targeted High Tech and Biotech uses as permitted uses, Ordinance 2622 (amending EastLake Planned Community District Regulations) is returned without changes, Ordinance 2621 establishes the Zone and its boundaries (EastLake Business Park, Phase I and II) and creates a Council Subcommittee to which the authority of both the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee is delegated, While apparently the language in Section C,III was unclear, the ordinance, as originally proposed, was also intended to enable Council to delegate advisory authority to the subcommittee related to providing economic incentives to individual companies - with such authority to be defined and authorized by Council via future agreements with EastLake (as adopted by Council) or via future city policy (as adopted by Council).Staff felt that a recommendation could more appropriately be made regarding the Subcommittee's role concerning economic incentives when Council receives the proposed Agreement with EastLake which will provide the overall mechanism and parameters for offering such incentives. &,,/,,/ ~_"____"_'_____'"'._.'_ _·.·_·.__._,·..,_'",..,_____~..___,._.._._........._m....._.__...__ _ ___~___._ _____~__.__._._.____~____._.__,_" .__ .__ Page 2, Item~ Meeting Date 2/14/95 On February 7, the ordinances returned for a second reading with Ordinance 2621 revised to reflect Council's January 24 input regarding the composition of the Subcommittee (see Section II). At that time, Council indicated that the language in Ordinance 2621, Section C.III regarding "economic support" was unclear and, further, that it should be clarified specifically that the Subcommittee's role should be limited to an advisory capacity. Ordinance 2621 provides Council with three options to revise Section C.III per Council direction, as follows: Option 1: This language deleaates authority to the subcommittee now to review and make recommendations to Council regarding eligibility for and the nature of economic support for businesses, including reviewing and advising regarding specific individual agreements, Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend delegating authority to the subcommittee at this time, Option 2: This is the original language which would defer deleaalina any authority reaardina economic assistance to a future date when a policy is adopted by Council and in anticipation of such a policy being brought to Council with a proposed Agreement with EastLake (identifying recommending financing mechanisms and how the economic incentive negotiation and approval process would work). While intended, this language does not clearly stipulate that any authority to be delegated must be advisory, Staff Recommendation: If adopted, language should be inserted stipulating that any future delegated authority would be advisory only. Option 3: This option would delete Item C,III altogether, This would eliminate any possible confusion regarding the Subcommittee having authority over economic assistance to individual businesses. If Council wishes to delegate such authority laler including ADVISORY AUTHORITY, the Ordinance could be amended accordingly, Staff Recommendation: Slaff recommends that Council adopt this option with the understanding that staff will return with recommendations regarding the mechanics for Council approving economic incentives, including any potential recommended role for the subcommittee, when the proposed Agreement with EastLake is submitted, {(MD) c:\wp51\document\255.95 (February 9, 1995)] ?;/-;¿ . ."___,_,',_" .' _m_~'__"__"__"_' _~__ _..____mm____. ---- --~-_._...._._--_. ORDINANCE NO. 2621 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CREATING A HIGH TECH/BIO TECH ZONE, CREATING A SUBCOMMITTEE TO GOVERN CERTAIN MATTERS WITHIN THE HIGH TECH/BIO TECH ZONE OF THE CITY, AND DELEGATING CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO SAID SUBCOMMITTEE WHEREAS, in order to attract certain targeted High Technology, Bio Technical and Bio Medical businesses and promote economic development in the City, the City desires to form, for economic incentive purposes (not in the planning/entitlement context). a High Tech/Bio Tech Zone ("Zone") in the territory of the EastLake Business Center of the City, diagrammatically represented on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference; and, WHEREAS, currently, as to property located within the Zone ("Zone Properties") and elsewhere within the City, the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee has certain authority to make certain discretionary approvals or recommendations to the Council for approval ("Planning and Design Authority") over land use; and, WHEREAS, the City hereby intends to form a subcommittee of the City Council consisting of the Mavor. a rotatina counciloerson and chairman of the Plannina Commission twe eeuAeil!erseAs to take certain discretionary actions within the territory of the Zone ("High Tech/Bio Tech Subcommittee" or "Subcommittee") and re-delegate Planning and Design Authority currently vested in the Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee of the City to the Subcommittee as to all Zone Properties; and, WHEREAS, on December 21, 1994, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the proposal in accordance with Resolution PCM-95-06; and, WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing, and notice of said hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 21 days prior to the hearing; and, WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely on January 24,1995, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain, find, declare, order and resolve as follows: SECTION I. Create High Tech/Bio Tech Zone. There hereby exists an area of the City of Chula Vista ("Zone") the territory of which is shown in Exhibit A, inclusive of the EastLake Business Center ("Center"), both Phase I ("Phase I Center") and Phase II ("Phase II Center"), which Zone may be expanded from time tA -1- J '-....-.-,---" . '~--'--'"-'---'-'-"'--'- Ordinance No. 2621 Page 2 to time by the City Council by written ordinance, in their sole discretion, and when so amended shall be included in the meaning of the term Zone as used herein. SECTION II. Create High Tech/Sio Tech Subcommittee. A High Tech/Bio Tech Subcommittee ("Subcommittee") is hereby declared to exist consisting of a permanent member being the Mayor of the City of Chu'a Vista and another member of the City Council that would rotate on a yearly basis, to rotate off not in the middle of any particular project and the third member would be the chair of the Chula Vista Planning Commission. The Subcommittee shall operate in all respects in the manner required by law, including the provisions of the Srown Act, and in that regard shall be deemed to be a standing subcommittee of the Council and shall conduct the meetings of their members in an open manner and pursuant to a posted agenda describing in legal detail the subject matter of their deliberations. SECTION III. Delegation of Authority to the Subcommittee. Subcommittee is hereby vested with the following authorities: A. Planning Commission Authority. All matters which are otherwise ..ested in the Planning Commission of the City by virtue of the Zoning Chapter of the Municipal Code or any Planned Community District Regulations or other rules of regulations adopted thereunder ("Planning Commission Matters") are hereby redelegated to the Subcommittee for applications for entitlement affecting Zone Properties exclusively wherein the application for entitlement indicates that the Zone Property is intended to, designed and planned to be put to a High Technology, Sio-Technical or Sio-Medical use as defined in Section IV.1 of the Eastlake Planned Community District Regulations. S. Design Review Authority. All matters which are otherwise vested in the Design Review Committee of the City by virtue of the Zoning Chapter of the Municipal Code or any Planned Community District Regulations or other rules of regulations adopted thereunder ("Design Review Matters") are hereby redelegated to the Subcommittee for applications for entitlement affecting Zone Properties wherein the application for entitlement indicates that the Zone Property is intended to, designed and planned to be put to a High Technology, Sio-Technical or Sio-Medical use as defined in Section IV.1 of the Eastlake Planned Community District Regulations. ( ) Option 1. (The following paragraph "C" implements the direction the City Council gave at the meeting of February 7, 1995. It makes the subcommittee only an advisory body to City Council. All economic based, concession-granting agreements will be reviewed by the subcommittee but approved by Council. If, later, Council wants to grant final decision making authorities to the Subcommittee, it can do so by amending this ordinance.) ~I'J-/-~ .__ 'U _____________._'._..____ ...__.,.__.. .. -----··---···---··0.·····-..---.-..---. _m..... __.".,~_~__._____ Ordinance No. 2621 Page 3 C. Economic Development Agreement Authority. The Subcommittee shall have authority to review and make recommendations to the City Council on matters relating to eligibility for economic support and the nature and extent of economic support for High Technology, Sio Technical or Sio Medical businesses proposing to develop within the Zone properties, including the review and advice of agreements relating thereto. ( ) Option 2. (This is the original language that created the confusion last meeting, except as marked. This language allows the subcommittee to have whatever concession-granting authority-- even final decisionmaking authority--as may be defined and delegated to the subcommittee by the Council in the anticipated "Menu Agreement" with Eastlake to be delivered subsequently). C. Economic Development Agreement Authority. Except as to matters other than legislative matters required to be vested in the City Council, all matters related to determining eligibility for and [reeeffiffiÐAàeà]lIlevel of economic support as permitted or required by one or more agreements between the Eastlake Development Company and the City of Chula Vista and/or by City policy. ( ) Option 3. 1. This is the word, I think, that created the confusion at the Council meeting. It was thought, at the Council meeting to read "recommending". I should not have used the word. If this paragraph is going to be used (and I recommend against it), I would strongly recommend either its deletion or its change to "recommending to the City Council". If deleted, the subcommittee will have such final decision making authority as is granted to it by subsequent agreements of the Council. If changed to "recommending to the City Council", the subcommittee could have final authority as to which companies are eligible for subsidy ("eligibility for subsidy decisions") if granted by a subsequent agreement, but could not have final decision making authority as to the nature and extent of those economic subisdies. Sy the way, I am concerned regarding the confusion the Council had in interpreting the language. I wrote the draft "Menu Agreement" and this "High Tech SubcommitteelZone" at the same time in June, 1994, with thE! intention that it would be presented simultaneously to the Council. As such, its meaning would have been apparent. For reasons that I can't understand, it was not presented simultaneously, but will be broken up over time for presentation to the Council for approval. As such,it is my recommendation that the Council not act on this ordinance until they see and understand the Menu Agreement and how it is scheduled to work. ~4-1-:J -~_._--"--_..__. ...~ -...-----.. -------··...-.....·-·0.'-·_.··.,·--. .-.-..-----.---.------ Ordinance No. 2621 Page 4 . (By deleting the Third Power, subparagraph C, this option reserves until a future date the decision as to whether or not the Council wants to delegate final decision making authority to the Subcommittee on economice subsidy matters.) C. Omitted. SECTION IV. Exercise of Authority by Subcommittee Not Mandatory. The Subcommittee is not obligated to use the authority regarding Planning Commission Matters or Design Review Matters, and if it surrenders or refuses to exercise same in gross or as to a specific application, the authority to decide such Matters reverts back to the bOdy from which it was originally delegated. SECTION V. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Presented by Robert A. Leiter Chris Salomone Planning Director Community Development Director Approved as to fo m by V\ ~ Bruce M. Boogaar City Attorney . ~...?-/- f ~ _._-~_._--_.-.... .------- .-.~ --.---" -- -- ORDINANCE NO. ~ ¿.;~ r\\.O~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE' CITY OF ~O~ CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO EASTLAKE PLANNED COMMUNITY D REGULATIONS AND ADOPT, DECLARATION ON 18-95-11 I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the properties which are the subject matter of this ordinance are diagrammatically represented on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, and located within the EastLake I Planned Community Area of the City of Chula Vista ("Project Site"); and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval WHEREAS, on September 29, 1994, the City of Chula Vista fùed an application proposing amendments to the EastLake Planned Community District Regulations (known as Document No. CO 95- _ on fùe with the Office of the City Clerk) Section IV.O, IV.l, IV.3, and IX.l in order to ellCQl1rage the location of certain qualified high technology, bio technical and bio medical uses within the EastLake Business Center ("Project"). C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, the Project Site has been in part the subject matter of a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan previously approved by City Council and most recently amended by Resolution No. 16702 ("EastLake I SPA Plan") on June 3D, 1992, and Planned Community (p.C.) District Regulations previously approved by City Council and recently amended by Ordinance No. 2600 and 2601 (EastLake Planned Community District Regulations) on August 16, 1994. D. Planning Commission Record on Applications WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said project on December 21, 1994, and voted 4-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the Planned Community District Regulation amendments in accordance with the findings listed below. ~ - - ,. --'---~.-_...---~--'--.- "~-----""--'-"-----~ The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on this Project held on December 21, 1994, and the minutes and draft ordinances resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. E. City Council Record on Applications WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on January 24, 1995, on the Discretionary Approval Application, and to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same; and, F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this ordinance was introduced for first reading (January 24, 1995), the City Council of the City of Chula Vista introduced for first reading Ordinance No. by which it approved the establishment of a High TechlBio Tech Zone and a High- , TechlBio Tech Subcommittee. NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Chula Vista does hereby fmd, determine and ordain as follows: 11. NEGATIVE DECLARATION REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED; FINDINGS; APPROVALS A. Negative Declaration · The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered Negative Declaration IS-95-11 (known as Document No. CO 95- _ on me in the Office of the City Clerk), the environmental impacts therein identified for this project prior to approving the Project. Based on the Initial Study and comments thereon, the Council fmds that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment and thereby approves the Negative Declaration. · -2- · ~ c.. ~ - 2,.. m. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA The City Council does hereby fmd that the Negative Declaration on IS-95-11 have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista. IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL The City Council fmds that the Negative Declaration on IS-95-11 reflect the independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista City Council. V. FINDINGS FOR P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE AMENDMENTS The City Council hereby fmds that the proposed amendments to the EastLake Planned Community District Regulations are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, and public necessity, convenience, the general welfare, and good zoning practice support the amendments. VI. APPROVAL OF P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE AMENDMENTS The City Council hereby approves the project and thereby amends Section IV.O, Section IV.I, Section IV.3 and Section IX.I of the EastLake Planned Community 'District Regulations to read as follows: (A.) SECTION IV: BUSINESS CENTER DISTRICTS IV. PURPOSE In addition to the objectives outlined in Section 1.0 (Purpose and Scope), the Business Center Districts are included to provide for a quality working environment and to achieve a harmonious mixture of uses which might otherwise be considered incompatible when located in close proximity . Activities are intended to promote employment opportunities in manufacturing, service, research and development, engineering and wholesale trade. In addition, the Business Center Districts are included to advance the following objectives: To reserve appropriately located areas for industrial use and protect these areas from intrusion by dwellings and other non-harmonious uses; -3- .J1'J <..&- ~ -----..-.-.- ,---._"- To protect residential and commercial uses from noise, odor, dust, smoke, light intrusion, truck traffic and other objectionable influences and to prevent fire, explosion, radiation and other hazards incidental to certain industrial activities; To promote sufficient open space around industrial structures to protect them from hazard and, to minimize the impact of industrial operations on nearby residential or commercial districts; and To minimize traffic congestion and avoid overloading utilities by restricting construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the amount of land around them. A. Business Center Manufacturing Park District (BC-I) This district is intended as an area for modem industrial, research, and administrative facilities which can meet high performance and development standards. B. ' Business Center Manufacturing Service District (BC-2) · This district is intended as an area for light industrial and limited service commercial uses which can meet high performance and development standards. The Business Center District areas (BC-I and BC-2) of the EastLake Business Center have been included and constitute a portion of the High Tech/Bio Tech Zone, an area of the City of Chula Vista the territory of which is shown on Exhibit C, within which certain qualifying high technology, bio technical and bio medical uses are encouraged to locate by providing to those businesses economic and land use processing incentives. · (8.) I IV.I Permitted and Conditional Uses: Business Center Districts The following uses shall be permitted uSeS where the symbol "P" appears and shall be permitted uses subject to a Conditional Use Permit where the symbol "C" appears. Uses where the symbol . A· appears shall be subject to an Administrative Review. · -4- -9ø, tf · (. '!- \of Land Use GrouD Land Use BC-l BC-2 (Manufacturing (Manufacturing Park) Service) A. Manufacturing 1. Manufacturing, compounding, assembly or treatment of articles or merchandise from the following previously prepared typical materials such as canvas, cellophane, cloth, cork, felt, fiber, fur, glass, leather, paper (no milling), precious or semi- precious stones or metals, plaster, plastics, shells, textiles, tobacco, wood, and yarns; novelty items (not including fireworks or explosive type items). P P 2. Electrical and related parts; electrical appliances, motors and devices; radio, television, phonograph and computers; electronic precision instruments; timing and measuring instruments; audio machinery; visual machinery, cosmetics, drugs, perfumes, toiletries an4 soap (not including refining or rendering of fat or P P oils) 3. Furniture and upholstering P C 4. Rubber and metal stamp manufacturing P C 5. Laboratories; chemical P P 6. Laboratories; dental, electrical, optical, mechanical and medical P P 7. Bottling plants P P 8. Cement products manufacturing C 9. Phannaceutica1s; laboratories and manufacturing p p -5- 2St/ (.ß-~ - ~ --"_._--.__..._-,._-------_.__._,--_._._---_..,--,-~. Land Use GrouD I.:and Use BC-! BC-2 (Manufacturing (Manufacturing Park) Service) B. Storage and Wholesale Trades 1. Mini-storage, public storage and storage warehouses C p 2. Moving and storage ftnns C p 3. Building materials and lumber storage yanls and/or contractors' yards C 4. Building equipment storage, sales, rentals C 5. Automobiles fleet storage C C 6. Trailer, truck, or bus tenninal C C C. Services 1. Animal hospital or veterinary clinic and/or office p P 2. Automobile and/or truck services including but not limited to: sales, rental agencies, body repair, painting and car washes C 3. Blueprinting and photocopying P P 4. Cleaning and dyeing plant C 5. Distributors, showrooms and automobile p p offices , -6- ~ , . (. 5-<- - Land Use GrOUD Land Use . BC-l BC-2 (Manufacturing (Manufacturing Park) Service) 6. Eating and drinking establishments: a. Bars C C b. Restaurants, coffee shops, delicatessens : 1. With alcoholic beverages C C 2. Without alcoholic beverages A A c. Snack bars, take-out only; refreshments stand within a building P P d. Fast food restaurants with drive-in or C C drive-through 7. . Furniture sales, new and used (no outdoor sales or display) P P 8. Gasoline dispensing and/or automobile service station C C 9. Kennels C 10. Heliports C C 11. Motels, hotels and convention centers , C C 12. Newspaper publishing, printing, and distribution, general printing and lithography P P 13. Offices, business, medical, professional, real estate and research P P 14. Retail commercial when in conjunction with a pennitted or conditional use P P -7- ~ 7 I.1ß-Lp I (.6:.7 . - -- --_._--~.._.+-.-.- ...,.. ...._._.__._~-"- Land Use GrouD Land Use BC-l BC-2 (Manufacturing (Manufacturing Park) Service) D. High-Technology Uses 1. Research, development and manufacturing of advanced technology products (such as but not limited to systems, subsystems, . components, peripherals and accessories), inclusive of prototype and experimental products, utilized in the fields of aerospace, avionics, computers, electronics, advanced materials, defense industries, communications, energy and environmental systems, transportation, telecommunications, optics/laser, fiberoptics, optoelectrics, video, imaging, p p , magnetics, oceanography and other related fields. E. Bio- Technical Uses 1. Research, development and manufacturing of health care, food safety, nutrition, agriculture productivity and industrial and environmental improvement products, inclusive of prototype and experimental · products involving use of organic, p p chemical, and biologic processes. F. Bio-Medical Uses 1. Research, development and manufacturing of inorganic and organic drug delivery systems and diagnostic and therapeutic products, inclusive of prototype and experimental products, utilized in the field p p of medical health care. · -8- ~ c.~~ · Land Use GrouD Land Use BC-l BC-2 (Manufacturing (Manufacturing Park) Service) G. Public and Semi-Public Uses l. Day nurseries, day care schools and nursery schools A A 2. Post offices and post office terminals A C 3. Public utility pumping stations, equipment building and instalIation A A 4. Public utility service yards C 5. Educational institutions, public or private including vocational schools C C H. Accessory Uses l. Accessory structures and uses located on the same lot as permitted or conditional use p p 2. Incidental services for employees on a site occupied by a permitted or conditional use, including day care, recreational facilities, showers and locker rooms P P 3. Watchmen's or caretaker's living quarters only when incidental to and on the same site as a permitted or conditional use A A I. Temporary Uses l. Temporary uses as prescribed in VI.o P P .. -9- ~ (. ~-9 . '--~'_'~---"------_'_'_."'.__._---.--,--_."'--'._"~"---- (c.) 1V.3 Perfonnance Standards: Business Center Districts A. In all Business Center Districts the required setbacks shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall consist predominately of plant materials and shall be irrigated by automatic sprinklers. All planting and irrigation shall be in accordance with the City's Landscape Manual. All landscaping shall be pennanently maintained in a clean thriving condition, free of weeds, trash and debris. B. All ground mounted mechanical equipment, including heating and air conditioning units and trash receptacle areas, shall be completely screened from surrounding properties by use of a parapet, wall or fence, or shall be enclosed within a building. Exposed gutters, downspout, vents, louvers and other similar elements shall be painted to match the surface to which they are attached unless they are used as part of the design theme. C. All utility connections shall be designed to coordinate with the architectural elements of the site so as not to be exposed except where required by utility provider. Pad-mounted tranSfonners and/or meter box locations shall be included in the site plan with an appropriate screening treatment. D. Lighting. All light sources shall be shielded in such a manner that the light is directed , away from the streets and adjoining properties. Illuminators shall be integrated within the architecture of the building. The intensity of the light at the boundary of any Business Center District shall not exceed seventy-five (75) foot lamberts from a source of reflected light. E. Electrical Disturbance, Heat and Cold, Glare. No use except a temporary constnlction operation shall be pennitted which creates changes in temperature or direct glare, detectable by the human senses without the aid of instnlments, beyond the boundaries of the site. No use shall be pennitted which created electrical disturbances that affect the operation of any equipment beyond the boundary of site. . F. Fire and Explosive Hazard. All uses involving inflammable and explosive materials shall be subject to initial and continued compliance with all applicable State regulations contained in the California Code of Regulations and the Unifonn Fire Code. G. Noise. The acceptable outdoor noise exposure levels, measured at the property line, for the Business Cen~r districts are given in the table below. (See amended Chapter 19.66 CVMC for definitions and additional details.) . -10- 9~~ - , <. 6- fa Exterior Noise Limits'" Receiving Land Use District 7 a.m. - 10 p.m. 10 p.m. - 7 a.m. BC-l, BC-2 70- dbA 'JO dJA "'Environmental Noise-Leq in any hour "'Nuisance Noise - Not exceeded at any time H. Odor. Any use involving the creation or emission of odorous gases or other odorous matter sha1l be subject to initial and continued compliance with a1l applicable County regulations including but not limited to Rule 51 of the San Diego County Air P01lution Control District (APCD) regulations. I. Radioactivity . Any use involving radioactive materials sha1l be subject to initial and continued compliance with a1l applicable State regulations including but not limited to Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations and the Unifonn Fire Code. J. Vibration. No use except a temporary construction operation sha1l be pennitted which generated inherent and recurrent .ground vibration perceptible, without instruments, at the boundary of the lot on which the use is located. K. In any Business Center District, the conversion of a project to condominium ownership shall meet a1l the requirements of the zone to the maximum extent possible. Specific City Council waiver sha1l be required where the zone requirements cannot be met. L. Air P01lution. Emission of air contaminants sha1l be subject to initial and continued compliance with a1l applicable County regulations including but not limited to Rule 50 of the San Diego County Air Po1lution Control District (APCD) regulations. M. Outdoor Storage Areas shall be entirely enclosed by solid wa1ls not less than eight (8) feet in height to adequately screen views from the external boundaries of the property. N. Energy Conservation. A1I uses sha1l be subject to initial and continued compliance with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. O. Toxic Materials. Any use involving hazardous materials sha1l be subject to initial and continued complil!nce with all applicable State regulations including but not limited to those contained in the California Code of Regulations, State Health and Safety Çodes and the Unifonn Fire Code. -11- 9-1L,' f - Cø~11 ___~__m" .,__~~___. P. Liquid or Solid Waste. The discharge of deposit of liquid or solid wastes shall be subject to the provisions of Section 19.66.150 CVMC. NOTE: With the exception of the Unifonn Building Code and Unifonn Fire Code, the above referenced State and County regulations shall not be administered by City departments! agencies. (D.) SECTION IX: ADMINISTRATION IX.l Standard Procedures A. General: The Administrative Procedures, Conditional Uses, and Variances, Chapter , 19.14 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, shall be utilized as applicable to the administration of the Planned Community of EastLake I. B. High TechlBio Tech Zone: Not withstanding the above provision, the High TechlBio Tech Subcomminee shall act in.place of the Planning Commission and Design Review Comminee on discretionary applications for high technology, bio technical and bio medical projects located within the High TechlBio Tech Zone, as described and established by Ordinance No. , in accordance with the authority vested in the High TechlBio Tech Subcomminee by said Ordinance. · C. Sectional Planning Areas (SPA) and Sectional Planning Areas Plans (SPA Plans). The administration of SPA Plans shall be as provided for in Section 19.48.090 through Section 19.48.130 inclusive of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, except that the Director of Planning may accept less detail or require additional detail to suit the scope of the SPA. VII. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION The City Council directs the Enviromnental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of · Detennination and file the same with the County Clerk. VIll. INVAliDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that adoption of this Ordinance is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every tenn, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more tenns, provisions or conditions are detennined by a · -12- _99-/~ <. e. ..17- Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio. IX. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall taIce effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by by .» Robert A. Leiter Bruce M. Boogaard Director of Planning Ci1¥ Attorney (III:\. ..lamyw\El.lpc:rq,onI) ) .'" ../ -13- ßn.,,~ <.~.. 1:3Þ - .....-.,.--." ......_-_._-"--,-"--_._-----_._~---~~ . , . LOCATOR RICH TECH I RIO TECH ZONE . C9 eXH.1T A EASTlAKE BUSINESS CENTER. PHASE I ICAU, t:(fJ- 'i ) NORTH N01\'E -, , ú8 -/7/ <ø~_ ,'" EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER HIGH TECHlBIO TECH ZONE _........,,_ H .-c..~ 'fWr' ".., ... ... - ... - , , .-- " ~.. . .-....." E-, ,. I' " \ \' " , ," , . , I _ " \ \"1 ' ' ~ ,":"". ~r _," -":-~"I" \' ' .,:'.. .....,; .... ~----E u. .. '"' . ..... " '" \ -~ ,-. . ...1;' -.--. f,\ .,.;_. .._-. -. \., , , '1,\,- "':. \ -, 1,\ ' ... S'. , ,,1, "" ::s-- -..-- ~.- t . . -6.r_' -.-.. _.'....... ... ._-~_... -. -- ... ----..- _·_.,..t·..~ D .._ ,'._ t,., .0. .. . ,..--. ... -- .",; ----... I~:~" :_s' ..; -.. .en "' I H ¡ ...c..-en. .... . ... I'" y.etl' .. '.... ,~..nl .u H ...·~,..tr. .... , .. MlØ"'WIt I U ., ~tI! ...~ .. '.........n q' ~ ::OOcw':~ ... " .... ' ..,. 4 E/iSTIfI(E 1 ~ .. - ....-, , , A PLANNED COMMUNITY IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ~ . Exhibit C' 9¡L-, - c.~ '4£ .-- -----. - __u.__ ...._.,----,.,._--~-- ...-." - - . 9P--'ç- -- ~ . IS-, _'~' CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ì Meeting Date 02/07/95 ITEM TITLE: Ordinance '1(,,2.3 Amending Section 10.56.040 of the Municipal Code Allowing Changing of the Time Limit in Some Parking Meters withi~wntown Parking Lots and Authorizing the City Engineer to Determine th ration of Meters within the Parking Lots D . / SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Directorø . ?-0"-'O\~~ ~ Finance Director:to:, 0\""'0 . Public Works Direc or~1 -;,.....0 REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~ . /'Z (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No X) Council Referral No. N/A BACKGROUND: At the request of the Town Centre Project Area Committee (TCPAC), staff conducted an analysis on the need to convert additional short-term parking meters to long-term meters in some of the downtown parking lots. Staff's analysis determined that there is the need to take this measure in some of the parking lots as indicated in this report. The City Attorney determined that the conversion of meter time limit could be done through an ordinance adópted by the City Council. The ordinance also adds new language to the Municipal Code authorizing the City Engineer to. in the future. determine the need for and location of different meter time limits within the parking lots with the advice of the TCPAC. Staff Is hereby presenting the ordinance for Council consideration and adoption. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the ordinance amending the Municipal Code to allow the conversion of 63 parking meters located in lots 2.5,8. and 9 from 4 hours to 9 hours and to authorize the City Engineer to determine the need for and location of meter time limits within the parking lots with the advice of the TCPAC. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: At its meeting of the January 5, 1995, the Town Centre Project Area Committee discussed the proposal and recommended that the City Council accept staff's recommendation (see minutes attached). On January 17. 1994, staff presented the recommendation to increase the number of 9-hour parking meters in lots 2,5, 8, and 9 to the Downtown Business Association. The association endorsed the recommendation. Staff presented the proposal to the Director of the Chamber of Commerce who supported the proposal as presented in this report. DISCUSSION: tn response to a request by the Town Centre Project Area Committee, the Parking Operations Officer and Community Development staff conducted an analysis of the existing parking situation within the Downtown Parking District to determine the need for additional 9-hour parking meters within some lots. A survey was conducted to determine the level of parking demand in the ten public parking lots and along ~- \ .-..--...---...-.-....-....-..---------.- Page 2, Item ï Meeting Date 2/07/95 Church and Landis Avenues. This survey was conducted during the period of December 2 through December 16, 1994. Staff checked the parking lots at 11 am and 3 pm on weekdays during the survey period. ¡he purpose of the observations was to find out how many parking spaces were vacant at the times of the survey and thus determine the level of parking demand. This helped determine whether additional long-term meters could be provided to accommodate additional permit holders and make better use of the long-term parking meters. The results of this survey are listed in the attached table shown as Exhibit I. Also, see attached downtown map for location of parking lots. The survey shows that lots 2, 5, 6, and 8 have the lowest level of vacancies (35%, 26%, 35%, and 15%, respectively). The rest of the parking lots have vacancies ranging from 40% to 65%. Overall and on average, parking vacancy within the district is approximately 38%, which is down from 47% shown by surveys taken a couple of years ago. Parking demand in lot 2 is expected to increase significantly when the building at 311 F Street is in full operation and the building at 256 Landis Avenue is completed and open by the end of February 1995. · Regarding parking on Landis and Church Avenues, the survey shows that parking vacancy is approximately 56% of metered spaces. This means that on both streets there is always one half of the metered spaces availðble. The vacant spaces were found to be evenly distributed along the street from E to F Streets; that is, the survey did not show any concentration of vacant spaces at any particular point along the streets. The meters on these streets are 2 hours and 9 hours. Staff also looked at the sale of parking permits to determine the demand for 9-hour meters within the parking lots. (Parking permits are allowed only on the 9-hour parking spaces within the parking lots). The Parking Operations Officer reported that for the period of October through December 1994, a total of 112 parking permits were purchased. It is expected that the number of permits that were sold during the last quarter of 1994 will be renewed during the first quarter of 1995. · While the holders of these permits are scattered throughout the parking district, there is a significant number of them that are concentrated in the proximity of specific parking lots (see Exhibit (1). The tendency of permit holders is to park in the parking lot closest to them. This is the case with lots 8 and 5 where approximately 48 permit holders are located in their proximity. The number of 9-hour meters within these lotS is 38. Therefore, additional 9-hour meters need to be provided at these lots in order to accommodate permit holders. Lots 2 and 9 currently have 48 and 7 9-hour meters. The number of permit holders in the proximity of these lots is 21 and 6, respectively. Additional 9-hour meters are needed in lot 9 because the number of peiTnit holders is almost equal to the number of available 9-hour meters. Additionally, other businesses in the proximity of this lot have expressed an interest in buying permits. If this happens, the number of · permit holders wishing to park in this lot will exceed the 9-hour meters available. In Lot 2 the current number of long-term meters is 48 while the number of permit holders in its vicinity is 21. However, it is anticipated that with the opening of the Telecenter and the medical office building at the corner of Landis and Davidson the demand for 9-hour meters will increase. Additionally, the Star- News has expressed interest in purchasing some permits and gave the impression that they would park in Lot 2. Given this scenario, it is staff's opinion that additional 9-hour meters also need to be provided at this lot. Given the success of the permit system and its demand for 9-hour meters coupled with an increase in overall demand for parking, staff recommends that additional 9-hour meters be made available in parking · lots 2, 5, 8, and 9. '1-2 Page 3. Item ì Meeting Date 2/07/95 Following is a table showing the number of metered spaces and the distribution of 4 and 9-hour meters as well as the number of meters that are being proposed to be changed. Im!& Total Number of Lot Number Number Number Number 4-Hour Meters of Metered of of to be Speces 4-Hour Meters 9-Hour Meters Reconfigured 2 117 69 . 48 18 5 29 16 13 8 8 52 27 25 27 9 28 21 7 10 Total: 226 Total Number to be Reconfigured: 63 The rest of the downtown parking lots do not require any change. Lots 1, 6 and 7 have only 9-hour meters, while lots 3, 4 and 10 have low levels of demand and still provide an adequate number of 9-hour meters. The Parking Operations Officer indicated that the cost of changing the 63 4-hour meters to 9-hours is $30 per meter, which requires a total expenditure of $1,890. He indicated there are sufficient funds in his budget to carry out this operation without an appropriation. The City Attorney determined that the proposed change to the meter time limit needs to be implemented through an ordinance amending the Municipal Code increasing the number of 9-hour meters within the stated parking lots. The change to the time limit in the meters as outlined in this report does not change the number of parking meters or spaces within any of the parking lots. Currently, the Council is the only one authorized to make changes to the meters. This requires going to the Council every time there is a need to do that. Staff recommends that additional language be included in the Municipal Code granting authority to the City Engineer, with the recommendation from the Town Centre Project Area Committee, to determine the combination and number of 9 and/or 4-hour meters within the parking lots (see copy of ordinance attached, the new language is underlined on page 3). This change in the code will help expedite future changes to the meter time limits within the parking lots. FISCAL IMPACT: As indicated above, the cost of the meter cQnversion will be approximately $1,890 and will be undertaken by the Parking Operations Officer. Sufficient funds are available in the parking operations budget to undertake the conversion; no appropriation of funds by the Council is needed. The proposed change to the meter time limit will not have a significant fiscal impact because the parking spaces are available on a "first-come first-serve" basis. The permit holders pay for the permit whether they use the spaces or not. While the prO¡:1osed change will provide additional 9-hour meters, these spaces can also be used. if available, to non-holders of permits who will deposit coins in the meter. IMZTIDISK IX/SURVEY.RPT) ,.~ .. . . . .. _'_-~--_._.._..__.._,.~.~-------,----_.-.,--,--- -_...'. - ~ fa9£ Clank! , ~-~ --- --~ --- ~-~ - ORDINMlCE NO. ';'(,~3 AN ORDINMlCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ~ AMENDING SECTION 10.56.040 OF THE CHULA VISTA rfJ?'S\O MUNICIPAL CODE - METER ZONES -DESIGNATED-F~~ SCHEDULE XI . D\~~ tt~ CO~O ~~ SECTION I: That Section 10.56.040 of the Chula VIsta Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 10.56,040 Meter zones-Desiqnate4-Fees-Sche4ule XI, In accordance with Section 10.56.030 of this chapter, parking meter zones are hereby established upon those public parking lots and streets or portions of streets described herein. In such zones, parking of vehicles shall be requlated by parking meters between the hours specified in Section 10.56.150 which shall permit vehicular parking for the duration specified below for all days except Sundays or public holidays, as follows: Name of Street Be2innin2 At Endin2 At Side Duration Third Avenue Alvarado Street 'E' Street East 2 hoon Third Avenue Roosevelt Street 'E" Street West 2 hoon Landis Avenue "F" Street 300 Ft. north of E/W 2 hoon north curbline or 9 hoon of 'E" Street , Church Avenue "F" Street 'E' Stteet E/W 2 hoon or 9 hoon "G' Street 40 ft. west of 100 ft. east of South 30 minutes west curbline of east cUrbline of or 2 hoon Third Avenue Church Avenue "G' Street 125 ft. west of 450 ft. east of North 1 hour or west curbline of east curbline of 2 hoon Third Avenue Third Avenue Garrett Avenue 100 ft. south of 150 ft. north of N/S 2 hoon south curbline of north curbline 'E' Street of 'E' 'Street Park Way 100 ft. west of Third Avenue N/S 1 hour west curbline of Third Avenue 1 7-1 /7-'5 ------~--- -- _._._---,~- Del Mar Avenue 'F' Street Center Street East 9 hours - Madrona Street Third Avenue 125 ft. east of N/S 1 hour east curbJine of Third Avenue , "F' Street Garrett Avenue Del Mar Avenue North 30 minutes or 1 hour or 2 hours "F' Street Church Avenue Del Mar Avenue South 2 hours Center Street Third Avenue Del Mar Avenue N/S 1 hour or 9 hours Center Street Third Avenue Del Mar Avenue South 1 hour 'E' Street Church Avenue Del Mar Avenue N/S 2 hours · - 'E' Street Garrett Avenue 100 ft. east of N/S 2 hours east curbJine of Landis Street Public Parkin!! Lot Duration No.1: Northwest comer of Church 8< Madrona 9 hours No.2: 200 block of Landis 4 hours and! or 9 hours · No.3: Northeast comer of Landis 8< Davidson 4 hours and! or 9 hours No.4: Northwest comer of Church 8< Davidson 4 hours and! or 9 hours No.5: Southwest comer of Church 8< Davidson 4 hours and! or 9 hours No.6: Near Southeast comer of Third 8< Madrona 9 hours No.7: Near Southeast ~omer of Landis 8< 'E' ~ Ä9t1Ri ..u~/er 9 hours No.8: 281-287 Church Avenue (Church 8< Del Mar) 4 hours and! or 9 hours · No.9: 230-232 Church Avenue 4 hours and!or 9 hours No. 10: Southwest comer of Church and Center St. 4 hours and!or 9 hours No. 101: Norman Park Senior Center between 'F' Street 8< Center Street .¡ ~ hoU1'! · 2 ì-I,., For narkina durations above listed. aiven in the alternative. the authoritv is .herebv aranted to thecitv Enaineer to determine the combination/confiauration of meter durations best suited for the diven location: éxceDt that as to Public Parkina Lots 1-11. thê citv Enaineer shall sOlicit the recommendation and advice of the Town Centre Pro;ect Area Committee before exercisina his/her authoritv. SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect an full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoptio Presente" by v..~ Chris Salomone, Director of Bruce M. Community Development Attorney c: 'or\ 1056040 3 ì-ì/1f/3 - - ~-..--..---...,----~.-----"--.-,..----~--..._-...---.,,.--- · . þa;JE- {; · · ( · \ \-~/7-/{-/ MINUTES TOWN CENTRE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Thursday, January 5, 1995 Council Conference Room 8:45 a.m. City Hall 1. Roll Call Members Present: Chairman Blakely, Members Hawk, Mason, Altbaum and Winters. Members Excused: Member Killian. Staff Present: Parkiflg Operations Officer. Bob Baker and Miguel Tapia. Community Development Specialist. Others Present: ' Steve McDonald, Star-News reporter. MSC (MasonlWintersl to excuse Member Killian. 2. Approval of Minutes of December 1, 1994. MSC IAltbaum/Masonl to approve the minutes of December 1, 1994 as submitted. PARKING BUSINESS 3. Conversion of 4·Hour Meters to 10·Hour Meters In Public Lots. Community Development Specialist Miguel Tapia stated that the reason this Item has been brought to the Committee is to recommend to the City Council to convert some of the existing 4-hour meters to 10-hour meters. Staff is recommending that 18 meters In Lot #2, 8 meters In Lot #5. 27 meters In Lot '8 and 10 meters in Lot #9 be converted from 4-hour meters to 1 O-hour meters. This would be a total of 63 meters targeted for conversion. Mr. Steve McDonald, reporter from the Star-News. asked if the conversion was being proposed because of the Increase in businesses requiring all-day parking. Chairman Blakely Indicated that the number of parking permits sold has Increased creating a higher demand for 1o-hour meters at, some of the parking lots. Parking Operations Officer Bob Baker said that he had spoken with a representative from the Star·News and was told that they would be purchasing parking permits. He also said that he had received a call from a person from the medical building on Landis Avenue and they also said they would be purchasing ~ least ten permits. Mr. Tapia said that the study that was conducted indicated that the demand for parking has increased by about 10 to 12 % from previous surveys. The demand for parking permits has also Increased significantly. He added that a year ago there were only about 60 permits sold and now about 110 permits have been sold. 0 Chairman Blakely asked If it was known whether or not the increase In purchased parking permits came from residents. Officer Baker replied no. He said that the only residential permits purchased are from the residents of the Congregational Towers. . ì-o¡ ._--~.- ~-- . ..___.."_~__._._ _n _ _." .' ______..._.._~__n_'.._'.....,_ .____ . - Minutes January 5, 1995 , Page 2 Chairman Blakely asked if overnight parking has been monitored in Lots 8 and 10. Officer Baker stated that very few of the lots have any vehicles parked overnight with the exception of Lot '10. MSC (Mason/AltbaumJ C5-G-1, Killian absentl to concur with staff's recommendetion to City Council to convert 63 4-hour meters to 10-hour meters In public parking lots Numbers 2, 6,8 and 9 end Introduce language In the Municipal tode to allow the City Engineer to determine the combination of 4 ancl10-hour meters within the parking lots. Chairman's Comments: None. Member's Comments: None. , Staff Comments: None. Public Comments: None. Adjourrvnent: The meeting adjourned at 9:10 a.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for January 19.1995. , s~~ . lFi1.:\TCPACMtN\b:'4u5-I5....... . , \-'0 - EXHIBIT I Survey Parking Demand Downtown Parking Lots Church & Landis Avenues Dec. 2 thru Dec. 16, 1994 Average Vacant Lot Existing Spaces Percent Number Spaces for period Vacancy ------ ----- ------ ----- ------ ----- ------ ----- 1 29 19 65.23% 2 121 42 34.71% 3 78 32 40.92% 4 34 14 41.91% 5 30 8 25.83% 6 46 16 35.14% 7 14 7 52.98% 8 54 8 15.28% 9 29 14 49.71% 10 70 33 46.43% ----- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- Totals==> 505 194 38.33% Church Ave 63 35 56.28% Landis Av. 65 36 55.52% ----- ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- Totals==> 128 72 55.89% 1-\ /'-1t. --,.,-_.. .- -,_...._~-_._-_..__._- · · I i / · ( · . , - ì -\''2.. .' . "E" STREET E)(hibit ]I -J- ~ C) ~. C) r'" - C C(1; '"'oY" ~ ~ 0 - r ~,»» :I: fTl To' ;u Z ___ C - - r _ < ~;u º ;u fTl fTl ~ n ____ _,____ ;U ~ _., :I: __ --.J \>!) - ---.r- . - ,-- ^- - fi!i- - -- --, þ. W ~ ß -T' , <: ~I.I -- -'.. - .::~.., . . -fTl ~_ -à ~--- I DAVIDSON -r -r -- .1_._ ~ r~ Úl --" -- "-L: L_ ~_' I ,- e .,.,--'- I ¡ @.I ----.- !- --··-t-·-··· Þ ""'T ._» '- þ , þ , <VI - I IIßd < <: -,--, , ~f---~-fT1~ I~rn I'T1 i ..!._ ___ _~. I ,-....,. :) , , . - I - . --- I ~ f-,--- ~ I '-;1[--- _ --3:fJ J I "F" STREET - /L J @ ~ i~!!- '\ 1 - -- e @~L ~-;-:~.-_ -- t~ --- ,... _,.. .h_ CENTER ST. ,- '- CENTER ST. --,.,-- . ~ (') ---~... ~ ..... E -~ ;U -.-. 1 n (') ~ 1--- ._, -.---..-- ~ I fl ~ ____ ~P~ESS '9~ fTl ____ ' L...!::' . 1 ' ........ ----.-..- -_. . --1 ~ . ~ . '-...,-, , --.. I f ---, E!J~ ~ ¡ , ' PARK WAY ~ r M'A~RONA" I ~ ~N /¿ ! - ~ '_ I- I~ // . I -t ~ I: ! -t I ì i i : "G" TIT I I TTn~ ~"'r I: :d-j II II ! : : ,! .."n... ._"._____.___._____...___.~._____._.._m~._._.__ It ! / ! , · · · \- \'-\ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Ikm~>f , Meeting Dat 17/95 f';¡5J" ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: PCM-95-05; Amendment to the Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulations to allow by conditional use p¡;nnit a dental practice as an accessory use to a dental laboratory or dental appliance manufacturing within the Employment Park Limited Industrial (EP-lb) land use district of the Rancho D~ Rey Business Center. rr-<jJ'(')\O Ordinance .l~.J Ý Amending Chapter lX-~ ~'i)Pennitted and Conditional Uses of the Rancho Del Rey S~ Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulations. ~'i) W ~c.O SUBMITI'ED BY: Director of Planning Æ S· REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No...XJ --r The applicant, Emesto Underwood, has ~bmined applications for an amendment to the Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulations and a conditional use pennit in order to establish a dental practice (dental office) as an accessory use to a pennined dental laboratory at the southeast corner of Tierra Del Rey and Canarios Court within the Rancho Del Rey Business Center. The Planning Commission has considered and approved the conditional use pennit contingent upon !lPproval of the SPA Amendment. The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposal and has prepared an addendum to FSEIR-87-Ol, Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, which must be considered by the City Council prior to a decision on the project (see attaclunent 6). RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Ordinance amending the Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District regulations in accordance with the f'mdings contained therein. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On December 19, 1994, the Design Review Comminee voted 4-0 to approve the development proposal subject to conditions (see attaclunent 4 and 5). On January 11,1994, The Planning Corpmission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed SPA amendment in accordance with Resolution PCM-95...05. The Commission also voted 6-0 to conditionally approve the conditional use pennit contingent upon approval of the SPA Amendment (see attaclunent 3). ~1 ?' / - . -~-~----_..__.- '.._"--"'---,- Page 2, Item J:l Meeting Date 2/7/95 DISCUSSION: 1. Existing Site Characteristics The Limited Industrial (EP-lb) District consists of approximately 21.4 acres located on the eastern portion of the RDR Business Center (see Exhibit C). 2. SPA Land Use designations and land use. Zoninl! Land Use Parcels 3,6,12,15,19,& 20 EP-lb Vacant Parcel 4 EP-lb Admin. Offices Parcel 16 EP-lb Jewelry Mfg. Parcel 17 EP-lb Admin. Offices Parcel 18 EP-lb Commercial Offices Parcel 21 EP-lb SDG&E Elect. Sub-Station (See Exhibit C) 3. Proposed Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulation Amendment The proposed SPA I PC District Regulations amendment is a request to modify Chapter IX-A. 1, Permitted and Conditional Uses section of the Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulations adopted by ordinance No. 2535 to allow dental offices as an accessory use to a permitted Dental Laboratory and Dental Appliance Manufacturing within the Employment Park Limited Industrial land use district , (EP-lb) of the Rancho Del Rey Business Center. 4. Analysis The Rancho Del Rey General Development Plan designates the easterly 29.9 acres of the overall Business Center as Employment Park (see Exhibit A). In order to achieve a diverse and harmonious Business Center environment, the Employment Park (EP) is divided into two specific land use districts: the EP-la, Research Industrial Administrative and Professional District, and the EP-lb, Limited Industrial District. The proposed project is located within the EP-l b land use district (see Exhibit B). , The EP-la district is intended for light industrial uses, large scale research, specialized manufacturing, and administrative and professional offices, including medical and dental offices. The EP-lb district is intended as an area for more exclusive light industrial development, which includes business and administrative offices, but which does not include medical or dental offices. þÞK fS-2 . Page 3, Item J).. Meeting Date 2/7/95 The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Development Plan and would not change the basic character of the EP-l b District. The accessory dental practice will be limited to a total of 35 % of the combined floor area devoted to dental manufacturing, laboratories and other dental related uses or no more than 15 % of the total building floor area whichever is less (traditionally, 15% has been interpreted as the level at which a use is considered accessory). The traffic generated by the dental office, when compared with the traffic generated by pennitted uses in the EP-l b land use district, represents an increase of about 30 average daily trips (ADT) per thousand square feet or about 72 total trips in a 24 hour period (peak hour 10-12 additional trips) for the 2,400 sq. ft. in question. According to the City Traffic Engineer, the increase in ADT and peak hour traffic is insignificant when viewed in the context of the overall Business Center trip generation. For the reasons noted, we are recommending approval of the SPA amendment in accordance with the attached City Council Ordinance. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant has paid for all costs associated with the processing of this amendment and associated conditional use pennit. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft City Council Ordinance 2. Exhibits 3. Planning Commission Minutes and Resolutions 4 DRC Minutes 5. Conceptual Development Proposal 6. Fourth Addendum to FSEIR 87-01 7. Disclosure Statement (m, \," lluis\p<lDo9SOS .A13) hl+r 2?'> 3 ,',"' ......... -,_._...---_._...__._..~- - . · . · THIS PAGE BLANK · , · . · . ~~f . - , .. "., - ORDINA~CE NO. r:2. ¿.2 f - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CAµFORNIA AMENDING CHAPTER IX-A.l,\O~ PERMITTED AND CONDmONAL USES, OF THE RANCH~,() REY SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) I PLAN PC DIS REGULATIONS ....(¡. . :\)\'\ '~ :\)\<1 I RECITALS';v(P~ 'J. ' A. Project Site WHEREAS, The Employment Park Limited Industrial District is diagrammatically present¡ed as attachment A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; is identified and described on Chula Vista Tract 88-2 as lots 2S to 39, inclusive, is commonly known as Rancho Del Rey Business Center and consists of 21.4 acres l~ted on the north side of East "H" Street approximately one and one half mile east of Interstate 805 and bordered on the north by a branch of Rice Canyon; and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval WHEREAS, on September 29, 1994, Ernesto Underwood (applicant) filed an application requesting an amendment to the Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulations (project), a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. Said application requested to modify Chapter IX-A. 1, Permitted and Conditional Uses section of the Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulations, presented as attachment B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, to allow dental practice (dental office) as an accessory use to a permitted dental laboratory or dental appliance manufacturing within the Employment Park Limited Industrial District (EP-lb) of the Rancho Del Rey Business Center. C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, the project site has been in part the subject matter of Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I ~ previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 13392 (Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan) and Planned Community District Regulations previously approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2535. B-// >7<5 D Planning Commission Record on Application WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised hearing on said project on January 11, 1995, and voted 6-0 (Willett abstaining) to recommend that the City Council approve the Planned Community District Regulations amendment in accordance with resolution No. PCM-95-05. The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on this project held on January 11, 1995, and the minutes and resoluûon resulûng therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceedings. E City Council Record on Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said SPA amendment application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing; and NOW, TIlEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows: A COMPUANCE~CEQA Based on the findings and recommendations of the Environmental Review Coordinator contained in the Fourth Amendment to FSEIR-87-0I, the City Council finds that only minor technical changes in the FSEIR are necessary to address the environmental impacts associated with this project. B FINDINGS FOR PC PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AMENDMENT The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulation amendment as represented in Attachment B is consistent with the Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan and the City of Chula Vista General Plan, and that public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice supports the amendment. C APPROVAL OF ZONE AMENDMENT The City Council does hereby approves the Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I PC District Regulations amendment as presented in Attachment B. ~ ?5/j" ..-_. ---- _____n_ --_._.._-_.__.-._-_.._._--".__._~_._._-~-- - ill NOTICE OF DETERMINATION The City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of determination and file the same with the County Clerk. IV EFFECI'IVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force the thirtieth day from its adoption. Presented by by '- ~ Robert A. Leiter Bruce M. Boog Director of Planning City Attorney (f:IIIome"'--.,_........9S05....) n g~7 -.-_. ....,. -_......_-_._----_.------_..,._~_.- - THIS PAGE BLANK . µ <ð<~, .. 'i r 'I I ; ; :: N Æ I jp . =. z;: I <C 1,1 'i ] . . I , 'I' " ~ I' i '. llI!i II t:: .. II · m . .. I - :I: 8x tW . J ....' :';'~.'?~; )A~ ii[ I "':0::, :""'-:' ,',,' ...... f¡<i..,:~ .. i .. 1"" ,Ir ! . . . ,I I 1:=: It' 1···.·lii i ... . Ilio" I , , I i ¡ i ' , ~ I I · Ilu n II I' . , 1111111: J. I , · '1 df J f 111111"1 · , ¡ dill... I ~ EE I r:EEEEEJ I I , ~ , r -/ $'-/ i' Ig,q ,) " - " > " - -" , - · ~ --"--- $ ---- - , ......,...- ---- t .' :. , ~~ ~ · ATTACHMENT 2 · EXHIBITS · · · 7' f{/lj . . Iii 5: ~ 1f~..H m 1¡5t;5 3 \ \ 110- \ \ \ " '-' ::I: \ !X \...-- fW ,- I ~ I I I I , , ,/ ~-) l . 8 / -", r \ \ ,/' c: \ I I ../ \. I ',.. ,. ) .......: ........ .. r ........ ~ . \ .....-J '---1 \ ¡ \ I (,) i .9' i I gJ -, I -(,)/ ¡ I ( *0>1 _,""" . I 2\ i : ¡I- ¡¡ I \ CL. ~¡ l!i-i'sl'" i pI I ,¡ ¡nd !I~ .111 I !1I1I!l1I ¡III I 8j iBBffi !illill0 I~ 0 ~ ã] ~ Yi¡;/g~!/ Ii \...' ) . RICE CANYON BUSINESS CENTER . (EP) " ..- - .7 ..J EP-1A -' < ë3a: a: W ... W~ U ::¡;z - i ::¡;w OU ~ U - .-- .. 0",. Parcel N.utnber' - . . '. . . - . , "LOCATOR .. (!) .. ." ...., , "Dam 1" · 800' EXHIBIT C --- - - ~5/1?i //2 - -"'-~.. ---. ....__..__....._-'-_._--_..._--....,,-_.."..~,. PLANNI COMMISS ON MINUTES ND RESOLUT ONS <¡r-/) -- -.---..--...--- ..----.-.-...." --" ._------_..~-'" -- ..-..._-----~---_. Excernt from Draft Minutes of 1/11/95 ITEM 2: PUBUC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING APPUCATIONS FILED BY ERNESTO UNDERWOOD FOR THE EP-lB DISTRICT AND 1.3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TIERRA DEL REY AND CANARIOS COURT WITHIN THE RANCHO DEL REY BUSINESS CENTER: a. PCM-95-05: AMENDMENT TO THE RANCHO DEL REY SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) I PLAN PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO ALLOW BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DENTAL PRACTICE AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO A DENTAL LABORATORY OR DENTAL APPUANCE MANUFACTURING WITHIN THE EMPLOYMENT PARK UMITED INDUSTRIAL (EP-1B) LAND USE DISTRICT OF THE RANCHO DEL REY BUSINESS CENTER. b. PCC-95-14: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABUSH A DENTAL PRACTICE AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO A DENTAL LABORATORY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TIERRA DEL REY AND CANARIOS COURT WITHIN THE EMPLOYMENT PARK UMITED INDUSTRIAL (EP-1B) LAND USE DISTRICT OF THE RANCHO DEL REY BUSINESS CENTER. Associate Planner Hernandez presented the staff report, giving the location of the project, the adjacent land uses, and the differences between EP-1A and EP-1B land use districts. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt PCM-95-05 recommending that the City Council approve the SPA Amendment in accordance with the draft City Council ordinance and the findings contained therein, and adopt Planning Commission resolution PCC-95-14 approving the conditional use permit based on the fmdings and subject to the conditions therein. He noted that the Planning Commission resolution approval of the conditional use permit was contingent upon approval of the SPA amendment. Commissioner Fuller asked when staff was reviewing the proposed uses between the SDG&E substation and the area that was vacant, was it indicated that a proposed use for that was storage garages, and why would that be appropriate in an employment park? Associate Planner Hernandez stated that self-storage units was a permitted use in the Limited Industrial zone of the business center. In this instance, it was a self-storage facility. Answering Commissioner Fuller, he stated it had been approved by the Design Review Committee. For the self-storage facility, all the applicant would have to do would be to apply for a building permit. Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that it was not likely that the project would proceed. They had approval, but had indicated that it did not appear to be economically feasible to -/ (fr/S/Ö -If- PC Minutes -4- January 11, 1995 proceed. Typically, within an industrial park that type of facility would occur on a limited basis. Commissioner Willett asked if staff intended to amend the SPA to include the storage. Principal Planner Griffm, referring to page 2-23, item B-1, noted the types of facilities that were proposed for that lot had been included since the SPA Plan was originally adopted. Commissioner Willett was concerned that an open storage yard would be a distraction. Assistant Planning Director Lee clarified that it was a mini-storage building, not an open yard type of storage facility. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Gary Cinti, 3639 Midway Drive, San Diego, representing the applicant, stated that they supported staffs recommendations and the conditions, and had the support of the master developer, Rancho Del Rey Partnership, who was in attendance if there were any questions. Commissioner Salas asked Mr. Cinti how common it was to have a dental practice connected with the manufacturing of orthodontics. Mr. Cinti stated that the doctor's dental practice was in a shopping center, and his manufacturing was done elsewhere. It was an attempt to try to stay in the same community, but to create some efficiency. He felt it was probably not common, but it was to his benefit. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Martin stated that he was familiar with these types of laboratories. They have a very low noise level with no effect to the environment by waste. This was a high tech business, and Commissioner Martin felt this was an ideal place for that type of project. He recommended that the Planning Commissioners enthusiastically support the project. It was a good project and the type of business needed. MS (Fuller/Martin) to adopt Resolution PCM-95-05 recommending that the City Council approve the Sectional Planning Area SPA I Plan District Regulations Amendment in accordance with the draft City Council Ordinance and the fmdings contained therein; and adopt Resolution PCC-95-14 approving the Conditional Use Permit based on the fmdings and subject to the conditions listed therein. Commissioner Ray asked if any large trucks were used for delivery, or if they were small courier-type vehicles. Commissioner Martin was not sure, but stated that typically they were like UPS or their own courier service or through the mail. Attorney Basil asked if Commissioner Fuller could restate her motion to make them two separate actions, with the first motion to be adoption of PCM-95-05 and the second PCC-95-14. ~ ~~J~ -.-.-.-,,- --- ,....---. -----------,-..---.---.. PC Minutes -5- January 11, 1995 RESTATEMENT OF MOTION MSC (Fuller/Martin) 6-0-1 (Willett abstaining) to adopt Resolution PCM-9S-OS recommending that the City Council approve the Sectional Planning Area SPA I Plan · District Regulations Amendment in accordance with the draft City Council Ordinance and the findings contained therein. MSC (FullerlMartin) 6-0-1 (Willett abstaining) to adopt Resolution PCC-9S-14 approving the Conditional Use Permit based on the fmdings and subject to the conditions listed therein. · · · · -/- K'/v RESOLUTION NO. PCM-95-05 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER IX-A.l, PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES, OF THE RANCHO DEL REY SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) I PLAN, PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS. . WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Secûonal Planning Area Plan I amendment was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on September 29, 1994 by Emesto Underwood for the property within the Employment Park Limited Industrial District (EP-lb) of the Rancho Del Rey Business Center; and, WHEREAS, said application requested to modify Chapter IX-A. 1, Permitted and Conditional Uses section of the Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I Plan PC District Regulations to allow dental practice (dental office) as an accessory use to a permitted dental laboratory or dental appliance manufacturing within the Employment Park Limited Industrial District (EP-lb) of the Rancho Del Rey Business Center; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said tentative SPA amendment application, and notice of said hearing, together with its purposè, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property 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. January 11, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the addendum to the FEIR-87-01 prior to action on the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends that the City Council amend the Rancho Del Rey Secûonal Planning Area (SPA) I PC District Regulaûons in accordance with the fmdings contained in the attached draft City Council Resoluûon. -4-/3þ; )7 -.-"-.-.-.------,...--..---......-..-..-- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 11th day of January, 1994 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Tuchscher, Fuller, Martin, Ray, Salas, Tarantino NOES: , ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Willett William C. Tuchscher n, Chainnan · ATTEST: Nancy Ripley, Secretary (I: Ihomelplanningl)u~ Ipcm,9505,,,,) · · -2- -I <;5--1 r · RESOLUTION NO. PCC-95-14 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A DENTAL OFFICE AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO A PERMITI'ED DENTAL LABORATORY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TIERRA DEL REY AND CANARIOS COURT WITHIN THE EP-IB LAND USE DISTRICT OF THE RANCHO DEL REY BUSINESS CENTER. WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use permit was fùed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on September 29, 1994, by Emesto Underwood, and WHEREAS, said application request¢d approval of a conditional use permit to establish a dental office as an accessory use to a permitted dental laboratory at the southeast comer of Tierra Del Rey and Canarios Court within the EP-Ib land use district of the Rancho Del Rey Business Center, and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission Considered an addendum to the FEIR-87-0I, Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan, and WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said conditional use pennit application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely January 11, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES hereby fmd, detennine, resolve, and order as follows: I. Environmental Detennination. That the Planning Commission has considered the addendum to FEIR-87-Dl, Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan. n. CUP Findings. That the Commission makes the findings required by the City's rules and regulations for the issuance of conditional use permits, as hereinbelow set forth, and sets forth, thereunder, the evidentiary basis that permits the stated finding to be made. A. That the proposed use at the location Is Decessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community . The proposed use would allow the applicant to establish an adjunct orthodontics practice in conjunction with his dental lab and manufacturing operation to provide a complete orthodontic service in one convenient location. / ff' /~ -"^..--- - .--_._---~._.~~._-~-_. ----- B. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed conditional use permit will ensure that the dental practice do not exceed 35 % of the space occupied by the dental related operation, but no more than 15 % of the total building area. C. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Municipal Code for such use, The proposed use will be required to comply with all regulations and conditions on a continuous basis. D. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. With the approval of this permit, the proposal is consistent with the Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan and SPA I Plan and consequently with the General Plan. · III. Conditional Grant of Permit; Conditions. The Planning Commission hereby grants conditional use permit PCC 94-23 subject to the following conditions whereby: A. Approval of this CUP shall be contingent upon approval PCM-95-05 B. Dental practice shall be limited to 35 % of the total floor area dedicated to dental related operations and shall not exceed 15 % of the total building floor area. · D. In the event that complaints are received or problems occur related to the dental practice would be sufficient grounds to review the conditional use permit and, if deemed appropriate, the Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions and may schedule any review for public hearing before the Planning Commission. IV. Code Reminders Fire DeDartrnent a. .Required fire flow is 3,000 gpm. · b. Provide one on site fire hydrant. Location to be approved by the Fire Marshall. c. Provide access around the perimeter of the building d. Provide one 2FI0BC rated fire extinguisher for each 3,000 sq. ft. · T 25 -¿)..(} e. Provide detailed infonnation about medical gas uses, oxygen and acetylene and all other flammable material. f. Provide proper disposal methods for medical waste. g All building improvements shall conform to the Uniform Fire Code to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. Emzineerinl! DeDartment h. Install two driveway approaches per City standards (35 ft maximum width). . i. Applicant shall obtain a construction permit for the above mentioned work in the right of way. j. A grading permit shall be obtained if the Exemptions in the Chula Vista Grading Ordinance are not met. k. Applicant shall pay corresponding sewer, traffic signal fees, development impact fees and sewer repayment district # 57 prior to issuance of a building permit. I. All utilities on site shall be underground. Miscellaneous m. Conform to all requirements of the Uniform Building Code as required by the Director of Building and Housing Department. n. The applicant shall agree to participate in a water conservation or fee offset program that the City may have in effect at the time of building permit issuance. V. Additional Terms and Provisions of Grant. a. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified, or deleted conditions imposed after adoption of this resolution to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to health, safety or welfare which City shall impose after advance written notice to the permittee and after the City has given to the permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprived the Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the Permittee cannot, in the normal operation of the use permi~, be expected to economically recover. b. This conditional use permit shall be void and ineffective if the same is not utilized within one year from the date of this resolution in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. Failure to comply with any condition of approval shall cause this permit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation. -~ ?5/ ~ I -- ---~.._---.._.._.._--_..._._.._-----_.__._--~---~- VI. A copy of this resolution be transmitted to the applicant. · PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CAUFORNIA, this 7th day of December, 1994 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Tuchscher, Fuller, Martin, Ray, Salas, Tarantino NOES: ABSENT: · ABSTENTIONS: Willett William C. Tuchscher II, Chairman · Nancy Ripley, Secretary (m:\home\pJIMin¡\luis\pc.c:-9514.res) · · ~ ~ ~.2;L. / D~;llf- · . \.., I ATTACHMENT 4 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES . .. -T 8'~ c2J ... ---- . .....--...-.....--.--.--....--..-.-. --- DOt~ FT MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE . ft·tr DESIGN REVIEW COMMIITEE , Mondav. December 19. 1994 Conference Rooms 2 and 3 4:30 p.m. A. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Spethman, Vice Chair Rodriguez, Members Way and Dll""llnson (Member Kelly arrived at 4:35) STAFF PRESENT: Associate Planner Luis Hernandez B. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Spethman made an opening statement explaining the design review process and the , committee's responsibilities. He asked that all speakers sign in and identify themselves verbally for the tape when speaking. C. PRESENTATION OF PROJECTS 1. DRC-95·14 Emesto Underwood 875 Canarios Coun 18.745 Li~ht Industrial Buildin~ Staff Presentation Associate Planner Hernandez presented the project, which consists of the construction of a two-story light industrial building and associated site improvements within the Rancho del Rey Business Center. He reviewed the building architecture, noting that staff recommeDded that the color scheme be revised to modify the high contrast in colors utilized. Staff recommeDded approval of the project subject to the conditions listed in the staff repon. Project Architect Roy Johnson indicated COllCU1Tence with staff recommendations. rnmminee Discussion Member Rodriguez asked if the design guidelines require architec1Ural -""..........=1 at the entry; Mr. Herru"vt..z respoDded that this area of Jla""bo del Rey was IUbject to Juide1ines that differ from those of the Commercial Center. Chair Spethman asked if the &lni." would be reflective; Mr. Johnson respoDded that it would be tinted gray, but would DOt be reflective. Member Rodriguez stated that the blue color of tile ~,Jildi." Ihould be toDecI down to almost a gray color. Member DlllV'JlnCOD indicated that of tile colon pmrDted on tile materials board, he preferred the green-blue of tile tile umple. In respøase to IUUestions by tile owner, member Rodriguez stated that if white was to be used for tile buüdin¡ color, tile windows, reveals, and feuooabation should be colored, for example Uti1i7i." tile tile color, with the reveals IOIDCWhat muted. Members agreed that the bright blue color depicted on the umple board Ihould be avoided. Mr. Hernandez su¡gested that specific colors could be brought back to the committee if desired. Members agreed that this was a good idea, with member 1)11IV'Jlncnn addin¡ that it would be helpful to bring back the glass sample as well. -~ gr ~;¿i . DPJr T ' DESIGN REVIEW COMI\U llEE -2 ,. ~ DECEMBER 19. 1994 -' MSUC (Spethm~nlRodriguez) (5-0) to approve DRC-95-14 subject to the conditions stated in the staff report, with the following modifications: modify condition "c" to add "Color sample board, to include a glazing sample, shall be brought back to the committee for final approval prior to the issuance of building permits." Add condition "d" - "Sign permits to be reviewed at staff level." D. STAFF COMMENTS Mr. Hernandez advised the committee that the applicant for the previously approved Chevron project within the Rancho del Rey Commerçial Center disagreed with staff's interpretation of a condition of approval (condition "f") for DRÇ-94-21. As a result, clarification was Deeded regarding the condition relating to architectural uiatment required at the entry of the food man. This was not formal action, but rather concurrence with either the applicant's interpretation or staff's of the pertinent condition. Mr. Don Nelson of Chevron indicated that changes had been made to the subject elevation, and that Chevron had attempted to fulfill all conditions of approval. He reviewed the elevation submitted for building pennits and stated that it met the requirement of providing changes in plane. Mr. Hernandez read the relevant condition, stating that staff was looking for a vertical, as well as . horizontal, change in plane. Members discussed the condition, as well as the plan presented for meeting the condition. Chair Spethman read from the minutes of the meeting at which the project was approved, noting that it was stated that venical articulation was required. He added that the front of the food man was always an item of concern during the design review process, and stated that he stood on the condition as it was approved. The ~aini"i members agreed; member Kelly stated that there were any number of low-cost changes possible, adding that the relief is Deeded. Mr. Hernandez made suggestions as to modifications that could produce the desired effect. Mr. Nelson inquired as to the process for appealing the decision, and expressed appreciation to both staff and the committee for providing consideration of this issue on such short notice. E. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:20 p,m. .' . Patty Nevins, Recorder .. ~ g-- ~ ~5 , , MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMI1TEE Mondav. December 19. 1994 Conference Rooms 2 and 3 4:30 p.m. A. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Spethman, Vice Chair Rodriguez, Members Way and Duncanson (Member Kelly anived at 4:35) STAFF PRESENT: Associate Planner Luis Hernandez B. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Spethman made an opening statement explaining the design review process and the committee's responsibilities. He asked that all speakers sign in and identify themselves verbally for the tape when speaking. C. PRESENT A TION OF PROJECTS 1. DRC-95-14 Emesto Underwood 875 Canarios Court 18.745 p~ht Industrial Buildin~ Staff Presentation Associate Planner Hernandez presented the project, which consists of the construction of a two-story light industrial building and associated site improvements within the Rancho del Rey Business Center. He reviewed the building architecture, noting that staff recommended that the color scheme be revised to modify the high contrast in colors utilized. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Project Architect Roy Johnson indicated concurrence with staff recommendations. Cnmmittee Discussion Member Rodriguez asked if the design guidelines require architectural ~""~ at the entry; Mr. Hernandez responded that this area of Rancho del Rey was subject to guidelines that differ from those of the Commercial Center. Chair Spethman asked if the glazing would be reflective; Mr. Johnson responded that it would be tinted gray, but would not be refl~tive. Member Rodriguez stated that the blue color of the building should be toned down to lImost a gray color. Member D\'¡>rJln'on indicated that of the colors presented on the materials board, he preferred the green-blue of the tile sample. In response to suggestions by the owner, member Rodriguez stated that if white was to be used for the building color, the windows, reveals, and fenestration should be colored, for example utilizing the tile color, with the reveals somewhat muted. Members agreed that the bright blue color depicted on the sample board should be avoided. Mr. Hernandez suggested that specific colors could be brought back to the committ.... if desired. Members agreed that this was a good idea, with member D"IV"Jlqson lId"ing that it would be helpful to bring back the glass sample as well. '6~Ä~ ~ "___"."._._._..,.___...__m. _U_"__.__.__·___""'~___ ¡ , '. . DESIGN REVIEW COMl\1UIEE -2- DECEMBER 19. 1994 MSUC (SpethmanlRodriguez) (5-0) to approve DRC-95-14 subject to the conditions stated in the staff report, with the following modifications: modify condition "c" to add "Color sample board, to include a glazing sample, shall be brought back to the committee for fmal approval prior to the issuance of building permits." Add condition "d" - "Sign permits to be reviewed at staff level." D. STAFF COMMENTS Mr. Hernandez advised the committee that the applicant for the previously approved Chevron project within the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center disagreed with staff's interpretation of a condition of approval (condition "f") for DRC-94-21. As a result, clarification was needed regarding the condition relating to architectural treatment required at the entry of the food mart. This was not fonnal action, but rather concurrence with either the applicant's interpretation or staff's of the pertinent condition. Mr. Don Nelson of Chevron indicated that changes had been made to the subject elevation, and that Chevron had attempted to fulfill all conditions of approval. He reviewed the elevation submitted for building permits and stated that it met the requirement of providing changes in plane. Mr. Hernandez read the relevant condition, stating that staff was looking for a vertical, as well as horizontal, change in plane. Members discussed the condition, as well as the plan presented for meeting the condition. Chair Spethman read from the minutes of the meeting at which the project was approved, noting that it was stated that vertical articulation was required. He added that the front of the food mart was always an item of concern during the design review process, and stated that he stood on the condition as it was approved. The remaining members agreed; member Kelly stated that there were any number of low-cost changes possible, adding that the relief is Deeded. Mr. Hernandez made suggestions as to modifications that could produce the desired effect. Mr. Nelson inquired as to the process for appealing the decision, and expressed appreciation to both staff and the committee for providing consideration of this issue on such short notice. E. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:20 p.m. ~. . vù0 Patty " Recorder / 8'- d- 7 -----_._--~------------~-_.._------ ------------- -- / , ..-. ATTACHMENT 5 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL ~ , ~ ,- ;Ø ¿;V~~?r , . . ~_.--... '-- - - : m11IY1d . nl\lJ1lJRJllv , '"IYd SSJHISnS . ~2: \ ~ . . .~ <. : ~pill!lJ:JJe", ... AlII 'iO OH~NYII r ¡ æ: ¡ - . ~:. T!"e OOSUIJO! ÁUJ ' n~o' i . =: != - I ; Ei Ii: :,~<)<) t ....* i' · J t ~ .... , ~ t . '~ t.,1 J ~ f! : iI : I I U~ 1;..... ;;"'1 \ Jt 11~ - . E ~ n "'Y .:.: .I ~. ¡~ . 11 ;; ¡~. ¡ ~ .... .. "I" ci .. · ~ ~¡¡iq :0 ~~~ II ~h st-lh ~ f¡: r. I t .¡!~! -,Ii· ¡~ -Hi I~¡g ~¡!! ~t 'i ; '~f" I~ ~ ..~..a i ~,.; ~ - , , J ¡ .¡ & ~ I~I m~u !~ : É!Ìi ..! ...."'..~-. -- ",,'Ii ~'. · · · · ~ r .' ~ ..... w ':". .. - w · . I : ~~ ... .. . ---::~''', .. - \ J ~I'~ '1 )rN'" . . . . . . ., . ~ I - J:zv- f5~~ c¡ /' - --- .--...----- ..~- - ......----.-.-.--------.-..--....-.--- . - )IllY" IUNllnø .. - ..t _ \ . - w~ . .AlII '"0 OHOHYII .;. ...: ~~ ~.. ;. :- , -- U.l.O, I . i :; i!" ¡¡ ; :: :¡7()(]oO ....·,-1 I \ ~ ,. &: . , ~ t r' \ ~i ... ~ . " ,-' i" . ~ \ ~ ~I ~ !. 1 ,..-.1 ¡ , . , t I, ~ ~I Iii I: * . ~ '1 , . I .. I i I \ "$ . , ~ s } I I, ~ .~ # I ~~ 1 I .. I . I ("...... .....~ I " - 7- 'i5/3d " .- , '- -_.-- _ .- -"'--'--" -- ------ - ------.-- ..- YIHII04n 'Y!SI^ nOM:! ffillQ alUN S1INIsnØ Ioall'. .:>H:!NYII I \: B~.1.01 <t- I . ,:p '(jj) .' , I . ': i ! ¡ . I . '. I. ~ :! i : i . 1: i , .:1 : t II . I . ; .~ ;¡ ii . ~ t Ii Ii I' nil ..: .. , - - I . -,- Î '1 · J III ,III' , IIUII.hl iii " li"I!!II¡ I! I " , , · 1111111111.111 · · 4 · : ., Ii8 cß<,~1C!) ß I · · l . . . . : I . : . . ~ -~ - 5[/3/ --_._._- -- , ~ '''r- :-,; >C.-. . -'. )III"" 'UHrlns l ~z - ,: ,{-".,~-pal!IJ:J.le, ,.:. ,~ ...all ,aa OH;)N"II r . "i! \ . - - ',~~~, ummlJDJ ADJ'~ . 1&.&0' i _ i - ª3 ¡ : : . .o. f I If. U , . if 'f I )' &il ,!" . t..,_. .. ..:' '." ..."..... , ~, - . "/""..... : .~. .1 . ~I , '. .... ,... ...... . ....... . ., I ~·rmI .. h' ... ! "..,.... ~ .., ~ ; .... ~ . ,,'. ~ ...... ~ . i" !~ .. ill a'l £ , , . ¡¡¡ :T ~ , 11 .~ .. - I y- r¡;-3c2. , '. --- ".. - .' .--.. .----- ---_..------_._~----~~----_._,- - ---------- ----------- ATTACHMENT 6 FOURTH ADDENDUM TO FSEIR-87-01 ~ y-3) - -- -~-_._-~.""..._-'--_._._--_._-'--.-..--- I ; , , i FOURTH ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SFEIR 87-01 Rancho Del Rey Spa I PROJECT NAME: Underwood Building RDR Business Park PROJECT LOCATION: Southeast comer of Plaza Amena and Canario Court I. INTRODUCTION The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report, if: J. None of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparaûon of a subsequent EIR have occurred; 2. Only minor technical changes or addiûons are necessary to make the EIR under consideraûon adequate under CEQA; and '. 3. The changes to the EIR made by the addendum do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. FEIR-87-01 Rancho Del Rev (SPA) I Plan analyzed the environmental impact of the first Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan within the EI Rancho del Rey Specific Plan area, for a number of other discretionary acûons. The project involved the ~cûon , of 982 single-family units, 1219 mulû-family units, an employment park (84.5 acres), community facilities, neighborhood and community parks, a school site, open space and a circulation system on 808.6 acres bounded on thenonh and east by Otay Lakes Road and East "H" Street to the south. Subsequent to the completion 'of that document three Iddenda \Pm'C prepared. The first 8ddendum, An Addendum to EIR-87-Ol. EVllluaûon of lÞe Adeem."" of (þe ~nvironmental Imnact Renort for the Revised Rancho Del Rev Sectionalllanninl! Area !SPA) Plan. October 1987 analyzed c:haD¡es to land use on two of the on-site parcels of Rancho Del Rey SPA I : the proposed ICboolsite on the project was reJocat"'" to an cea previously desil'''ltr~ u residential DC! the residential units \Pm'C reJO('.,."'" to the , IChoollite. The addendum· concluded that: no IiJDificant environmental effects would result from the modified project, DO DeW mitiption meuures \Pm'C DHW, DC! that the facility and IerVÍce Deeds lenerated by the ... upoaed project are ';mil... to those projected for the ori¡inal project. Second Addendum to FEIR-87.o1 Rancho del Rev Sna I, E!QDlovment Develomnent Denartment analyzed the impact of . 22,865 IqUBre' foot ain¡le-1tDry tilt-up buildin¡ -~~:: 25/31 I, I . , proposed for lease to the State of California Employment Development Department in . the eastern secûon of Rancho ~I Rey SPA J Business Park, DOrth orH Street between Del Rey Blvd. to the west and :Paseo Ranchero to the east. The Second Addendum found that there were no significant impacts. Third Addendum to FEJR-87-01 Rancho del Rev SDa J, SUDland Communities analyzed the impact the construction of 200 two-story detached, residential condominium units on 16.87 acres, Lot 19, locatedDorth of East wH" Street, east of Del Rey Blvd., and south of RDR Parkway in Rancho Del Rey Spa J. To allow for the development of 200 units on Lot J9, a Tentative ~ubdivision Map approval and SPA amendment are ~uired. The Third Addendum found that there were DO significant impacts. This addendum, the fourth, analyzes a proposal to develop a 1.03 acre lot, Jocated at the southeast comer of the intersection of Plaza Amena and Canarios Court, with a two- story, 18,745 sq. ft building, of which one story would primarily be used for an òrthodontic laboratory and manufacture of orthodontic devices and the other story would be leased. To allow for the proposed development, a text amendment change to the PC regulations, Chapter IXA would be required, and the land use would be subject to a Conditional Use Pennit. JS-95-10 has been prepared to provide addiûonal infonnation and analysis concerning potenûal impacts to of the proposed land use. This analysis, has determined that the basic conclusions of the Environmental Impact Report have not changed. The applicant has incorporated measures into the project to ensure , that impacts of this modification, remain at a level below significance. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared the Fourth Addendum to EIR 87-01 Rancho Del Rey Spa J. D. . PROJECT DESCRIPTION The location of the proposed project is south of Plaza Amena, east of Canario Court and north of East "H" Street. The proposed project is a text amendment to the adopted Rancho Del Rey SPA J PC Re~aûons, Chapter IX-A; Employment Park Districts. The purpose of the text amen~t is to allow. dental laboratory, a permitted use, to also have an accessory use, a d= orthodonûc practice (dental office), subject to the approval of. condiûona] use '1. The SPA text currently does DOt allow dental offices in the Light Jndustrial PC mne. The amendment would allow tile dental office as an lC('essory use. . . The proposed ItrUcture is . two-story buildiD¡, 18,745 Iq, ft., in whi~ the 0WDer will occupy ODe Ðoor which would primarily be . w1bodODtic Iabcntory 'aDd manufacture of orthocIODtic devices. The otber floors will be 1eue4. The applicant alJo ..o~,¡es to operate an onbodontic practice (dental office) as 11II accrllOry u.ewithiD the primary orthodontic lab use, The.. for the ortbodODtic practice will be _~-I..·-ly 2,400 IqWlre feet. The dental office would occupy less 1ban I'" of the total bufldiD¡ area and less than 35% of the total .p.ce occupied by related facilities. , The DmDber of on-site parkin¡ spaces to be provided Ire 66 aDd the ."'...... DUmber of employees for the dental office is 3. The Nfi"'-ted DmDber of c:ustomen per day Ire .:-.- :,- ~r- %-35' "2 I I . \ 15-18. The estimated number of deliveries is less than 5 per day. The hours of . operation will be 8;30 am to 7:30 pm (M-F). Discretionary approvals for the project include a SPA text Amendment, Conditional Use Pennit, and Design Review. . UI. 'ROmCl' SE1TING The project site is 1.03 acre located at the southeast comer of the intersection of Plaza Amena and Canarios Court. The site is zoned PC and is designated as Limited Industrial. The site is located within the Rancho Del Rey Business Park in the Planned Community of Rancho Del Rey. The site is S\UTounded in all directions from uses that are in the Planned Community and that are also all designated as Limited Industrial in the General Plan. The average ¡rade slope of the site is 1 %. IV. IDEl''TIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECI'S , In accordance with CEQA Regulaûons and City of Chula Vista standards the following areas of concern are addressed in this Addendum: PUBLIC SERVICE IMP ACI'S SQili A Soils Report as recommended in Secûon 5.3 "Foundaûon and Slab Recommendations" of the AS·2I'8dcd Geotechnical Renort dated January 12, 1989 is required. The soils report shall be submitted prior to the issuance of ¡rading and or construcûon permits. En The Fire Department Threshold wil1 be met as the nearest 2 miles away and the estimated reaction ÛD1e is 5 min¡ges. The required fire flow Type UIN·3,000 ¡pm. On on-site fire hydrant is required.Access must be provide around the perimeter of the building. One 2AI0BC rated fire extinguisher must be provide for every 3,000 1QU8I'C feet. Details must be provided to the fire depar1ment of medical ps UICS, OXYlen and acetylene or other fJAmmahles. A MatcØal Safety Data Sheet for any bazardous matcrialsfwaste anellor f1AmmA),\e liquids stored or .~AWd OD lite must be submitted. Proper disposal methods for medical waste must be foUowed. The plaas must ccmform to all requirements of the ChulaVista Fire Depar1mc:nt. nr.in.øe .. ExiJtinø OD-site clraina¡e facilities ccmsist of lUlÍace flow to a cIesiItinø bIsin nmofT at . the northwest comer of the pucel. From the desiltin¡ huin, nmofT is con~ via a private 12" PVC pipe· to ofT-site drainaae ficilities. Tbese facilities arc DOt ldequate I:lADDlllt.SUN -¡f¿r- <6/3 k h¡e3 .- ____.___~"______._.~__._~__~___.._____._..._._.".___...____.__n_________ · l ) to serve the project. On-site collection IUId conveyance facilities will be required to adequately convey site runoff to downstream drainage facilities. Off-site drainage facilities consist of a 30" RCP in Plaza AlDene which flows to the west. Also, a curb inlet near the southeast comer of Plaza AmenalCanarios Court which is connected to an 18" ACP in Clnarios Court. This 18" ACP connects downstream to the 30".RCP. These off-site facilities are adequate to serve the project. Water During the subdivision map approval process, water facility issues were addressed IUId facilities were constructed pursuant to the approval of the map to ensure water availability. An NPDES general permit for storm water discharges associated with construction . activity will be required by the State Water Resources Board, bt{'.lI~ the project is part of a larger common plan or development which will exceed five acres. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required. which will ensure that stormwater discharge impacts are at a level below significant. Schools The entire Rancho Del Rey project is within Mello-Roos Community Facilities District No.3. All properties are assessed a special tax to fully mitigate impacts to elementary and secondary school facilities. LAA'D USE Backl!round The Chula Vista General Plan Land Use Diagram (Fig. 1-2) designates the propeny in question as "Industrial Research and Limited Manufacturing." However. EI Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan, IS adopted and amended and I'eCOI7'i7M by State law.lUpel'Sedes the policies and diagrammatic designations of the General Plan for die Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan acts IS die GeIIeraI Plan for this area and is therefor compatible with the Geœral Plan. The SpecifIC Plan desi¡Dates die IUbject "1"'I'"'lty IS ·Employment Park Industrial." which will permit office and ~ .......-.cIaJ. ftIW'Ch and development and some light lIWIUfaccuriD¡ IaDd uses in low-rise bujtI;"i~: Çurrent ProDOSal -- The p·",."o Del Rey PIa""""" Cœmnmity (PC) Re¡uIaticms ~lOved with SPA 1 (Chapter IX-A-3). lists permitted IaDd uses. ~ uses aDd ... subject 10 approval of a Conditicmal Use Pczmjt. The PC Re¡u1ati~ ~..dt demallaballfOries. but do DOt list accessory uses that might be permitted with demallaboratories. The SPA text amendment to Section IX-A-' (Aœessory Uses) will allow for COIISisIeDcy with Section IX-A-' by Iistin¡ die deDtaI office u an ~ory use to die deDtallaboratory, IUbject' to approval of a Conditicmal Use PcnDit. The plopoted modificatiODS to die PC a:\"J)DIþ SUN ,~ ~/37 .... 4 .--..__._----~--_.._.._---_._-_._-~----- ~..- . . l ) 0, , Regulations are compatible with the permitted range of land uses contained in the Specific Plan (see above), and as stated previously, are consistent with the General Plan. 0 V. CONCLUSION . Impacts to public services and land use are found to be less than significant. Pursuant to section 15164 of the State CEQA GuideliDes and based upon the above discussion, I hereby find that the project revisions of the proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions and have not created any new environmental impacts. The proposed project was adequately analyzed in FEIR-B7-01 and the fourth addendum. VI. REFERENCES FEIR-B7-01 Rancho De] Rey SPA I Plan, First, Second and Third Addendum FEIR-92-02 Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center General Plan, City of Chula Vista Title 19. Chula Vista MUlÚcipal Code City of Chula VIsta Environmental Review Procedures . , '. .. .:~SUN ~'15-J? ...' ATTACHMENT 7 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT -~ 2"<3/ ~--_._-_._-,,_.._---~_.-._---,_.- , . . , I . 'I1œ L.. I{ OF an.n..A VJSTA DJSO.OSURE S"I lEMEPn' . You Ire. required to file I Stalemenl of Disclosure of amain ownel'lbip or flnanc:lal InteralS, paymenlS, or campa1ln CIOntrtbutions. on III mailers wbich will require discrctionary Iction on tbe pan of the City Council, 'lanninl Commis&ion, Ind III other omcial bodies. The lollowin¡ infol1llltion must be disclosed.: 1. Ust tile DImes of III persons havin¡ I fiDlncial interest in tile propeny wbich Is tbe subject of tbe Ippllcation or Ibe CIOntract, Co&-, owner, Ipplicant, CIOntrlctor, subQØntractor, material supplier. I Ernest E. tn:Ierwood . 2- IIlny person" Identified pursuant to (I) lbove Is I CIOrporalion or pannel'lbip,list the u_ of IIIIDdMduals 0WDIn1 more tban 1O'/D of the shares in tbe CIOrporalion or owninl Iny panDel'lbip IIIterat III the panDership. · 3- 11 Iny person" identified pursuanl to (I) lbove Is non-profit orpnlzation or I trust, Ust the umes of Iny person SClViDlas director of the non-pronl orpnlzation or as trustee or beneficiary or tMtor of Ibe tMt. ',' · 4. Haw you hid more than 5250 wonh of business transacted with Iny member of thc 01)' starr, Boards, OoatmissiollS. CommJllees,lnd Council within the put twelw months? Yes_ No~ 11,.. plase iDdicate perIOo(s): 5. PIase identiC)- each ind every person, IIIcludin¡lny IlenlS, employees, CIOlISultanlS. or Independent CIODtrICtOn wIIo you hawassilned to represent you before the Cily in ibis matter. . Gary P. Cinti · . 6. HaYe you IDCIJor your omœn or I¡COts, 10 the aørepte, CIODtrlbuted IIIOre lhao 11,000 to . o.,...t-ller·1o the _nut or preœdinl eJection period? Yes_ No".L II,.. IIItc wIIlcII CouDCII~IIer(S): · · · (Naœ: Aaada addIliDuI .... . . EMte: 9/28/94 I'IppUcut - BI.._toE. gr.4on-...c:<d · Print or type "!DC 01 CIODlrac:torl'lppliCUt " tIlmll"". 'Ñr~Jlmt....,...wnhip,jøittl_..LJ '~-."""''''''''''.rL' ~- ,....,.......-..............' '. .... MIl..,... -....". ciIy"~, ciIy ""","ipoIIiIy, .." .....,..M II' . ~.. ....,...... .. _.. J -........ ~ ?~ ¿¡Ô . \. I . . RICE CANYON WAC EP-1A -' i W! "'" '·<l , . . . ATTACHM-ENT A . . "LOCATOR Ordinance No. . C) , II Ie...., . "ORm 1" - 800' - I ó- '4 ( - --- - - . . . . , Proposed Amendment to Rancho del Rey SPA I Planned Community District Regulations Chapter IX-A: Employment Park Districts StrikeoutIRedine Version 9-28-94 ~t"!(e~!:'t · text proposed for deletion &iª.lig~ .. text proposed to be added - prepared for: Dr. Emesto E. Underwood 750 Otay Lakes Road . Cbula VISta, CA 91910 .' prepared by: 'Cinti Land Planning .. 3639 Midway Drive, Suite 292 . San Diego, CA 92110 ATTACHMENT B (619) 223·7408 Ordinance No. 6~'-t2- -- ._.._.---~--_._-'" -.-.__.._---~._----_.,_._~--,-_._~ I., I . CHAPTER IX: BUSINESS CENTER DISTRICTS CHAPTER IX-A: EMPLOYMENT PARK DISTRICTS IX-A.O Purpose In addition to the objectives outlines in Chapter VII, the Employment Park Districts are included to provide for a quality working environment and to achieve a harmonious mixture of uses which might otherwise be considered incompatible when located in close proximity. Activities are intended to promote employment opportunities in manufacturing, service, research and development, engineering, wholesale, and limited retail trade. In addition, the Employment Park Districts are structured to advance the following objectives: -- To reserve appropriately located areas for industrial use and protect these areas from intrusion by dwellings and other non-harmonious uses; -- To protect residential and commercial uses from noise, odor, dust, smoke, light intrusion, truck traffic and other objec- tionable influences and to prevent fire, explosion, radiation and other hazards incidental to certain industrial and automobile service/repair activities; -- To promote sufficient open space around industrial structures to protect them from hazard and to minimize the impact of industrial operations on nearby residential districts; -- To minimize traffic congestion and avoid overloading utilities by restricting construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the amount of land around them; and, -- To promote high standards of site planning, architecture and landscape design for light industrial and commercial develop- ments within the city of Chula Vista. A. Employment Park Industrial/Office District (EP-1A) This district is intended as an area for light industrial uses, large scale research and specialized manufacturing organizations, and administrative and professional offices which can meet high performance and development standards. .' B. Employment Park Industrial District (EP-1B) This district is intended as an area for modern industrial development that can meet high performance and development standards. øm'SJl' IX-A-l ':': ;...::::_..,:...:'.~ '. » 'o~ "-{ 3 - -----.---... ~._._---_.._~--~---- , i . '. XX-A. 1 PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES The following uses shall be permitted uses where the symbol lip" appears and shall be permitted uses subject to a Conditional Use Permit where the symbol "C" appears. Uses are not permitted where the symbol "N" appears. EP-1A - Industrial/Office District EP-IB - Industrial District LAND USE LAND USE DISTRICT EP-1A EP-1B A. Manufacturing 1. Manufacturing, compounding, assemb- ly or treatment of articles or mer- chandise from the following pre- viously prepared typical materials such as canVaS, cellophane, cloth, cork, felt, fiber, fur, glass, leather, paper (no milling), pre- cious or semi-precious stones or metals, plaster, plastics, shells, textiles, tobacco, wood, and yarns; novelty items (not including fire- works or other explosive type items) C P 2. Electrical and related parts; elec- trical appliances, motors and devices; radio, television, phonograph and computers; electronic precision instruments; medical and dental instruments; timing and measuring instruments; audio machinery; visual machinery; cosmetics, drugs, per- fumes, toiletries and soap (not including refining or rendering of fat or oils) P P mmZI#f IX-A-2 ':'-"--/ -'-". ,....., .<:...'..", ,., ð-'1'1 ____·,·__"'·'"··_·__________···__.w._._.~__.__.____~~ . . , LAND USE LAND USE DISTRICT EP-1A EP-1B 3. Furniture upholstering N p 4. Rubber and metal stamp manufac- turing p p 5. Laboratories, chemical N C 6. Laboratories; dental, electrical, optical, mechanical and medical P P 7. Laboratories; research, experimental, film, electronic testing and mechan- ical p p 8. Machine shop and sheet metal shop N P 9. Plastics and other synthetics manufacturing C C B. storage and Wholesale Trades 1. Mini-storage, public storage and storage warehouses N P 2. Moving and storage firms N P 3. Building materials and lumber storage yards and/or contractor's yards N C 4. Building equipment sales, rentals C C 5. Public and private building mater- ial sales yards, service yards, storage yards, and equipment rental N P 6. Minor auto repair N C 7. Trucking yards, terminals and dis- tributing operations N c l~tl~:!fDAJ IX-A-3 '(LIS -_.__.'".._-,--_._----_._~_.__._"-_._~-- ! , , LAND USE LAND USE DISTRICT EP-1A EP-1B C. service and Commercial 1. Animal hospital or veterinary clinic and/or office C N 2. Automobile and/or truck services N C 3. Blueprinting and photocopying p p 4. Cleaning and dyeing plant N C 5. Eating and drinking establishments: a. Restaurant, restaurant with cocktail lounge, coffee shop, and full delicatessen (may serve alcoholic beverages) N N b. Refreshment stands & snack bars within a building as accessory to permitted use P C - mYAtlD] IX-A-4 ....,. ,".. ..... '," ., -, . -. .. . . ... . .. ",,"- . ~ - '-I~ -~~ -"-~~-_. - - -_._._-_._-~------- ._-_._.._._---_._--_.__._--_.._--~---_..__. "- I - LAND USE LAND USE DISTRICT EP-1A EP-1B 8. Kennels N C 9. Medical and dental offices, and clinics, medical, optical and dental laboratories, not including the manufacture of pharmaceutical or other products for general sale or distribution P N o. Newspaper publishing, printing, and distribution, general printing and lithography C C 1l. Administrative and executive offices; professional offices for lawyers, engineers, architects; financial offices including banks, real estate and other general business offices P C 12. Any other research, light manufac- turing or office use which is deter- mined by the Planning Commission to be of the same general character as the above permitted uses p P 13. Exterminating services N N 14. Plant nurseries and the sale of related hardware items provided they are clearly incidental and secondary to the plant nursery. Plant nurseries shall be allowed only on the peripheral areas of the EP-1A zone, so as not to dis- rupt the continuity of the profes-, sional and administrative office land uses C N 15. Radio and television broadcasting, excluding towers C C 16. Retail commercial when in support of a permitted or conditional use C ,. P f117D1J!1}, IX-A-S '<s-<..{ " , " \, - lAND USE LAND USE DISTRICT EP-1A EP-1B 17. Retail distribution centers and manufacturer's outlets which require extensive floor areas for the stor- age and display of merchandise, and the high volume, warehouse-type sale of goods and uses which are related to and supportive of existing on-site retail distribution centers of manu- facturer's outlets. Conditional use permit applications for the estab- lishment of retail commercial uses, covered by the City council subse- quent to its receipt of recommenda- tions thereon from the Planning Com- mission N C 18. Sale of beer or alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises only where the sale is incidental to the sale of food and accessory to the permitted use P C D. Public and Semi-Public Uses 1- Day nurseries, day care schools and nursery schools C C 2. Educational institutions, public or private including vocational schools C C 3. Post offices and post office terminals P P 4. public utility pumping stations, equipment building and installation N C s. Recreation, private, semi-private, or commercial C C , [411'9114:" IX-A-6 . ...·j¡t,' ".",.,.J, ð-- 'i is __,___,_____..._,_____~.___"._ _____~_._._.__..___, _ ____.___~__.__m__ -....--.---- , ¡.AND USE LAND USE DISTRICT EP-1A EP-1B 6. Public and quasi-public uses appro- priate to the district, such as professional, business and technical schools of a public service type, but not including corporation yards, storage or repair yards, and warehouses C C 7. School and studio for arts and crafts; photography, music, dance and art galleries, in accordance with the provisions of section 19.58.220 CVMC C C E. Accessory Uses 1. Accessory structures and uses located on the same lot as permitted or conditional use p p 2. Accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, such as incidental storage facilities p p 3. Commercial parking lots and parking garages, in accordance with section 19.62.010 to 19.62.130 CVMC C C 4. Incidental services for employees on a site occupied by a permitted or conditional use, including day care, recreational facilities, showers and locker rooms p p 5. Office condominium p C II " - R ~ .~; ~l4)' IX-A-7 . . ... . .. . . . ,., - > ~'.: , '<s-y~ - - - --,_._~_._._-~-,.__..".- ----~----_._"- ...-..- _.---_.__..~-_._-,..._..__._._---_.__._----------_._- · \ ! LAND USE LAND USE DISTRICT EP-1A EP-1B 5. Roof mounted satellite dishes subject to the following standards or conditions:' p p a. The dish shall be screened using appropriate matching architectural materials or parapet walls; b. Dishes shall be of a neutral color, match the building, or as otherwise approved by the City; c. A building permit shall be required; d. No advertising material shall be allowed on the satellite dish antenna. Satellite dish antennae containing advertising material shall be considered signs. 6. Watchman's or caretaker's living quarters only when incidental to and on the same site as a permitted or conditional use p p 7. Wholesale business storage or ware- house for products of the types permitted to be manufactured in the district p p ... ~.mporary u... Temporary uses as prescribed in , 1. Chapter XI p P _1~17'.1) IX-A-B :",.- .::':::..:' .. .:;:--,. :' ~ 'ð - 'Sô .-._~~--_..--_._._-_.,-~--_..,---------------------- '-"-"-'~-'-'"'-""'-'-'-------"- CITY COUNCn. AGENDA STATEMENT _~9 Meeting Date ¿&:jI7~ ITEM TITLE: Ordinance ~ ~~nding Chapter 18.16 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code to Allow fÓr the Posting by Developers of Alternative Forms of Security. for Pu~lic or Private Improvements Requiring Completion \O~ Guaranties in Favor of the City and Making Minor Technical Correcti~t'\ ~. G ¡>.~O SUBMITI'ED BY: Director of Community Depment (". ?-0"O\~ Director of Public Works ''i.CO~O City Attorney~ ~ £:4Mß ';) . REVIEWED BY: City Managef . (4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No...x> BACKGROUND: The developers of the Channelside Shopping Center (which includes a 120,000 square foot Wal-Mart) are requesting that a Wal-Mart "corporate guaranty" be accepted as security for the public and private improvements that the City and the Redevelopment Agency are requiring for the Project. The existing City Municipal Code does not expressly contemplate . this form of security and will need to be amended in order to allow for the Wal-Mart guaranty and/or other similar forms of "alternative" security. Staff is recommending the necessary amendment to the Municipal Code in light of the cost savings and efficiency resulting for the project developer, .the tremendous credH-worthiness ofWal-Mart, and the benefits of the project to the City. Where other corporations Qf Wal-Mart's credit-worthiness are developing projects in the City, such an amendment may alsò provide development cost reductions and convenience. . In order to be fþ1ancially prudent, the proposed Ordinance amendment would permit alternative forms of public improvements securitý only where (1) the improvements being secured are valued at less than $5,000,000, (2) the security offered is 50 times more valuable than the improvements being secured, and (3) there are· adequate cost recovery and enforcement mechanisms to access such security in the event of a developer default. The proposed Ordinance amendment also includes various "clear) up" revisions which eliminate redundant sections and make minor technical corrections. A copy of the proposed Ordinance amendment is attached hereto. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council introduce the Ordinance amendment with a first reading, consider the Ordinance amendment with a second reading at the meeting of February 14, 1995, adopt the Ordinance after the second reading and, concurrently, waive the existing Ordinance requirements and approve t11e Wal-Mart Corporate guaranty as an acceptable form of public improvements security (consistent with the terms and cònditions of the just approved Ordinance amen4ment) in order that the developer may acquire and commence development of the project site prior to the formal effeCtive date of the approved Ordinance amendment. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Gatlin Development Company and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. have previously obtained City Council and Redevelopment approval of certain land use entitlements for the development of an approximately 200,000 square foot shopping center, including a 120,000 ¡Þr7~/ square foot Wal-Mart, to be located between Broadway and 4th Avenues at the northern boundary of the City, City/Agency approval of the project included conditions that require that the developer construct certain public and private improvements at and around the site. Existing . City ordinances require that developers constructing public improvements post security with the City assuring the completion of such improvements in the form of a surety bond, a letter of credit or a cash deposit. In order to . minimize the expense and inconvenience of this security requirement, Gatlin Development has proposed that it be allowed to secure completion of the . required pUblic and private improvements by having Wal-Mart post a "corporate guaranty" of completiòn pursuant to which Wal-Mart itself would act as the guarantor of completion. The City's existing iinprovement security ordinances do not contemplate this form of security. Thus, in order to allow for the posting of such security, existing ordinances must be amended. The proposed Ordinance amendment (attached hereto) would permit a developer constructing public and private improvements to submit "alternative" public improvements security (i.e., security other than a surety bond, cash or a letter of credit) only under the following circumstances: 1. The costs of completing the improvements to be secured for a project do not exceed $5 million. 2. The proposed security mechanism is backed by a guaranty or pledged assets valued at at least 50 times the cost of the improvement work being secured. 3. The proposed security mechanism includes adequate remedies which assure reasonable access to such security in the event the developer defaults and the City must proceed itself to complete the required improvements. 4. The City Attorney and the City Engineer approve the form of such security and . impose such additional terms and conditions as they deem appropriate. Such conditions shall include, at a minimum, (a) the right of the City to require that conventional replacement security be submitted for any uncompleted improvements at the time that a certificate of occupancy is issued for the project, and (b) developer's agreement to pay the City's attorneys fees and costs if the City must enforce its remedies under the alternative security arrangement. 5. . The City Council shall have the right to approve or disapprove, in its sole discretion, any proposed "alternative" security arrangement. The Wal-Mart corporate guaranty proposed by Gatlin Development and Wal-Mart in connection with the Channe1side Shopping Center would qualify under these rigorous standards for acceptable "alternative- security. theimprovements being secured are estimated to cost well below the $5 million cap.Wal-Mart has provided independently certified financial statements which demonstrate that its current net worthfar exceeds the 50 to 1 coverage ratio proposed in the Ordinance amendment. The form of the proposed Wal-Mart guaranty is substantially similar to the City's existing standard form of surety bond and will afford the City approximately the same remedies against Wal-Mart as it would against a conventional surety company, including the right to collect attorneys fees and costs. Finally, in order to reduce any risk that Wal-Mart might be disinclined to Mnor its guaranty once it has already opened for business at ~ ,7-':< - ------~--------_.- --.. · the site with respect to any required public improvements which remain uncompleted when Wal- Mart is open forbusiness, City staff is retaining the right to require that the Wal-Mart corporate guaranty be replaced with either cash, a third party surety bond or a letter of credit to the extent of such uncompleted public improvements. Pursuant to the conditions for approval of the Preçise Plan for the project, the City would also retain the right at such time to deny the issuance of any certificates of occupancy for the remainder of the project until all required public and private improvements were completed. Other jurisdictions in California, including ù>s Banos, Oceanside and Lake Elsinore, have accepted this form of security from Wal-Mart in lieu of the more conventional third party "surety bond". If the City Council adopts the proposed Ordinance amendment, under applicable law the Ordinance amendment will not formally go into effect until the 30th day after such adoption. This timing is problematic for the developer and may cause a delay in the development of the project. Too much of a delay may result in Wal-Mart's decision to postpone its development of the site until fall of 1996. In light of these circumstances, if the City Council is willing to approve the Ordinance amendment, staff is also recommending that City Council vote to waive the requirements of the pre-amendment Ordioance with respect to the Wal-Mart project in order to allow Wal-Mart immediately to proceed. with its proposed "corporate guaranty" security alternative. This would allow the Channelside Shopping Center developer to proceed immediately with the development of this time sensitive project and not wait for the 30 day effectiveness period which applies to the Ordinance amendment. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed Ordinance amendment is designed to reduce public improvement security obligation costs where substantial assets or a corporate guaranty of a substantial corporation are being offered as a substitute for conventional forms of improvement security. The kinds of security which would be accepted under the Ordinance amendment should not increase the costs to the City in pursuing such security. In light of the required terms and conditions for posting "alternative" forms of security under the Ordinance amendment, the Ordinance amendment becomes a low risk proposition. M:\bomo\altotDly\wal-ICÇ.113 ~ 7'-J -,._._._.__...~._.._'" - ----_..._-~- -.---..--,,-..--.-. - - - THIS PAGE BLANK · . . · · . ~ 9-// . - ~ . .- "., ORDINANCE NO. 02~ - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CI'l'Y OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 18.16 OF THE CHULA VIS~A MUNICIPAL CODE IN ORDER TO ALLOW r(\\O~ FOR THE POSTING BY DJitVELOPERS OF ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF D ¡..\fJ , SECURITY FOR PUBLIC OR PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS REQqIN¢ COMPLETION GUARANTIES IN FAVOR OF THE CITY AN~~NG MINOR TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS rO~~ ~ ';)'f,'v WHEREAS, the city Council has determined that accepting alternative forms of security for the completion of public and private improvements within the city, under certain limited circumstances, is in the best interest of the city by reducing development costs for private developers; and WHEREAS, the City desires to amend Chapter 18.16 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code in order (1) to provide for the acceptance of such security, (2) to establish the terms and conditions for such acceptance, and (3) to make other minor technical corrections thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, the city Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTION I: sections 18.1&.150 and 18.1&.220 or Chapter 18.1& of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: . Sec. 18.16.150 City council determination a~thoritY--Requirements to be met. A. In the event that 'all improvements required or cônditions imposed as conditions of approval under the provisions of this chapter or by law are not completed before the filing of the final map, the council shall enter into an agreement for the installation of improvements with the subdivider. In such case, when the agreement and bond, deposit~ eP inst~ment of credit or alternative form of securitv have been approved by the city attorney as to form and by the director of public works as to sufficiency, the council may consider the final map. All signatures except those of the city clerk, city attorney, title company, clerk of the board of supervisors and the county recorder shall be affixed to the title sheet at least eight days prior to council consideration of the final map. The· abstract of title certificate may be executed at any time prior to council consideration of the final map. The bond and agreement provided for in the preceding section shall be filed with the city clerk 1 . ,.C{-1!9-3 --- ..... .___._.__ .._..__u_...~_____. __.._._______~ within sixty days from date of approval and acceptance of the final map. If compliance is not so had, then the council approval shall be automatically void and a final map must be resubmitted to the city council. B. The council shall approve said map if it is determined to be in conformity with the requirements of this chapter and the conditions of approval of the tentative map. If it is not in conformity, it shall be disapproved, and the council shall advise the subdivider of its disapproval and the reason or reasons therefor. The city council shall take action as provided herein within ten days or at its next meeting following the submittal of the report by the director of public works unless the time for taking action shall have been extended by mutual consent of the city council and the subdivider. Sec. 18.16.220 Construction prerequisites--Security arrangements--Generally. The subdivider shall file surety to guarantee completion of improvements with the improvement agreement as follows: A. Bonds. All bonds shall be executed by a surety company a~thorized to transact a surety business in California, and shall be approved as to form by the city Attorney, and shall include: 1. A faithful performance bond in an amount deemed sufficient by the Director of Public Works to cover · up to fifty percent (50%) of the total cost of all required on-site and adjacent off-site improvements including twenty-five percent (25%) of grading and slope planting expenses as applicable. 2. A labor and material bond in a like amount. 3. A monumentation bond in an amount stipulated by the subdivider's engineer to cover the cost of placing lot corners and other related monuments. Said ~eßd eka11 1te dr&\ffl BREI 'tit.ilieeå 1ft esftfermit.y Wi'tR £ee~ieft 11592 sf 'the B'tisiReSS 8Rå PFsfessisßs Gada · of 'the St.at.e af Saliferøia.! ¡The Section of the Business and Professions Code referred to in this sentence has been repealed and replaced by new Sections of the Subdivision Map Act. The replacement language in Section 18. 16.220.B.3., below, restates the relevant portions of the new Map Act Sections relating to cash deposits only. 2 · ~ '7-? B. Cash Deposits. In lieu of the faithful performance and labor and material bonds, the subdivider may submit cash deposits und.er the conditions hereinafter described. Total cash deposit surety shall contain: 1. A faithful performance cash deposit in an amount deemed sufficient by the Director. of Public Works to cover fifty percent (50%) of the total cost of all required on-site and adjacent off-site improvements includin9 twenty-five percent (25%) of 9rading and ,slope plantin9 expenses as applicable. 2. A labor and material éeftè cash deÐosit in a like amount. 3. A monumentation èeftè cash deÐosit in an amount stipulated ~y the subdivider's en9ineer to cover the cost of,placin9 lot corners and other related monuments. UÐon aÐÐroval bv the citv Enaineer of the required monumentsettina work. and UÐon subdivi4er'li! reauest. such cash deÐosit mav be released as Ðavment d~rectlv to the enaineer or survevor Ðe~formina such work. Said ~eßd sftall ~e åravlfl aRå 1i~.iliBed 1ft eeßfermi'ËY t.·i~B See'ËisR 11592 af 'he BuaiRess a~à PrefessisRs Gada sf ~he &~a'Êe . af GaliferPlia. Disbursements from cash deposits shall be made in accordance with separate agreement between the subdivider and the city. A ~eeJt1teepil'uJ fee ef efte pereeft'E (1\) ef ~Bè ~e~al ameaß~ àe,esi~~à ~ith ~he eity fer eaeà sash depesi~ ~eftd The Reauired BookkeeÐina Fee(s) 2 shall be submitted with eaph such bond. Disbursements from a cash deposit filed with an approved escrow agency shall be made in accordance with separate agreement between the subdivider and the city. Disbursements from a cash deposit in any instance shall not be permitted unless and until authorized. in writing by both the subdivider and the Director of ~ublic Works. C. Instruments of Credit. In lieu of the faithful performance and labor and material bonds or cash deposits, the sUb1ivider may submit instruments of credit under the conditions hereinafter described. Such instruments of C¡redit shall be issued by a financial institution subjElct to regulation by the state or federal government in a form and content as approved by the City Attorney, and shall pledge that the funds necessary to 2. This change incorporates a change made in 1992 to other Sections of the Chapter which was inadvertently not changed here. 3 ~9-7 __"_._n___..M....._.___._.__. _.____ meet the performance are on deposit and guaranteed for payment and agree that the funds designated by the instrument shall become trust funds for the purposes set forth in the instrument. An instrument of credit shall be accompanied by a current statement of assets and a resolution of the Board of birectors of the responsible organization authorizing the issuance and the amount of the letter. An instrument of credit shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth the date upon which the responsible organization was established. Instruments of credit shall provide surety as follows: 1. A faithful performance Bask depBsi~ instrument of credit in an amount deemed sufficient by the Director of Public Works to cover fifty percent (50'> of the total cost of all required on-site and adjacent off-site improvements including twenty- five percent (25'> of grading and slope planting expenses as applicable. 2. A labor and material èeftà instrument of credit in a like amount. 3. A monumentation èeftà instrument of credit in an amount stipulated by the subdivider's engineer to cover the cost. of placing lot corners and other related monuments. said BBftdBkall Be dFaVft aftd ~~ilieeàiR eeRfeFmi~y Wi~R See~ieR 11592 af ~he BasiRess 'BRd PrefessisRB gada af ~he £~a~e af ealifeE'ftia. ~ Oirher. Sub;ect to irhe Drior aDDroval of citv Council. in its sole discretion. in lieu of a suretv bond. cash deDosit or instrument of credit. alternative forms of securitv mav be acceDtable Drovided that: (1\ in the determination of the citv Enaineer. the costs of comDletina the imDrovements beina secured for a Dro;ect do not exceed $5.000.000: (2\ in the determination of the Finance Direct9r. the DroDosed se9uritv is backed bv a auarantv and/or Dledaed assets with a net value eaual to at least 50 times the estimated cost of the imDrovements beina secured: and (3\ in the determination of the citv Attornev. there exists adeauate remedies to access such securitv in the event that the Dartv obliaated to . construct such imDrovements defaults on such obliaation. The form of suchsecuritv and the terms and conditions UDon wh~ch such security mav be acceDted are subiect to the aDproval of the citv Attornev and the citv Enaineer. Such conditions shall include. at a minimum (a\ the riaht of the citv to reauire that conventional reDlacement securitv be submitted for anv uncomDleted secured imDrovements at the time a certificate of OCCUDancv is 4 ß4 <J-Y - ~:~U~~ef~rt~~: ~~tl~~;~sat~e~b~n~e~~;~~e~~st~~r~!~~n;u;~ enforce its remEldies under the alternative securitv arranaement. e~. Endorsement of Certificates. The City Clerk and city Attorney shall nOt endorse or sign their respective certificates cont~ined on the final map unless and until improvement secu~ity as hereinabove specified has been posted. . B,f. Applicability to Parcel Maps. The èeftEl imcrovement securitv requirements stipulated above are applicable to any parcel map for which the installation of any public improvements or grading is a condition of approval. SECTro.orr: Sections 18.1'.230, 18.1'.240 and 18.1'.250 of Chapter 18.1' of the Chula ~ista Municipal Code are hereby deleted in their entirety:3 ' Se.. 18.11.238 G.þ8~~~.~i.R p~.~..ui.i~.8 s8eu~i'y aæ~aB'''.Bt. BeBls. 1:.11 )gaRBs stial1' :he 8:Jlssa'Eed 1:ty a B\lret.y eSlftpaRY a~eFiBeà ~e ~ra8Bae~ a saretoy 19asiRess 1ft Salifernia, aRd sRall he ap,re7ed as ~e ferm by tae ei~y atterRey, BAå saall iBelade. A. A fai~hf1:il ,erfsraaRee )gaRB 1ft 8ft a.BaRt deemed Buffieie:A1:l :by 'the !direeter ef¡n¡)91ie ve~[s te eeveF 11' 'Ê8 fifty pereent af taB tetel sestet all re~ired 9ft site BRd adjaeeR'E eft site impre~emeRts iRsludiR! ~~eRty fi78 pereeR~ af gradiR! aREI aleps plaRtiR! eJ*eRses as Bl'l'lieasle 1 1\. A la}ssy apul ma'terlal BBBd ift a liJte ame1::l:1\~1 g. A .ePNme8~a'EieR ),eRB 1ft 8ft amB1:ift'E st.ipulat.ed BY 'Eke B1:i¡'di~ider's 8ft!ifteer 'Ee ee7er 'EBe eeet. ef ,lae!,,! let. eeE'"e~s aRd ether: re1at.'f!.d meftWtieRt.s. Said seRd BBa11 lte drawø aRd 1::I:ti1iesd iR esftfermit.y ~it.k £eet.iel\ 11592 sf t.BB BaaiR8ss aft. PrBfessiefts Gade 8f 'EBe Bt.a~e sf Qa1iferRia. Se.. 18.11.218 ø.þ.~~..~i.. '~.~.'Ui8i~.8 s.eu~i~y .æ...'....,. Ða.~ ..p..i~.. , ~These delet.isRs elimi~at.e reåøftdaftt Seet.ieRB sf tRie Ghapter already 8e~ fer~h iR See~ieR l8.lg.~~9. 5 ~~~1 .._-"-----------. .---.......-..---..- 1ft lieQ ef ~Be fai~hfY1 ,erfermaøee aßå 1aher aød ma~erial beRds, ~he sQhdi7ider .ay s~~.i~ sash d&pesi~s Yftå!r t,h,e eeøEii~ieRe BeFeiøaf~er dessE'ièad. Te'ts.a1 saah depesJ..'t aure~y shall eeø~aiftl A. ~ fai~fQl peE'fermaøee 8ask depesi~ 1Raft ameQR'ts. deemed B\iffisieRt. Ja~-1iBe àiree~er EJfp\iBlie wer]ts 'ts.8 se-Jar fif~j' ,eFeeR~ af ~he te~al east af all re~ired eft Bi~e ~ød adjaee~ aff si~e imprevemeRts iRe1yšiøg ~weH'ts.y f1~e pereeR~ af ,raEiiø, aftd slepe ,la8'ts.1ft' expeøBea as 81'1'1ieasle. B. ~ laher aftd lIa'Ëeria1 sash d8,eait. 1ft a li]E8 ameQR't_ G. A maBUmeø'ts.a'ts.lsft aBah depas1~ ift aft ameQ~ 8'Ëipa1~teš hy 'the eøgiøeer af werlt, t.e ee·.~er '6fte eest. af p1a81ftl) let. earøera aDd etfler re!at.eà meæøaeft'Es. The agreemeft~ re1a.t.i·.~e 'Ee a sasft depesi~ fer _.eJWmeft'ts.a'ËieR pYrpe~es ahal1 Be d:ra-..:H BPld at.i1ieed ift eeRfer.i tly "it.h £ee't1ePl 11592 af tRe Basiøeas aøå Prefessieøs Seàe. Ðias\irsemeøts fram sash depeaitseka1l, he made iø aeeeråaPlee WiEft separat.e agreemeBt. se-areeR t-ke s\ihdi'\-ider aød 'tae eit.y. The ReEf\iiFed Bee1[JteepiRg Fee(s) BBa!l 1ge B\iM\it'Êed -..:i'EBeaSa suek heRd. DiBS'tlreemeR'ES frem a saBB Bepesi~ filed ~i'Eft aRappreved eeeraw ageøey eaa11 1ge Bade 1ø aeeeFåaøee ~i~k eepara'Ee a,reemeft~ 1ge~weeR 'ERe easEl! ·..-ideE' aRd'Efte 9i 'EY _ . ÐiBB\:iree1l\eft'EB fre. a sask depeei't ,i" aRY iRst.aRee eBa!l "at. Be permit'EsEl ~"less aDd UR'Eil a~heriBed iø ~i'EiR' 19y set-a ~e sy)gEl1vider &ftå toke Biree~er af '11s1i9 werJEs. · Sa.. 18.11.258 G.B.~~u._i.. .2.~...i.i~.. s..uri~y a~2aB'''.B~. ZB._2".B~. af .2..i~ IR 1iea af 'ERe fai~fal ,erfermBøee aRå laser aøå aa'Êerial baRds aE' aBaft depesi'Es, .'Ehe saJ9divider may s\ilami'Ë ißs~rømeø'Ea af 9Fedi~ aøisE' ~e eeftdi'ËiaRs fteFeiøafter deseribe~. £QeR !Rs~Føme~s sf ared!' eaall be iBB\ieå hy a fiR8fteiat iBst.it.at.ieø ,sY19jee4s '8 ref'ilatieB lay the eta'-. 81' federal ,e7eE'nmeft'Ê 1ft a fe~m 8ftd eeft'EeR'E as appr8~eà BY 'ERe ei~y a'E'Eerøey, aRd ekall pled,e ~a'E ~e f\iRds øeeessar! !~ meet. ~e.peFfermaøêe .are eB depeBi~ BRB taa~aftt.eed feF ,aymeR'E 8ftd 8'E'e~ ~at tke faBBe de~1gBa~eà J9y ~e iøstrameøt BRall · sesame tr\is~ fYBds fer 'Eae '\ir,eses Bet ferth 1ø ~e iftstrameRt.. An iftB'tE'~eft'E af eredit_shall las aeea~aßied by a eUrreR'E st.atemeR'Eef assetsaRd a resela~ieø sf ~ae Beard ef diree4ssFs ef ~fle respsBsi191e ergaRieat.i.aB aYt.fteyiaiøg ~ae ies\iaøee aRd .~he ame"1Rt. ef ,he 1et.ter _ hft iRst.r\HReø'ts. ef eredi~ Bka1! ~e aeeempaBied hy a st.at.emeøt. se~'Eiø, fer~B ~ke 6 · ~ c;-/t? àa~e apeft whiek ~ke reepsRsiè1e eF,aftiBa~ieR vas es~as1iBkeB. IRs~rameR~S e£ ereài~ eka11 pre~iàe èQre~y as fellewsl A. A fai~fifal ,erf~rmaRee s~rety in an &meant deemed s1iffieieft~ h~i t.he äireeter af pu.slie -';'¡8r)tB ta sa~-er fifty l'erseRt. af tke tetel eest. af: all eR 81_8 BREi adjaeent eff si~e imprsveme8ts, 188l1ld1R, tW8Bty fi~e perseR'È ef gradiø, aRd slape ,1aRtiB,eJ*eftses-as applieahle B. 1\. labaE' aREi mat.eria181:irBty iB a liJte a:mS\lftt. c. 1\. .aRameR~aÊieft saFet.y 1ft aft amS1iRt st.ipulated BY t.he eRg-1Reer af wer]t 15e sever taB seat sf ,1&811u) let. earRers aøå et.her relat.ed mSRameRte. ~~eh sar~ty shall 88 dra-Jft aR~ U:t.ilise,d 1)1\ esafermit.y vit.à s:eet.iea 11592 sf the Basiøess aRd PrefessieR8 gade. SECTION III: Section'18.1'.340 is hereÞy added to Chapter 18.1' of the Chu~a Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 18.1'.340 Improv~ment Security Reauired Bv Reason of Other than Subdivision of Land-- ADDlicaÞilitv of this ChaDter To the extent consistent with other aDDlicable Drovisions of this Code. ~nd all other aDDlicable laws or reaulations. the standards for Derf6rmancé. security obliaations. and other reauirements set forth in this ChaDter with resDect to subdivision imDrovéments shall also aDD Iv . under circumstances aDDroved bv the city Attornev and the City Enaineer. to any and all other work or imDrovements constructed within the City reauirina comDletion auaranties in favor of the city. SECTION IV: This ordinance shall take effect and Þe in full force and effect thirty (30) .says after its second readinq and adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development C:\or\1816 ~9-/1 ... -..'..---..--'....---..-...---..-...-.----.-..------- - - , - . / . . ~ /l~~.I/C¡~ - . .. ." CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item IP Meeting Date 2/14/95 ITEM TITLE: ß. RESOLUTION I '7k"~tePting and Agreeing with the California Coastal Commission's February 9, 1995 Action on the City of Chula Vista's Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 12 and accepting and agreeing with the California Coastal Commission's modifications to the Land Use Plan and Bayfront Specific Plan ¡IJ. ORDINANCE .2~.2 tmending Ordinance No. 2613 of the City of Chula Vista by incorporating modifications to the Land Use Plan and Bayfront Specific Plan as adopted by the California Coastal Commission on February 9, 1995 for the City of Chula Vista certified Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 12. SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director L~~, REVIEWED BY: City Manager~~ {~ {4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No XJ Council Referral No. NA BACKGROUND: On November 15, 1994, the City Council approved Amendment No. 12 to the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program (LCP) to reclassify a portion of the Inland Parcel (Subarea 4 of the LCP) from an Industrial land use designation to a Commercial land use designation. The land use change allows the construction of a "Wal-Mart" store and commercial complex on the site. Following the Council's action, the LCP amendment was forwarded to the Coastal Commission for approval. The Commission's staff accepted the LCP amendment for review and it was scheduled for a Commission public hearing on February 9, 1995. At the February 9, 1995 meeting, the Coastal Commission approved LCP Amendment No. 12 with modifications which are acceptable to City staff and the City's Coastal consultant. In accordance with the Coastal Act, the City now must formally accept the Commission's action and adopt the Commission's suggested modifications, and incorporate the modifications into the certified Chula Vista LCP. The following report describes the Coastal Commissions action and suggested modifications to LCP Amendment No.1 2. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Resolution accepting the California Coastal Commission's February 9, 1995 action on LCP Amendment No. 12 and adopting the suggested modifications to the Land Use Plan and Bayfront Specific Plan and introduce for first reading and approve the Ordinance incorporating said modifications into the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable /P"/ -----',...-.--.------......--.,.-.-.. -- --- --,-.,--.,-.,-,- ~------ Page 2, Item It? Meeting Date 2/14/95 DISCUSSION: The Coastal Commission's specific suggested modifications have been placed in ordinance form for adoption and are attached hereto. The following is a brief description of the modifications and their application to the amendment. Suaaested Modifications LCP Amendment No. 12 consists of a land use change on a 31.63 acre parcel of land located at the southeastern quadrant of State Route 54 and Broadway. The historic route of the Sweetwater River and associated wetland and riparian resources are located along the western portion of the site. This wetland is noted on the LCP as "Potential Environmentally Sensitive Areas". And, although the LCP amendment changes the land use designation from industrial to commercial the LCP requires that an environmental management plan be prepared for the Inland Parcel before any development takes place. The Commissions's suggested modifications outline the policies that will govern the Environmental management plan and the activities that can take place within the wetland area of the Inland Parcel to ensure the protection of environmentally sensitive resources in accordance with the California Coastal Act. (As you know, the Chula Vista Local Coastal Program consists of two main documents, the Land Use Plan and the Bayfront Specific Plan. The Land Use Plan contains the goals, objectives, and policies of the Program and the Bayfront Specific Plan functions as the implementation plan and contains the detailed development criteria. Text within the documents is repetitive at times to ensure consistency between the two.) The suggested modifications focus on activities that will be allowed within the wetland area located within the Inland Parcel and sets forth policies in the Land Use Plan that identifies permitted uses and provisions to protect the wetland and riparian resources. Those policy statements are then reiterated in development criteria language into the Environmental Management section of the Bayfront Specific Plan. The suggested modifications add the following objective and policy to the "Subarea Development Objectives and Policies"section of the Land Use Plan. The modification reads: Objective S6.A - The dikina. dredaina. or fillina of wetland areas shall be oermitted onlv where there is no feasible less environmentallv damaaina alternative. and where feasible mitiaation measures have been crovided to minimize adverse environmental effects. and shall be limited to the followina cermitted uses and activities. a. Nature studv. aauaculture. or other similar resources decendent activities. b. Wetland restoration croiects where the crimarv function is restoration of wetland habitat. c. Incidental cublic service croiects. d. Mineral extraction. includina sand for restorina beaches. excect in environmentallv sensitive areas. /t?.;¿ Page 3, Item If) Meeting Date 2/14/95 Policy 56.A.1 - A maximum of one Sweetwater River river crossina shall be cermitted to crovide access to the develocable cortions of the Inland Parcel. The crossina shall be desianed as a bridae to minimize adverse imcacts to the habitat value of the wetland corridor. All mitiaation reauired shall be located on-site and contiauous with the existina wetland carridor. Mitiaation for anv temcorarv disturbance or cermanent disclacement of identified resources shall be reauired at the followina ratios. For wetlands. 4: 1 reclacement for imcacted area and for ricarian resources. 3: 1 reclacement for imcacted area. Ocen scace creservation in ceroetuitv of sensitive resources area will also be reauired cursuant to an accrocriate mechanism. No other dikina. dredaina or fillina of wetlands or other wet environmentallv sensitive areas shall be cermitted without crior Coastal Commission accroval throuah the LCP amendment crocess. Buffer zones of 100 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified wetland areas and 50 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified ricarian areas. unless the acclicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width will crotect the identified resources. based on site- scecific information. Such information shall include. but is not limited to. the tvce and size of the develocment and/or crocosed mitiaation (such as clantina of veaetation or the construction of fencina) which will also achieve the curooses of the buffer. Develocment within the buffer zone shall be limited to construction of a cedestrian cathwav within the uccer half of the buffer with fencina or other imcrovements deemed necessarv to crotect sensitive habitat in the uccer half of the buffer. The buffer shall be measured landward of the delineated resource. The California Decartment of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service shall be consulted in such buffer determinations. Buffer zones shall be cermanentlv crotected as ocen scace throuah the use of deed restrictions or other accrocriate mechanisms. Passive recreational uses are restricted to the uccer half of the buffer zone. If the croiect involves substantial imcrovements or increased human imcacts. such as a subdivision. a wider buffer mav be reauired. The suggested modifications also amend Section "F" of "The Environmental Management Program" portion of the Bayfront Specific Plan as follows: Additional Diking, Dredging or Filling of Wetland Areas. Diking, dredging or filling of wetland areas consistent with the provisions of this environmental management plan shall be limited to the specific projects incorporated into this plan, and future croiects that mav be crocosed in areas containina wetlands within the Inland Parcel Subarea. for the creation of new or enhanced wetland areas, very minor incidental public facilities, restorative measures, and nature study. Mitigation for all disturbance of the wetland areas shall be provided at the ratio of 4: 1 of new wetland areas created to areas disturbed, and for ricarian resources. 3: 1 reclacement for imcacted area. Ocen scace creservation in ceroetuitv of sensitive resource areas will also be reauired cursuant to an accrocriate mechanism. No other diking, dredging or filling of wetlands or other wet environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be permitted without prior Coastal Commission approval through the Local Coastal Program amendment process. A maximum of one Sweetwater River river crossina shall be cermitted to crovide access to /p~.J _._._..m..,.,_,_".~_·_··'__··___·_~_____·__'__·'··_'__-,._._ "'--..----- . -- --- _..-- . ._... . ___.u______·_~.__·__·_·· Page 4, Item /0 Meeting Date 2/14/95 the develoDable Dortions of the Inland Parcel. The crossina shall be desianed as a bridae to minimize adverse imDacts to the habitat value of the wetland corridor. All mitiaation reauired shall be located on-site and contiauous with the existina wetland corridor. Buffer zones of 100 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified wetland areas and 50 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified riDarian areas. unless the aDolicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width will orotect the identified resources. based on site- sDecific information. Such information shall include. but is not limited to. the tVDe and size of the develoDment and/or DroDosed mitiaation (such as Dlantina of veaetation or the construction of fencina) which will also achieve the ourooses of the buffer. DeveloDment within the buffer zone shall be limited to construction of a Dedestrian Dathwav within the UDDer half of the buffer with fencina or other imorovements deemed necessarv to Drotect sensitive habitat in the UDDer half of the buffer. The buffer shall be measured landward of the delineated resource. The California DeDartment of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service shall be consulted in such buffer determinations. Buffer zones shall be Dermanentlv Drotected as ODen soace throuah the use of deed restrictions or other aDDroDriate mechanisms. Passive recreational uses are restricted to the UDDer half of the buffer zone. If the Droiect involves substantial imDrovements or increased human imDacts. such as a subdivision. a wider buffer mav be reauired. Acceptance of the Commission's action, adoption of the suggested modifications, and incorporation of the modifications into the certified LCP will complete the City's actions necessary to finalize LCP Amendment No. 12. The amendment as modified will allow the Wal-Mart's commercial complex as a land use and will provide the environmental guidelines for preservation of adjacent wetlands. Approval of said modifications is exempt from CEQA under Section 15307 of the CEQA guidelines. FISCAL IMPACT: The Wal-Mart project will provide an estimated $90,000 annually in increased property tax increment revenue to the Redevelopment Agency and is estimated to generate approximately $400,000 in annual sales tax revenue to the City's General Fund in the first full year of operation. That figure is estimated to increase in subsequent years. jl)~ i ----'^--~--_...__..__.._.__.__._- .. . ...._---- -----....--.--.....---..,- ORDINANCE ~¿.2¿ ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2613 OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA BY INCORPORATING MODIFICATIONS TO THE LAND USE PLAN AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN AS ADOPTED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 9,1995 FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 12. WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2613 on November 15, 1994 amending the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program and Bayfront Specific Plan in accordance with Amendment No. 12 reclassifying 31.63 acres of the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 from Industrial General to a Commercial thoroughfare land use district subject to Central Commercial with Precise Plan Modifying District pursuant to sections 19.36 and 19.56 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was submitted to the California Coastal Commission on November 17, 1994 and the California Coastal Commission staff, on December 2, 1994, accepted Amendment NO.1 2 as complete; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was presented to the California Coastal Commission at a public hearing on February 9, 1995 and the Commission approved Amendment No. 12 subject to suggested modifications; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered, accepted and agrees with the California Coastal Commission's February 9, 1995 action and suggested modifications. NOW. THEREFORE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION I. Consistencv with General Plan Findinas The City Council does hereby find that the LCP. as amended by Amendment 12 and modified by the Coastal Commission on February 9, 1995. is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan as amended. SECTION II. California Coastal Act Findinas The City does hereby find that the subject Amendment #12 complies with Chapter 3, Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies, of Public Resources Code, Division 20 in accordance with the following findings: The Inland Parcel is not located within the Chula Vista Bayfront. The Parcel is located approximately 1/2 mile (north east) traveling distance from the Bayfront's main. "E" Street entry. The land use designation of the Inland Parcel. therefore. will not directly affect Bayfront "coastal resource" planning. The Inland Parcel does not have access to coastal beaches, therefore, the /11/1-1 - --..-.... -----"--'.,--..-.....,...--.-...- , -- -.'------ ,,~--_.,.._._-_.-.._"". .. ----..-...--....-.. .. ---~----_.__._,..- ._~.,~-~~._-~---- change in land use destination will not affect such access. The Inland Parcel has no oceanfront land suitable for water-oriented recreational activities or coastal dependent aqua cultural uses. A portion of the Historic Sweetwater River is located along a portion of the western edge of the Inland Parcel. This is considered potentially sensitive habitat and will be enhanced and protected when development occurs on the Inland Parcel. The proposed Amendment #1 2 is a change in land use only and will not affect the site's sensitive habitat designation or the site's sensitive habitat. The Inland Parcel is visible from the north (State Route 54), however, there are no coastal views or vistas from or to the Inland Parcel. The land use change will include a Precise Plan Modifying District which will require the development of specific design and land development criteria to ensure the visual quality of the Inland Parcel. SECTION III. That the City of Chula Vista Ordinance No. 2613 is hereby amended by incorporating into the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan and Bayfront Specific Plan "suggested modifications" as adopted by the California Coastal commission on February 9, 1995 for the City of Chula Vista certified Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 12 and herein attached as Exhibit A, as though fully set forth herein. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the date which is the later of the 30th day after its adoption or immediately following the Coastal Commissions concurrence with the Commission's Executive Director's determination that the City of Chula Vista's acceptance and agreement with the Commission's February 9, 1995 action on LCP Amendment #12 and modifications to the Land Use Plan and Bayfront Specific Plan are legally adequate. Presented by: Approved as to form by: ~ ~ Chris Salomone Community Development Director I PRB/a:mord/channelsidedisk] /~/1.~ _.."...--,,,---~..._._--.-._,,-+----" . ._--_.__.._-~_.,--_.. .,..--...--...+ -- --"-_.__..__._----_.~..._-+.- EXHIBIT "A" Suggested Modifications to certified Chula Vista local Coastal Program as approved by California Coastal Commission on February 9,1995. (Note: language to be added is underscored) 1. The following policy shall be added to "Subarea Development Objectives and Policies" under D. Subarea 4 - Inland Parcel (page IV of the land Use Plan): Obiective S6.A - The dikina. dredaina. or fillina of wetland areas shall be oermitted onlv where there is no feasible less environmentallv damaaina alternative. and where feasible mitiaation measures have been provided to minimize adverse environmental effects. and shall be limited to the followina oermitted uses and activities. a. Nature studv. aauaculture. or other similar resources dependent activities. b. Wetland restoration proiects where the orimarv function is restoration of wetland habitat. c. Incidental public service proiects. d. Mineral extraction. includina sand for restorina beaches. exceot in environmentallv sensitive areas. Policv S6.A.1 - A maximum of one Sweetwater River river crossina shall be permitted to provide access to the developable portions of the Inland Parcel. The crossina shall be desianed as a bridae to minimize adverse impacts to the habitat value of the wetland corridor. All mitiaation reauired shall be located on-site and contiauous with the existina wetland corridor. Mitiaation for anv temporarv disturbance or permanent displacement of identified resources shall be reauired at the followina ratios. For wetlands. 4: 1 replacement for imoacted area and for riparian resources. 3: 1 reolacement for imoacted area. Ooen soace oreservation in perpetuitv of sensitive resources area will also be reauired pursuant to an appropriate mechanism. No other dikina. dredaina or fillina of wetlands or other wet environmentallv sensitive areas shall be oermitted without orior Coastal Commission approval throuah the lCP amendment orocess. Buffer zones of 100 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified wetland areas and 50 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified riparian areas. unless the aoolicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width will orotect the identified resources. based on site- specific information. Such information shall include. but is not limited to. the tvpe and size of the development and/or proposed mitiaation (such as plantina of veaetation or the construction of fencina) which will also achieve the purposes of the buffer. Development within the buffer zone shall be limited to construction of a pedestrian pathwav //)/9-3 -_.~-,..__._._--,---"- ---..-- -.----"- _._._-~--_.._. ._._._a." .._....._.,_ ..----..-.--.......-..... .._---,----~+---- within the uooer half of the buffer with fencina or other imorovements deemed necessarv to orotect sensitive habitat in the uooer half of the buffer. The buffer shall be measured landward of the delineated resource. The California Deoartment of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service shall be consulted in such buffer determinations. Buffer zones shall be oermanentlv orotected as ooen soace throuah the use of deed restrictions or other aoorooriate mechanisms. Passive recreational uses are restricted to the uooer half of the buffer zone. If the oroiect involves substantial imorovements or increased human imoacts. such as a subdivision. a wider buffer mav be reauired. 2. The following language shall be added to letter "F" of Section 19.81.060, Environmental Management Program on page 69 of the Bayfront Specific Plan: Additional Diking, Dredging or Filling of Wetland Areas. Diking, dredging or filling of wetland areas consistent with the provisions af this environmental management plan shall be limited to the specific projects incorporated into this plan, and future oroiects that mav be orooosed in areas containina wetlands within the Inland Parcel Subarea. for the creation of new or enhanced wetland areas, very minor incidental public facilities, restorative measures, and nature study. Mitigation for all disturbance of the wetland areas shall be provided at the ratio of 4: 1 of new wetland areas created to areas disturbed, and for rioarian resources. 3: 1 reolacement for imoacted area. Ooen soace oreservation in oeroetuitv of sensitive resource areas will also be reauired oursuant to an aoorooriate mechanism. No other diking, dredging or filling of wetlands or other wet environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be permitted without prior Coastal Commission approval through the Local Coastal Program amendment process. A maximum of one Sweetwater River river crossina shall be oermitted to orovide access to the develooable oortions of the Inland Parcel. The crossina shall be desianed as a bridae to minimize adverse imoacts to the habitat value of the wetland corridor. All mitiaation reauired shall be located on-site and contiauous with the existina wetland corridor. Buffer zones of 100 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified wetland areas and 50 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified rioarian areas. unless the aoolicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width will orotect the identified resources. based on site- soecific information. Such information shall include. but is not limited to. the tvoe and size of the develooment and/or orooosed mitiaation (such as olantina of veaetation or the construction of fencina) which will also achieve the ourooses of the buffer. Develooment within the buffer zone shall be limited to construction of a oedestrian oathwav within the uooer half of the buffer with fencina or other imorovements deemed necessarv to orotect sensitive habitat in the uooer half of the buffer. The buffer shall be measured landward of the delineated resource. The California Deoartment of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service shall be consulted in such buffer determinations. Buffer zones shall be oermanentlv orotected as ooen soace throuah the use of deed restrictions or other aoorooriate mechanisms. Passive recreational uses are restricted to the uooer half of the buffer zone. If the oroiect involves substantial imorovements or increased human imoacts. such as a subdivision. a wider buffer mav be reouired. a:exa/ I~/t -'I --.--.-...-......-.---.-..--......--- .--- .........-. ...- "_"H' ____. Item No. 10 - Replaces in part Ordinance 2626 in the Council Agenda Package ORDINANCE NO. 2626 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE BA YFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFICALLY SECTION 19.B6.003(F) OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT PROPOSED MODIFICATION THERETO AS ADOPTED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 9, 1995 FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 12. WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2613 on November 22, 1994 amending the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program and Bayfront Specific Plan in accordance with Amendment No. 12 reclassifying 31.63 acres of the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 from Industrial General to a Commercial thoroughfare land use district subject to Central Commercial with Precise Plan Modifying District pursuant to sections 19.36 and 19.56 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was submitted to the California Coastal Commission on November 17, 1994 and the California Coastal Commission staff, on December 2, 1994, accepted Amendment No. 12 as complete; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was presented to the California Coastal Commission at a public hearing on February 9, 1995 and the Commission approved Amendment No. 12 subject to suggested modifications; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered, accepted and agrees with the California Coastal Commission's February 9, 1995 action and suggested modifications; and WHEREAS, in order to fully adopt and implement the modifications proposed by the California Coastal Commission to the Bayfront Specific Plan, it is necessary to amend the Chula Vista Municipal Code which contains such Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION I. Consistencv with General Plan Findinas The City Council does hereby find that the LCP, as amended by Amendment 12 and modified by the Caastal Commission on February 9, 1995, is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan as amended. SECTION II. California Coastal Act Findinas The City does hereby find that the subject Amendment #12 complies with Chapter 3, Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies, of Public Resources Code, Division 20 in accordance with the following findings: /Ò/J-S' - ._---~-~-~--_.+_._------_. ..-.' .--.---......--.-- -.-------- ______._ '._.____.__..._______..____u__ The Inland Parcel is not located within the Chula Vista Bayfront. The Parcel is located approximately 1/2 mile (north east) traveling distance from the Bayfront's main, "E" Street entry. The land use designation of the Inland Parcel, therefore, will not directly affect Bayfront "coastal resource" planning. The Inland Parcel does not have access to coastal beaches, therefore, the change in land use destination will not affect such access. The Inland Parcel has no oceanfront land suitable for water-oriented recreational activities or coastal dependent aquacultural uses. A portion of the Historic Sweetwater River is located along a portion of the western edge of the Inland Parcel. This is considered potentially sensitive habitat and will be enhanced and protected when development occurs on the Inland Parcel. The proposed Amendment #12 is a change in land use only and will not affect the site's sensitive habitat designation or the site's sensitive habitat. The Inland Parcel is visible from the north (State Route 54), however, there are no coastal views or vistas from or to the Inland Parcel. The land use change will include a Precise Plan Modifying District which will require the development of specific design and land development criteria to ensure the visual quality of the Inland Parcel. SECTION III. That Section 19.86.003(F) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in full as follows: Additional Diking, Dredging or Filling of Wetland Areas. Diking, dredging or filling of wetland areas consistent with the provisions of this environmental management plan shall be limited to the specific projects incorporated into this plan, and future oroiects that mav be DrODosed in areas containina wetlands within the Inland Parcel Subarea, for the creation of new or enhanced wetland areas, very minor incidental public facilities, restorative measures, and nature . study. Mitigation for all disturbance of the wetland areas shall be provided at the ratio of 4: 1 of new wetland areas created to areas disturbed, and for riDarian resources. 3:1 reDlacement for imDacted area. ODen SDace Dreservation in DerDetuitv of sensitive resource areas will also be reauired Dursuant to an aDDroDriate mechanism. No other diking, dredging or filling of wetlands or other wet environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be permitted without prior Coastal Commission approval through the Local Coastal Program amendment process. A maximum of one Sweetwater River river crossina shall be Dermitted to Drovide access to the develoDable Dortions of the Inland Parcel. The crossina shall be desianed as a bridae to minimize adverse imDacts to the habitat value of the wetland corridor. All mitiaation reauired shall be located on-site and contiauous with the existina wetland corridor. Buffer zones of 1 00 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified wetland areas and 50 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified riDarian areas. unless the aDDlicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width will Drotect the identified resources. based on site-sDecific information. Such information shall include. but is not limited to. the tv De and size of the develoDment and/or DrO'Dosed mitiaation (such as Dlantina of veaetation or the /1/1~¡} ,...-.-..---.-.,,-,.-....--.-.........,..... __ ___ - ____._.__.....n.__.__._____ ___ ____n.__ ,..__....__._ U'__"_' ----------.---.---. construction of fencino) which will also achieve the Durcoses of the buffer. DeveloDment within the buffer zone shall be limited to construction of a Dedestrian Dathwav within the UDDer half of the buffer with fencino or other imDrovements deemed necessary to Drotect sensitive habitat in the UDDer half of the buffer. The buffer shall be measured landward of the delineated resource. The California DeDartment of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service shall be consulted in such buffer determinations. Buffer zones shall be Dermanentlv Drotected as ODen SDace throuoh the use of deed restrictions or other aDDroDriate mechanisms. Passive recreational uses are restricted to the UDDer half of the buffer zone. If the Droiect involves substantial imDrovements or increased human imDacts. such as a subdivision. a wider buffer mav be reouired. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the date which is the later of the 30th day after its adoption or immediately following the Coastal Commissions concurrence with the Commission's Executive Director's determination that the City of Chula Vista's acceptance and agreement with the Commission's February 9, 1995 action on LCP Amendment #12 and modifications to the Land Use Plan and Bayfront Sp 'fic Plan are legally adequate. Presented by: Chris Salomone Bruce M. Boogaard Community Development Director City Attorney [PRB/a :mord/channalsidadiskl It) A - 7 --~----_._.._,--------_.,--^._--~.,_.__._-- - ...--.-,.-.--.,,--...,.....- . - ----,---------_._-,------- RESOLUTION 1 78"¡;¿' RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND AGREEING WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION'S FEBRUARY 9,1995 ACTION ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 12 AND ACCEPTING AND AGREEING WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION'S MODIFICATIONS TO THE LAND USE PLAN AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted Ordinance No. 2613 on November 15, 1994 amending the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program and Bayfront Specific Plan in accordance with Amendment No. 12 reclassifying 31.63 acres of the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 from Industrial General to a Commercial thoroughfare land use district subject to Central Commercial with Precise Plan Modifying District pursuant to sections 19.36 and 19.56 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was submitted to the California Coastal Commission on November 17, 1994 and the California Coastal Commission staff, on December 2, 1994, accepted Amendment No.1 2 as complete; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was presented to the California Coastal Commission at a public hearing on February 9, 1995 and the Commission approved Amendment No. 12 subject to suggested modifications; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the California Coastal Commission's February 9, 1995 action and suggested modifications. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby resolve that the City Council: 1. Accepts and agrees with the California Coastal Commission's February, 1995 action on the City of Chula Vista's Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 12 and accepts and agrees with the California Coastal Commission's suggested modifications to the Land Use Plan and Bayfront Specific Plan. 2. Requests that, upon the City's approval of a Local Coastal Program amendment incorporating such modifications into the City's certified Local Coastal Program, the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission promptly take all necessary steps to determine such approval to be legally adequate and to report such determination to the Coastal Commission in accordance with Section 13544.5 of the Coastal Commission regulations. Presented by: Approved as to form by: ~ ~ ~&- 0" Chris Salomone Community Development Director City rney /ßß-) /IOE-2 ____·,·_____,__,__··__~____n'__·__."·__.,__.___.~ _'''0''____' Item No. 10 - Replaces in remaining part Ordinance 2626 in the Council Agenda Package /78"/ / RESOLUTION NO. )' r¡~;/D RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 16838 (THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE PLAN) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE MODIFICATIONS THERETO AS ADOPTED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 9, 1995 FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 12 WHEREAS, the city Council adopted Ordinance No. 2613 on November 22, 1994 amending the certified Chula Vista Local.Coastal Program and Bayfront Specific Plan in accordance with Amendment No. 12 reclassifying 31.63 acres of the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 from Industrial General to a Commercial thoroughfare land use district subject to Central Commercial with Precise Plan Modifying District pursuant to sections 19.36 and 19.56 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was submitted to the California Coastal commission on November 17, 1994 and the California Coastal Commission staff, on December 2, 1994, accepted Amendment No. 12 as complete; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 12 was presented to the California Coastal Commission at a public hearing on February 9, 1995 and the Commission approved Amendment No. 12 subject to suggested modifications; and WHEREAS, the city council has considered, accepted and agrees with the California Coastal Commission's February 9, 1995 action and suggested modifications; and WHEREAS, in order to fully adopt and implement the modifications proposed by the California Coastal Commission to Resolution No. 16838, as amended (the City of Chula Vista certified Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan), it is necessary to amend such Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION I. Consistency with General Plan Findinas The City Council does hereby find that the LCP, as amended by Amendment 12 and modified by the Coastal Commission on February 9, 1995, is consistent with the City of Chula vista General Plan as amended. 1 J()ß-J' .^'~_._., ---_._---_.~_....._-~._--_.,_....._,-"~"..,...__.,-_.._._~-----_...-_.." ...----- ._~ SECTION II. California Coastal Act Findinas The City does hereby find that the subject Amendment #12 complies with Chapter 3, Coastal Resources Planning and Management POlicies, of Public Resources Code, Division 20 in accordance with the following findings: The Inland Parcel is not located within the Chula vista Bayfront. The Parcel is located approximately 1/2 mile (north east) traveling distance from the Bayfront's main, "E" street entry. The land use designation of the Inland Parcel, therefore, will not directly affect Bayfront "coastal resource" planning. The Inland Parcel does not have access to coastal beaches, therefore, the change in land use destination will not affect such access. The Inland Parcel has no oceanfront land suitable for water- oriented recreational activities or coastal dependent aquacultural uses. A portion of the Historic Sweetwater River is located along a portion of the western edge of the Inland Parcel. This is considered potentially sensitive habitat and will be enhanced and protected when development occurs on the Inland Parcel. The proposed Amendment #12 is a change in land use only and will not affect the site's sensitive habitat designation or the site's sensitive habitat. The Inland Parcel is visible from the north (state Route 54), however, there are no coastal views or vistas from or to the Inland Parcel. The land use change will include a Precise Plan Modifying District which will require the development of specific design and land development criteria to ensure the visual quality of the Inland Parcel. section III. Amendment of Local Coastal Plan. City Resolution No. 16838 "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report on the Midbayfront Local Coastal Program Resubmittal No. 8 Amendment (EIR 89-08) and Addendum thereto, and Making certain Findings with regard thereto; Amending the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Circulation Diagram and Parks and Recreation Element, and Bayfront Area Plan; adopting, on conditions, the Chula Vista Local Coastal Program Resubmittal Consisting of the Land Use Plan with the Changes Identified herein; and Making Findings of Fact, Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program and statement of Overriding Considerations for the Midbayfront Local Coastal Program Resubmittal No.8", originally adopted on October 13, 1992, and amended by Resolution No. 17036 on March 16, 1993 is hereby amended to add the following to 2 /tJ !J Y "-~-------'------~"'''-'-~''-'----'------ -_._-.~_.__._-------- -- -- - - --........-.,,--.. ----~.._-_."_.._"-_._----~ the end of "Subarea Development Objectives and Policies" under D. Subarea 4 - Inland Parcel (page IV of the Land Use Plan) : Obiective S6.A - The dikina. dredaina. or fillina of wetland areas shall be Dermitted onlv where there is no feasible less environmentallv damaaina alternative. and where feasible mitiaation measures have been Drovided to minimize adverse environmental effects. and shall be limited to the followina Dermitted uses and activities: -ª... Nature stu4v. acruacul ture. or other similar resources de~endent activities. ~ Wetland restoration Droiects where the Drimarv function is restoration of wetland habitat. ~ Incidental Dublic service Droiects. !L. Mineral extraction. includina sand for restorina beaches. exceDt in environmentallv sensitive areas. policv S6.A.1 - A maximum of one Sweetwater River river crossina shall be Dermitted to Drovide access to the develoDable Dortions of the Inland Parcel. The crossina shall be desianed as a bridae to minimize adverse imDacts to the habitat value of the wetland corridor. All mitiaation reauired shall be located on-site and contiauous with the existina wetland. Mitiaation for anv temDorarv disturbance or Dermanent disDlacement of identified resources shall be reauired at the followina ratios. For wetlands. 4:1 reDlacement for imDacted area and riDarian resources. 3: 1 reDlacement for imDacted area. Open SDace preservation in DerDetuitv of sensitive resources area will also be reauired Dursuant to an aDDroDriate mechanism. No other dikina. dredaina or fillina of wetlands or other wet environmentallv sensitive areas shall be Dermitted without Drior Coastal Commission approval throuah the LCP amendment Process. Buffer zones of 100 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified wetland areas and 50 feet in width shall be maintained around all identified riDarian areas. unless the aDDlicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width will Drotect the identified resources. based on site-sDecific information. Such information shall include. but is not limited to. the tvce and size of the develoDment and/or DroDosed mitiaation (such as Dlantina of veaetation or the construction of fencina) which will also achieve the purposes of the buffer. 3 /tJß-f' Development within the buffer zone shall be limited to construction of a pedestrian pathwav within the upper half of the buffer with fencina or other improvements deemed necessary to protect sensitive habitat in the upper half of the buffer. The buffer shall be measured landward of the delineated resource. The California Department of Fish and Game and the United states Fish and wildlife Service shall be consulted in such buffer determinations. Buffer zones shall be permanent Iv protected as open space throuah the use of deed restrictions or other appropriate mechanisms. Passive recreational uses are restricted to the upper half of the buffer zone. if the proiect involves substantial improvements or increased human impacts. such as a subdivision a wider buffer ma be re uired. Presented by Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development B:\bayfront.res 4 /¿J[J~b' --------... .'. .'. .---".--.. .-- ._---~-_., _____..__._~.__._,____._. ._m.. _,...._ .------- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT II Item Meeting Date 2/14/95 ITEM TITLE: Resolution 17~t' ?APproving Submittal of a Local Government Used Oil Opportunity Grant Application for $230,900 to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for fiscal year 1995-1996 SUBMITTED BY: Conservation Coordinator ~t~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~ -S\. (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No X) BACKGROUND: The City has received two regional grants funded by the Used Oil Enhancement Act totaling $371,850. Those grants are funding the recruitment, support and promotion of 30 used oil recycling centers in Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City. The City has also submitted a 1995/96 block grant application ($73,130) which is under consideration. This application ($230,900) would establish an educational partnership with the Sweetwater Union High School District and fund the residential collection of used oil in Chula Vista and Imperial Beach. The deadline for filing the grant application is February 17, 1995. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution as requested by the State. BOARD/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission reviewed the grant and voted to support it on January 9, 1995. A copy of the minutes is attached. DISCUSSION: The California Used Oil Enhancement Act requires the collection of four cents for every quart of lubricating oil sold, transferred and imported into California from oil manufacturers. Chula Vista consumers pay four cents per quart into the fund when they purchase oil. The Act mandates that the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) use part of the funds to provide grants to local governments for used oil recycling programs. Opportunity Grants are competitive and funds are limited. The state's general fund will absorb all funds not awarded to applicants by the end of the fiscal year. This application is a regional application that provides different used oil collection/drop-off services and education services for the cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City. Chula Vista is the proposed designated jurisdiction and will receive up to $230,900 in funds to carry out a regional program. Imperial Beach and National City are adopting similar resolutions that authorize Chula Vista as the designated jurisdiction. The proposed program has four primary components detailed in the application (Atlachment A). The first component provides $92,500 to establish an on-call residential used oil collection program for Chula Vista and Imperial Beach only. To initiate service residents will telephone the service provider 48 hours before their regular refuse/recycling collection day. Residents will receive a free used oil recycling container(s) upon request or they may obtain free containers from any of the 30 new certified centers in the region. Used oil will be collected on the same day as //-/ .. _...__..,...__...._....._,___ - _._ _..._._..__...____._........_.._....____..._.._.______.._""n_ Page 2, Item II Meeting Date 2/14/95 the customer's refuse and recycling collection to offer as simple a process as possible. Combining used oil collection with other collection services also provides an opportunity to take advantage of the existing fleet, routing and personnel efficiencies. Residents can place their used oil recycling containers out each week alongside their existing curbside recycling bin. The drivers will replace the full containers they collect with an empty container for the customer's future use. There will be no cost to the rate payer for the first full year of the program. Continuation of the used oil collection program would cost the average rate payer no more than $0.05 per month in future years. Recycling incentive fees ($0.16 per gallon), avoided disposal costs and future block grants may combine to reduce or eliminate the program's future costs (approximalely $18,000 per year). The City Council will have the opportunity to review that decision before the program's second year. Component two provides $18,000 to supporl 30 used oil drop-off centers that will serve Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City. This component also adds free oil filter drop-off to some of those centers. Component three provides $84,900 for public school education programs that will also serve all lhree cities. Sweetwater Union High School District would receive $66,100 to make used oil recycling and watershed protection a permanent part of the middle school, high school and adul1 education curricula. The Chula Vista Elementary School District would also receive $11,000 to continue their watershed protection program. This component also provides $7,800 for a part-time intern to help carry out this component. The final component provides $24,000 to implement a public education program to support the used oil program. The Nalure Center would receive $7,500 to continue their science class and visitor programs. This component provides an additional part-time intern position ($13,000) and $3,500 for printing related costs. Additional requests include: office space rental ($3,500) and Conservation Coordinator's grant assistance to National City and Imperial Beach ($7,500). The total grant request is $230,900. No matching funds are required and none are recommended. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no additional fiscal impact as a result of the recommended action to adopt the attached resolution. Should the grant be awarded, staff will return to the City Council for acceptance of the grant and approval of the service agreement, final grant budget and conditions. If the grant award is then approved by Council, the City will receive up to $230,900 to continue the used oil collection program through the 1995/96 fiscal year. The program does not require matching funds and the grant has been written to cover any costs required to carry out the program. The grant also provides $11,000 for Conservation Coordinator personnel and office space costs associated with the project. If the Council decides to continue the residential collection of used oil beyond the first year, the service could cost residential rate payers up to $0.05 per month. However, revenue from the recycling incentive fee ($0.16 per gallon), avoided disposal costs or future block grants may reduce or eliminate the program's annual operating costs ($18,000). The City Council will have the opportunity to review that decision before the program's second year. mtm2 a:opp95-96.cas Attachment 1/-';" .-.-_._-_.._._._.__..._-'"._--_.__.__._.,_._~.._,._- . RESOLUTION NO. J78'f? 7 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $223,400 TO THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-1996 WHEREAS, the people of the State of California have enacted the California oil Recycling Enhancement Act that provides funds to cities and counties for establishing and maintaining local used oil collection programs that encourage recycling or appropriate disposal of used oil; and WHEREAS, the California Integrated Waste Management Board has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the program within the state, setting up necessary procedures governing application by cities and counties under the program; and WHEREAS, the applicant will enter into an agreement with the State of California for development of the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula vista authorizes the submittal of an application to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for a Local Government Used oil Opportunity Grant. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized and empowered to execute in the name of the City of Chula vista all necessary applications, contracts, payment request, agreements and amendments hereto for the purposes of securing grant funds and to implement and carry out the purposes specified in the grant application. Presented by l Michael Meacham, Conservation Bruce M. , city Coordinator Attorney C:\rs\usedoil.1 /J~ 3/ Il-f¡ ---...-.----.-..... ---.- - --~-_.- -~-_..._._. --..--.-,..--------.---.--...- ...-------- FEB-l1Jl-'0Ø !.ED 15:37 ID: TEL t-D: 1lØØ1 PØ2 ---..., " - MJNUTES 01' A SCHEmJLBD JUiO'ULA1l MEEtING ~ CoIIIImtion CommiNion Cbula VIItI, CIIIfomIa 6:30 U&, CoDrenftot :Room "I ~nday.1UIIWY 9. 1995 PvbI1c: Snoel BuDdiq CALL MEETING TO OJU>Ea/ROu. CAU: Meetiq..... caI1ed to ordlr It 6:32 Jo,M. by ChaIr BurraKlftO. City Staft'Bnvlronmeatll briIw Coordinator DouaRdd oaIled roU. Praent: eoc,.",¡ulonen Ball, Marquez, FIaher; abønt: OIio"".....¡,'!, auerrelro. It wu MSUC (HaIIIfIIaber) to not GCllIO CommIuioJllJ'l GhoUSUalall and 0UemIr0 fI'om the meetiaa IÙIoe they did DOt c.n In tor IIGIIIOd Ibacœe. . au.. prøeDt: Luce Boeker, apnt fbr applicant CburCh of JOY. Amy wolte. PIIIIDIna Dept. JIIPP,.OV AI. OP MINUTES: It wu Nsue (FilherlHa1l) to approve the minute. of the IIIIIÛIII of'No'lelllbct 7, 1994; 400, ~n carrl.,d. It wu MSUC (HeIlIFilllcr) to approve the miDut.. 0' the meetina of'Novembcr 21, 1994; 4-0, motion carrlecI. OltAL COMMUNICATIONS: NolUI. N'£W BUSINØSS: 1. Michael Meacham reported on the Vied on OpportuDley ara.. tor 1995/1996, which would provide çurblide oU recy::t aervlcU to w City. Hall oppoled any kind ofm. lIIorouo, 11I4 alto preterred more . Ibl. aerv1ce centerI rather thin to allow uaed 01111011I with other reoyc1abla It the curblldo, She oppoød the ¡$Ietal cØMept of'tbe ... hut qreed to vote for approval fbr the second y.... of the proll'llll. It wu MSUC (8umacanolHl11) to approve recommendation of the ar~; 4.0, mmion carried. [A.¡enda itema taken out of order to lI:OOIMIodatc ¡vml ptIIeI1t). 2. bvi_ ofN.ptive Dtc1atation IS-95-12, Source I.aductIon and Jec)'cIiD¡ Elltntnt and Houaehold Hazardous Wutc Element: Meecbam eçWÐed thiI neptive dlolaratlOft WII already acctptid 11I1991 and mutt be reaubmltted to c:onfbrm to CEQA OuldcllDol tor formality only. It Vit. M$VC (HaIIIB\IDUCIIIO) to recommead approval; 4.0, mocion CIIIrlIcL 3. :amew of'Chutcb oUO)' NqatIve DeclaratioII ibr IS-94-211114 CS-9S-01: The project area __ cS.ciribod .. oontúnlø¡1II\OCICI!IIpillll Cla..1I .... 101\I1), Muy øther plllftt epto'~ w«e fbllJlll on the propeny u Indicated' lID the nport. Ahhov¡b IOßIII- båDø replanted, Ita I\IIVÌVlbUity wu 1iattd II WIf'J OW, Lance BecIœr, ... tbr the çptiClllt, _..fleeS qUllt1ot11, Marquez laid lb. would IIJcc to encourqe the appIi;ant to maintain u much of the natural veøetation u poøIble. FiIher III"'''' that In the amu., PacIfio SO\IthweIt Bioloaïeal SeMCCI ccmduet Itlllltve)'I durina thl proper 101I011I when IOIIUI of the habitat are more apt to be plWMllt, thuI provIdIø¡ . II)()Ie aacuratercpott. It wu MSUC (Ha1IIMarquez) 10 nc:olllDlClld approVII ofboth 15-94-21 and CS-95..o2; 400, motion omIlII, /),ß' -_..._'".~---_.,-"-,-.---- -- -- - ---- ~~ ---- -- - ----~~-~-- -.-----... ..---------_. . . .._ . .._ -=..:,-~~.-- ¿~ J.='.) ...::1:,)0 ....); . --~- ...._; ;~;¿~:. -¿..j , 4e20be&' EXPRESS æCRETRRI~ 79Eo Pa3 rES el'" 1~117 . . ~ Conservation ComItll.lion Pue2 .... Review ot'Noptlvc ~ tor IS·P~·II, ~"1."" HI¡h 'foçJVBio TICh zono; Amy Wo~ I'om the PIarmIn¡ l)epanmlat reponed that the DeISIn 1leview Committee &lid the PIaanin¡ CommIallon have lIrudy approved thIa Item, IIId that the City WI. attemptiD¡ to ItreamIiDe and 1Împ1~ the regulatory procell within tlIe BastIIJœ project area. It wu MSUC (HaUIBvnuclDO) to recommend approval olthe ....ativ. declaration; 4-0, motion carried. ,. J.cvicw of'Coutal SClUb Lo.. Permit tor CS·PS.oS,lehovah Witn..., wu øontiDued to ~ next 1IIMtin¡. 6. Review olCoa.taI Sorub Lo.. Permit fbr C5-9S.o4, OTC Wvelte !load: Dou¡ Reid explained t.bal lip, Iou permit proceu may not _ b, aeceuary. After a brict diIcu.eion, it wu MStTC (FI.herlBumlClllo) to accept tht notice otpropolll; 4-0, motion canied. 7. Jl,"ow of'Neptlve I)cçllfltion tor IS·P'·13, SaUd Wllte Dlverlion: After a brier cxpllnatlon of the impact ofuwpon oflOlicI WIIte to Minmu, It wu MSUC (Pi1her1Hall) to recommend approval oftbe n.pdve declaration; 4-0, motion canied. .. Communication ft'om Taxpayers fur Prelervatlon: It wuMSUC (pilherlBurrucano) to ...e! ancIa~t th,letter U MIlt; 4-0, motion carried. O. a.vIew otthe P1annint CommIAIon A,enda tbr 111IIIII)' II, 15195: Publio bMriøp¡ no lOtion b1 the _\lIion. STAFF IU!.POJlT: Tbe CEQA Ulembly will be on IIDUll)' 26, 1995 at 6P,M. CHAlRMAN'S COMMENTS: New mcmbm are noccIecS on the commlnlon. Dov¡ keie! reported be met with M8yor Honon who stated Ihe wID be tillin¡ . polition, She 1110 requelted a counoiIlUhcommlttce ovenee the atClnduce reoordI of the mINI COIMIlnlOIU, I , COMMISSIONEl,'S COMMENTS: PiIbtr DOted that Mitch BeIIICbamp, owner/colllll1tant of PaciØc SouthWelt BioJo.i;aJ, I. . newly altcted øoU"";I_" tor the CIty otNatiollll City, 1bi. ! , polltion could potIIbly PO" a eonØIct otlaterut in dealq with die City ofClwla Vista; J)ou¡ i , a.id to øolllUlt witb the c:ky 1Uomey, fübtr aIao RQuatecI CIty biI'.... card. for purdaue. I i ADJOtmNNENT: The meedn¡ wu IIVovrned by ChaIr B\II1'IICIDO at 1:31 P.M. I , a.pe¡:1ÑIly IUbmlttod, I!xJrD.q SBc:aaTAIUAL SIiIlVJCB8 ï I ~~ i , I I II - ¿, - DRAFT COpy Attachment A EXHIBIT A State of California California Integrated Waste Management Board APPLICATION COVER SHEET LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT CIWMB,J06 (9/92) South Bay San Diego Regional Used Oil Recycling Program (Chula Vista. designated iurisdiction) Name of Applicant 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista 91910 Address City Zip Stephanie Snyder Principal Management Assistant. City of Chula Vista (619) 691-5031 Name of Program Director Title Phone Carole French Accountant. Accounts Payable. City of Chula Vista ((519) 691-5051 Name of Finance Officer Title Phone Michael T. Meacham Conservation Coordinator. City of Chula Vista (619) 691-5122 Name of Grant Administrator Title Phone (619) 585-9118 Urant Administrator t<ax Number Program Summary (1-4 sentences): This application is for a regional program that serves Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, and part of the County and City of San Diego. The proposed grant establishes a partnership with the State's fifth largest Union High School District, third largest adult education program and one of the State's largest Hispanic student populations (ages 12 to 24). The grant establishes curbside used oil collection for a major portion of lhe region's residents, provides used oil services to the region's recreational marinas, establishes new centers and enhances the availability and convenience of certified centers and curbside collection services, Total Grant Request: $ 230.900 Certification: I declare, under penalty of perjury, that all information submitted for the CIWMB's consideration for allocation of grants funds is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge an belief. Date ~Ignature OJ person authorized oy resolutIOn or teller OJ aultlOflZflllOn John D. Goss Cit Mana er nnJ name an Il e 0 slgnalure aul my 11/~ 7 __ .__~u .,..". .__._--_._._..~._----_._~---- 1994/95 Local Government Used Oil Opportunity Grant Proposal A) BACKGROUND: Local Used Oil Disposal Problems: The Cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City (Region) comprise most of the enclosed portion of South San Diego Bay. The Region has an estimated 1,500 businesses that sell and/or generate motor oil. A significant part of the Region's total households own more than one vehicle. Many households also own recreational vehicles, boats and other motorized items that generate used oil. Recently, San Diego County Solid Waste staffreported that 65 % of the household hazardous waste identified in the refuse at their North County refuse treatment facility was used oil and oil filters. The improper disposal of used oil in storm drains has a particularly devaslating effect on the Region. Most of the storm drains for city and county streets from downtown San Diego to the border drain into San Diego Bay and are captured in the enclosed South Bay. Approximately one million residents potentially utilize their gutters, storm drains and refuse containers as the only convenient means of used oil disposal. Between Chollas Creek and the Tijuana River there are at least four additional rivers and creeks that support hundreds of acres of National Wildlife Refuge and wetlands, The wetlands and bay wildlife depend on the waterways and are threatened by the used oil and other hazardous wasles they can transport. Jurisdictions' Population: The City of Chula Vista is the second most populated city in San Diego County with approximately 150,000 residenls. National City has approximately 55,000 residents and Imperial Beach approximately 28,000 residents. The greater South Bay area serves as home, work and retail center to more than 1,000,000 people from the United States and Tijuana, Mexico. The Sweetwater Union High School District is the fifth largest union high school district, the third largest adult education program and one of the largest Hispanic student populations in the State, The District serves approximately 55,000 high school and adult education students in Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, and parts of the City of San Diego and Unincorporated County of San Diego. Existing Used Oil Collection Opportunities: Prior to Used Oil Recycling Grant opportunities there were only two businesses in the Region that have completed the certification process, neither of which promoted their used oil collection programs. There are approximately ten additional non-certified centers in the Region that are known to accept motor oil from the public. These centers are not well publicized and tend to be located in dense commercial areas that are not convenient for many generators, The Region is in the process of recruiting, certifying and promoting 30 certified centers. The centers will be promoled through: local media, point of purchase displays, movie theaters, newsletters, prize incentives and school/agency education programs. The program includes an extensive public education program that will reach thousands of studenls, consumers, relail centers and used oil generating businesses throughout the region. 2 I/~~ . -_._~- --_._-,_.,---_.__..~.._~-~~_._--"._---_.__.- County-Wide Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHW): The Region has paid an additional per ton tipping fee to San Diego County for the HHW Program for the past several years. The County uses a portion of the funds to conduct HHW Round Ups which accept used oil. The County typically schedules an annual roundup in National City or Imperial Beach. No Round-ups are schedule for fiscal year 1995196 because of budget cuts. The County has not schedule roundups in Chula Vista in the past three years. The County expects Chula Vista residents to take their used oil and other HHW to the County's HHW subcontractor which is located in a remote part of the City. The County's records indicate that the contractor receives less than 2 % of Chula Vista's total HHW waste stream of which only a part is used oil. Additionally, the County cut back its HHW Round-up and education funding by approximately 50 % in 1994 and has submitted a staff recommendation to eliminate public education funding for solid waste entirely. 3 11- 'f ....,··..·..._..w,···..·.__·o _______________,__"__._"_.~~ B) PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND GOALS: Program Description, SouthBay Used Oil Recycling Program: Providing every household with a convenient recycling opportunity is lhe first step in eliminating improper disposal and eliminating used oil as a threat to the Region's waterways and wildlife habitat. Recently, a third grade elementary school student noticed a barge full of fifty gallon drums that has washed up on the shore of the wildlife refuge following a storm and said, "I hope those barrels are not full of oil!" The student was one of thousands ofChula Visla, National City and Imperial Beach students attending California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) sponsored science classes at the wildlife refuge. Earlier that day the students had examined the layers of oil contaminated soil that have built up along the banks of the refuge's waterways over the decades. As the science classes learned, up to 100,000 gallons of used oil may be illegally disposed of in storm drains and waterways that lead directly to the wildlife refuge. With the help of previous used oil grants from the California Integrated Waste Management Board, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City (Region) are establishing up to 30 certified used oil recycling centers and teaching tomorrow's generators the importance of proper disposal. REGULARLY SCHEDULED/ON-CALL(CURBSIDE) COLLECTION OF USED OIL: Request $ 92,500 An extensive and well publicized drop-off program will continue to be the foundation of the region's used oil collection/recycling program. Drop-off remains the most economically and operationally viable method of collection for the region's extensive multi-family dwellings. However, curbside collection has proven to provide the convenience that encourages greater participation and the highest possible recovery of used oil for single-family homes and smaller multi-family dwellings in many cities such as Long Beach. This grant proposes to enhance the use of certified centers with the following curbside used oil collection program: General Description: Residents will be provided with their initial used oil recycling container(s) upon request or from any of the thirty certified centers being established in the region. Residents will initially be asked to lelephone the service provider 48 hours in advance of their regular collection day. Used oil collection will take place on the same day as the customer's refuse and recycling collection to offer as easy a process as possible. Combining used oil collection with other services also provides an opportunity to take advantage of the existing fleet, routing and personnel efficiencies. Residents will place their used oil recycling containers out (as needed) with their curbside recycling bin, yard waste container and refuse which are all collected weekly. Recycling trucks automatically stop at any site they see a curbside recycling bin. Supervisor truck(s) would respond to on-call requests or call-backs, when containers are missed or placed out late. The drivers will replace full containers placed at the curb with empty containers for the customer's future use. Drivers will transport the full containers from the curb to the rack on the vehicle and from the vehicle racks to the used oil storage tank later that day. There the containers will be inspected tested if necessary and stored for collection by a permitted hazardous waste hauler. The proposed service provider is an existing certified center and will make routine diversion reports 4 JJ-Jd -. --..-.----.,-.,-.,.-.-.-..-----. to the region and state as a curbside collector. The proposed program will require approximately 10,000 one gallon containers or 7,500 six quart containers with caps and labeling. The infonnation printed on the containers will recognize the California Integrated Waste Management Board's supporl of the program and provide the required infonnation. The containers will be consislent with the certified center conlainers and will also provide supplemental information to assist the recycler. Frequency of Pick-up: On Call, weekly availability. The used oil will be picked up on the customer's regular weekly refuse and recycling day. Residents will be requested to call the service provider 24 to 48 hours in advance of their regular recycling pick up day to request oil collection (all single family homes and dwellings of up to four units in the region have curbside recycling) . Days and Hours of Operation for the Used Oil Collection Center(s): The proposed curbside collection center is also a certified used oil collection center and will be open during regular business hours approximately 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., Saturdays. The center is only closed on Sundays, News Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Sunday hours may be added in the future. To date the Region has signed up approximately nine new certified centers and initiated contact with approximately 400 prospects. Each business has different operating hours however, almost all businesses have been willing to accept used oil during regular business hours. For the convenience of certified center operations we always recommend that the advertising promote used oil drop-off approximately one half hour after the store opens through one hour before the store closes. Stores are not encouraged to sign up as certified centers and are not promoted if théy cannot meet the CIWMB's minimum hour requirements. Type of Equipment and Facilities to be Used: 0 Tanks: At least one double wall construction, above ground used oil tank with leak detection system will be utilized to store the used oil from the curbside collection program. A 110% containment wall is also proposed for the used oil tank. 0 Vehicles: Either the recycling, refuse, greenwaste and/or supervisor truck(s) will be fitted with racks to hold the residential used oil collection containers. The trucks include: full- size pick-ups, Labrie Eager Beaver Recycling Trucks, Heil recycling trucks, Amrep greenwaste and refuse trucks, Collection vehicles will be supplied with appropriate spill clean-up supplies as required by local and state health and safety codes. 0 Containers: A one gallon or a six quart post -consumer content plastic container will be distributed to participants. The container will have lhe required warnings, CIWMB recognition, other appropriate information, and a leak proof cap. 0 The proposed facility is a trucking yard and staging area for refuse and recycling for the Chula Vista and Imperial Beach franchisee. s //~/I ...·.u.. ,.__"·n _ ,..--,....-.---.----.-.---.--.--.- Used Oil Storage Capacity: The minimum used oil storage capacity will be 500 gallons. A five hundred gallon container collected five days a week could collect approximately 130,000 gallons per year. According to CIWMB, HHW Section projections, approximately 100,00 gallons of used motor oil is improperly disposed of in the region each year. If it is more cost effective to collect larger quantities, fewer times per week, additional storage capacity will be considered. Method of Used Oil Storage and Recycling/Disposal: · Residenls will place the used oil in a program provided container with an appropriate leak: proof cap. The container will be a post-consumer plastic bottle similar to the one utilized successfully by lhe City of Long Beach curbside and certified center programs. · The containers will be inspected and transferred by employees of the service provider to the residential recycling vehicles which will be equipped with racks that will securely hold 20 to 40 individual containers, · The recycling containers will be taken from the racks, oil will be inspected and poured into the storage tank (described above) al the collection center at least once per day. · The storage tank will be serviced by a State and County permitted hauler with third party insurance. The program will strive to utilize a service provider who participales in a closed loop process for used oil collection and re-manufacturing. Additionally, the grant's proposed provider would have a California Hazardous Waste "Part B" permit. CERTIFIED CENTER PROGRAM: $ 18,000 The grant also request $3,000 to continue the Used Oil Recycling Awards Program that focuses on recognizing certified centers. An additional $1,000 for premiums is requested to use in promoting existing centers and the addition of the Marina and new centers, and $13,000 is requested to add free motor oil filter collection to at least three locations. PROPOSED SCHOOL EDUCATION PROGRAMS: $ 84,900 High School and Adult Education Watershed protection is a key concern of drought plagued Southern California and the Region in particular. Our limited watershed is vital to the quality of life for human residents and a key link to thousands of indigenous and migrating species. The improper disposal of used oil is the largest contributor to the contamination and destruction of those resources. The County Solid Waste, Household Hazardous Waste Section Staff reported that approximately 65 % of the hazardous waste identified in the refuse at their North County San Diego trash treatment facility was used oil and oil filters. The goal of this component is to make used oil recycling and water shed protection a permanent part of the high school and adult education curricula. The program will empower young adults with the information they need to recycle used oil, the desire to become advocates for recycling in the community and the sensitivity to appreciate how recycling used oil 6 //-/.2. _.~---_...._._~,-~-,.__._.~---_.,,--_.,.__..,.- can positively impact the local watershed and quality of life, A number of excellent curriculum, fact sheets, exercises and lesson plans that teach used oil recycling and watershed protection concepls have been created by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB), the California Environmental Protection Agency, the California Department of Health Services and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Too often the excellent materials created and distributed by these agencies and other sit idly on shelves collecting dust. Many, if not most school districts lack the funding, the personnel and/or the expertise to use the materials. This componenl of the grant focuses on a cooperative effort that maximizes the use of limited funds and the use of existing materials. This component creates a partnership that combines the funding, mission and environmental expertise of local jurisdiction's with the local high school/adult education district's teaching and expertise and facilities. The Sweetwater Union High School District is the State's fifth largesl districl and the Adult Education Program is the State's third largest. Sweetwater Union High School District and Adult Education Program serves Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, and parts of the City of San Diego and unincorporated County. The District services approximately 65,000 high school and adult students in 24 schools. The district is a multi-cultural district with one of the state's largest Hispanic populations. The Region will contract with Sweetwater Union High School District, and Adult Education Program (District) to fund a series of teacher workshops that will reach all science teachers. The Grant Manager, interns and District will work with federal, state and local agencies 10 establish an anthology of instructional materials regarding oil disposal, recycling, buying recycled oil and oil's relationship to watershed protection (the anlhology will supplement the one currently being developed for the elementary age students under a previous grant). The materials available to the selected science and auto shop teachers and provide ongoing technical assistance and orientation that keeps lhe teachers and sludents up to date on local certified center and curbside recycling opportunities. The District will be divided inl0 eight (8) clusters fed by middle schools, high schools and adult schools. There will be approximately lhirteen (13) teachers per cluster and each cluster will meet for a full day once per year for staff development on used oil recycling issues, interactive recycling lessons and information regarding used oil recycling special evenls. The program includes three one day district-wide special events, "Used Oil Collection Contests." The events will provide students with practical used oil recycling experience, and promote future used oil recycling. As an example, student may be assigned a homework task, "scavenger hunt" to phone or visit and map out several used oil certified centers in their neighborhood, bring back a used oil container, recycling information, and prepare a report on the importance of used oil recycling and its relationship to the local watershed. This program has an extraordinary opportunity to reach the state's target group, 17 to 24 year old Hispanic males. Elementary School Program The grant also requests funds to continue the Chula Vista Elementary School Program established in the previous block grant cycle (see attached description). 7 1/'1;1 ___._.._______ u.__'._ __..__....__."'". PUBLIC EDUCATION: $ 24,000 A public education fact sheet will be distributed with the bottles to supplement customer instructions printed on the bottle. The fact sheet will also be distributed at major civic events to promote used oil curbside recycling. Notices will be periodically included in the regular refuse billing and promotional material will be prepared to supplemenl the mobile displays, movie theater promotions, point of purchase displays and other promotional activities with curbside collection information. Residents that participate in the program will also be randomly selected to receive post-consumer content premiums, related services and products as a reward and recognition for participating in the program. Selected participants will also be recognized in newsletters, local media and public events. At least two advertisements will be placed in the paper annually to promote the program and potentially recognize participants. Nature Center Science Class and Visitor Programs This component includes $7,500 to continue the Nature Center Program established in a previous grant cycle (see attachment). OTHER COSTS: $11 ,500 The request includes $3,500 to cover renlal space for the project intern's and Grant Manager. Another $500 is requested to upgrade the Grant Manager's computer hard drive memory. The additional memory would be used for a data base for certified centers and related activities (Chula Vista is paying for a Random Access memory upgrade). The grant request includes $7,500 for that portion of the Grant Manager's time spent on coordinating the project for Imperial Beach, National City and portions of City of San Diego and Unincorporated County that will be served by the grant. Chula Vista is funding lhe Grant Manager costs associated with the Chula Visla portion of the program. s II'IJ/ . ""~'"".._' ._,._....._,..._...__.__._--------~--....._--_.~-----,_.__._.- C) FUNDING SOURCES: Local Agency Funds: As the lead agency, the City of Chula Vista is funding the time required for the Program Director and Grant Manager. Other Funding: Cooperative efforts: This program is a cooperative effort that combines the full faith and support of the Cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City with the San Diego Urban Corps, the Chula Vista Nature Center, the Chula Vista Elementary School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District. Each is committed to the successful completion of its respective componenls. Contributions: The Grant Manager has contacted potential sponsors for advertisements, in-kind support and recycling incentive prizes. The response to those inquiries has been positive. Volunteers: The Grant Administrator has contacted an environmental club at Southwestern Community College in Chula Vista for volunteer support. The Grant Administrator has also met with the local school dislrict representatives. Volunteers from the community college, high school, middle school and elementary school environmental clubs will be encouraged to participate in public education program components. Commitment to continuin~ the used oil pro~ram: The addition of the used oil collection to City curbside recycling programs is a logical step in making used oil recycling a permanent fixture in the region. The residential recycling program is funded through a user fee assessed each residential dwelling. The continuation of the curbside used oil collection program would cost the average rate payer no more than $0.05 per month in the second year. It is also possible that the program's future costs to rate payers could be reduced or eliminated by the value of the oil, the recycling incentive fee and avoided disposal costs, The respective city councils will have the opportunity to make curbside used oil recycling an ongoing part of the regions residential recycling programs in the 1996/97 fiscal year. 9 I/-If .. -,,~,...._-_._--_.,----.-~----_.~~~. "'---,-- Local Government Used Oil Opportunity Grant Eligibility Summary Certified Used Oil Recycling Centers: 1) ütay Buy Back Center; 1751 Maxwell Road, Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 Mark Watton; (619) 234-8744 (located at a County Landfill) Certification Number # 37-C-00022 2) SouthBay Jiffy Lube; 593 E Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910 Leo and Evar Carrillo; (619) 476-0202 Certification Number # 37-C-00374 3) Laidlaw Inc; 881 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA 91912 Charles Moore, Operations Manager; (619) 656-3551 Application pending (see attached letter) The Cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City recently submitted a regional Block Grant and Opportunity Grant designed to establish thirty certified used oil recycling centers. Another objective of the program is to establish certified centers in as many neighborhoods within the region as is reasonable to make it convenient for all residents in the Region to utilize a certified center. The goals of this grant are to continue service to the certified centers established under the previous grant, expand to include new centers or replace centers that drop out, expand to include used oil filters in at least three locations, expand to include three fourths of the Region's residents in a curbside collection program, expand to include more direct service for local recreational marinas and continue the related public education and promotion activities lhroughout the next fiscal year. The Grant Manager has the ability and experience to carry out the project proposed. The Manager was the author and responsible staff person for developing and implementing one of the State's initial demonstration granls. That grant established curbside used oil recycling in Long Beach and recovered up to 4,200 gallons per month in its first twelve months. The grant manager also managed the City of Long Beach's initial block grant which was a regional grant between the City of Long Beach and the City of Signal Hill. The Grant Manager has worked in the public solid wasle recycling field for five years and in recycling and granl management for more than lwenty years. He has received awards for grant administration and program management from the Department of Justice and the State Department of Corrections. 10 //.. J ~ -- - - ~--_.__._._._,-----"."._---- * Q)"Q ~ e .~ ~ .~ ;- ¡.... ¡.... Q) - Po. ~ - ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:; 0\ ....., 0\ ~ - $ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - Q) ~ ~ ~ <1) ~ U <1) <1) <=I Q ::J <1) ....., ~ <=I '" .~ Q "Q <1) "0 ~ '" ~ '" .~ .... U '" ~ ~ z a ~ 8 ~ '" CIS "'" ;.... ~ .~ ~ <1) ~ 0 .~ ~ <=I . ~ 0 ü ...... .~ "'- """'l.¡ ..... 1-1 . .... ~ ~ ....<=1 ~ .~ = 0 00 b 00 ~ U ~ ~ Q) ~ ~ Q 0"'" ~ "",<=I O ~'" "'~ > ~~ " "'<1) gf~ ~ .- ~ ~ ~ <=I o .9 V':I b ......'- .~ c8 ~ Q ~~ <=I .s a '" <=I <1) ro CI) 0 ~ ~ s ~ >'" .s~ ~ '~N ~~ ~~ ßE ~~ u~ §~ ~0<1) ~::J ..= ~ = ~ ~ ~ .~ Û a 8 ~ +-' ~ 00 5b ç::: 00 ;.... - ctI 0 Ij,) .... .~ ~ ~a < õ..~ ¿ "' ~"O Z ::J_ <<1) ....N"'..,.t/)\Ot--OOQ\O.... z~ CFJ ~ '1"""'1 '1"""'1 11) (J "i: 8. ~ ~ ~ f3 2 E-4 ~ ;::s "Po. * <=I II~ I? .-..- ...-".".-.~.__. --..---------.--------..---.---.--.. EXHIBIT C Local Government Used Oil Opportunity Grant Budget Summary Grant Applicant City of Chula Vista Date February 6. 1995 Proposed Program The South Bay San Diego Regional Used Oil Recycling Program TYPE OF EXPENSE CIWMB GRANT FUNDS2 CURBSIDE COLLECTION $ 92,500 CERTIFIED COLLECTION CENTERS $ 18,000 SCHOOL EDUCATION PROGRAMS $ 84,900 PUBLIC EDUCATION $ 24,000 OTHER COSTS $ 11,500 TOTAL $230,900 All expenses listed above must be itemized on a separate sbeetls) of paper 2Round all numbers to the nearest dollar 12 1/-/ ¡/ -- ---"._-~.~._--~~~-_._------------ EXHIBIT D Local Government Used Oil Opportunity Grant BUDGET ITEMIZATION Grant Applicant City of Chula Vista Date December 13.1994 CIWMB FUNDS CURBSIDE COLLECTION Tank Improvements and Installation $ 28,000 Vehicle Purchase $ 27,000 Vehicle Rack Modifications, Test Kits and Spill kits $ 12,000 Personnel Costs $ 8,000 Operating Costs; Fuel, Oil Tires & Maintenance $ 10,000 Collection Containers & Caps $ 7,500 TOTAL $ 92,500 CERTIFIED CENTERS Annual Awards & Recognition Event $ 2,500 Premiums $ 1,500 Oil Test Kits $ 1,000 Oil Filter Press (3) $ 13,000 TOTAL $ 18,000 SCHOOL EDUCATION PROGRAMS High School & Adult Education Program: Personnel Expenses $ 28,500 Materials, Supplies Special Events & Awards $ 27,600 Used Oil/Watershed Simulation Games $ 10,000 Elementary School Program $ 11,000 Intern appx. 15 hours pr/wk @ $10 pr/hr $ 7,800 TOTAL $ 84,900 PUBLIC EDUCATION Graphics, Printing & Advertising $ 3,500 Intern appx. 25 hours per week @ $10 per hour $ 13,000 Nature Center Science Class & Visitor Program Materials and Supplies $ 7,500 TOTAL $24,000 OTHER COSTS Space Rental $ 3,500 Computer Upgrade (graphics) $ 500 Grant Mgr. approx. 338 hours @ $22.199 $ 7,500 TOTAL $ 11,500 TOTAL COSTS $230,900 TillS APPLICATION WAS PRINTED ON POST-CONSUMER CONTENT RECYCLED PAPER 13 /I-I' - .. .. ._-~"-----------,.._._------"~-~---- - -- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item j.).. Meeting Date 2/14/95 ITEM TITLE: a) Resolution /7G;OY Approving the submittal of the City's Fiscal Year 1996/2000 NPDES Storm Water Management PlanlPermit Application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) b) Resolution J?9"I)'f Approving the City's participation in the Fiscal Year 1996/2000 Regional NPDES Storm Water Management Plan and Memorandum of Understanding SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public wor~~ REVIEWED BY: City Manageq~ ~\., . (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX) On February 19, 1991, the Chula Vista City Council passed a resolution approving the City's participation in its first National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. Said permit was considered an "early" NPDES permit issued by the RWQCB prior to the promulgation of fmal United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations, At the time, EPA regulations required NPDES permits for discharges from municipal storm drains on a system-wide or jurisdiction- wide basis, The County of San Diego, the 18 incorporated cities of San Diego County, and the San Diego Unified Port District were all parties to the early NPDES permit and the Implementation Agreement associated with it. Under the early permit, the co-permittees cooperated in the development and implementation of a comprehensive County-wide storm water/urban runoff management program in which the City of San Diego took the lead as the principal permittee, The early NPDES permit issued on July 16, 1990 allowed agencies in San Diego County an opportunity to gradually come into compliance with the EPA requirements, Said permit expires on July 16, 1995. City staff has been working with representatives from other agencies on the development of the second permit and also a Memorandum of Understanding (MOD) to serve as a guide for implementation of the next five year permit. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolutions approving: 1) the submittal of the City's NPDES plan/permit applications; and 2) the City's participation in the regional NPDES plan and Memorandum of Understanding, BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable, DISCUSSION: In accordance with the Federal Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987, on December 8, 1988, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) proposed regulations for the issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to regulate storm water discharge to waters of the United States. The final version of these regulations was issued on November 16, 1990, In order to allow local agencies an opportunity to gradually come into compliance with the EPA regulations, on July 16, 1990, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board issued an early NPDES permit (RWQCB Order No, 90-42) for the San Diego Region, The permit covered all I,J - / - - -_.__._-_.__._.~.._.. -_... -'~"""--'---"----~'----"'~"---~-"'- ____ - _____ _____'. m. ._.___...__._.,___._ ____ ___..___..__._ Page 2, Item IJ.. Meeting Date 2/14/95 of the 18 incorporated cities, the County of San Diego, and the San Diego Unified Port District. The conditions placed on the City and all other co-permittees in Order No, 90-42 were considered the legal equivalent of compliance with the Federal regulations, The early permit expires on July 16, 1995, at which time the City will be officially regulated by the new Fiscal Year 1996/2000 NPDES permit. The proposed permit application (Exhibit A) outlines Chula Vista's commitments and programs to be included in the overall area-wide Storm Water Management PlanlPermit Application, Our region was directed by RWQCB staff to fashion the proposed application after a model known as the "Mumley Memorandum. " The "Mumley Memorandum" is based upon the consensus of all of the RWQCBs in the State and was compiled by the San Francisco RWQCB. It is important to point out that the Principal Permittee, City of San Diego, will be providing those sections of the permit application that have regional ramifications, Those sections are noted on the application, Under the new permit, the City of Chula Vista will be responsible for the management of storm water and urban runoff programs within the City's limits including the following activities: A Conducting storm water conveyance system inspections within the City's sole jurisdiction as required in the permit. B. Planning and conducting surveys and characterizations needed to identify the sources of discovered pollutants and the affected drainage areas where we have sole jurisdiction over such areas. C. Participating in management programs, monitoring programs and other plans as required to comply with the permit. D, Maintaining maps of storm water conveyance systems which are within the City's sole jurisdiction, with periodic revisions as necessary, E, Preparing and submitting all reports that are required by the permit to the Principal Permittee (City of San Diego) a minimum of two weeks prior to their due date to the RWQCB in a format acceptable to the Principal Permittee, F, Assisting and cooperating with the RWQCB in pursuing enforcement actions as necessary to ensure compliance with the storm water quality management programs, G, Pursuing enforcement of local laws, codes, and ordinances as necessary to msure implementation of plans where the City has statutory authority to pursue such enforcement actions, H. Ensuring adequate response to emergency situations within the City such as accidental spills, leaks, illicit discharges, etc, L Abiding by the terms of the proposed MOU where it does not conflict with any other statutory requirements, IJ~,,2, _ _'"___...._._._ __'. ... ___~n_.___·_· .__"._____~_ ______, ......_....._._..__.__ . - ~....- _.~-_.._-~._-~ ----- Page 3, Item I,). Meeting Date 2/14/95 In addition, the City will participate in certain programs of the San Diego County Storm Water Management Plan which provide a general and collective benefit to all co-permittees (such as storm water monitoring/testing, education programs, print and broadcast media programs, etc,), Such programs will be developed and implemented throughout the permit period, A description of the programs, major tasks, schedules and budgets will be developed by November 1st of each year for those elements to be instituted in the ensuing fiscal years, Each co-permittee will insure that sufficient funds are budgeted specifically for its share of the cost of each General Program element The proposed MOU (Exhibit B) defines each co-permittee's fiscal responsibilities as follows: A All co-permittees will share in General Program Element and administration costs incurred by the Principal Permittee in fulfilling its dutiès pursuant to the MOD. Costs shall be allocated to the co-permittees as follows: 1. The San Diego Unified Port District shall pay 2,5% of the overall General Program Element costs, This percentage share is based upon the fact that the Port District is not a municipal agency and has no permanent population, 2, The remaining shared costs will be allocated to the other co-permittees as follows: a, Forty percent will be distributed based on the population within each co- permittee's jurisdiction using SANDAG's most recent January 1 "Population and Housing Estimates" using the "HOUSEHOLD" population figures, County of San Diego population figures for purposes of the cost distribution shall be based upon population within the County "Urban Limit Lines," Based upon Chula Vista having approximately 6.25% of the total urbanized population in San Diego County, it is estimated that Chula Vista's population share will be approximately 2,5 percent of the anticipated total General Program and associated administrative costs, or about $31,250, b, Forty percent will be distributed based on the urbanized area within each co- permittee's jurisdiction using SANDAG Land Use database as most recently updated, Urbanized area will consist of the following categories: Single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, light industry, and heavy/general industry, County of San Diego area figures for purposes of the cost distribution shall be based on area within the County "Urban Limit Lines," Based upon Chula Vista having approximately 5,25% of the total urbanized land area in San Diego County, it is estimated that Chula Vista's urbanized area share will be approximately 2,1 percent of the anticipated total General Program and associated administrative costs, or about $26,250, c, Twenty percent distributed equally, It is estimated that the City's equal share will be approximately 1 percent of the anticipated total General Program and associated administrative costs, or about $12,500, 1"-· :J -----~~+--~.__._-~-_._._~._-- ---~- - ----.-..-.....-. .~_._.-_.__.._..,. - ..---.-------------..- -_.. Page 4, Item /.2... Meeting Date 2/14/95 3, Permit fees paid to the State Water Resources Control Board, both regular and supplemental, shall be distributed as follows: a, The NPDES regular annual permit fee shall be divided equally among all co- permittees. The City's share of this fee will be $500 per year, based upon a permit fee of $10,000 per year, b, The Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (BPTCP) fee shall be divided half equally among all co-permittees and half equally among those co-permittees tributary to any impaired water body as determined by the State Water Resources Control Board. The City's share of this fee will be $1611 per year, based upon a permit fee of $20,000 per year, c, Each co-permittee shall pay its share of expenses within 60 days of receipt of an invoice from the Principal Permittee, Funds collected and not expended in any fiscal year shall be carried over as a credit to the next fiscal year, d, The Principal Permittee shall provide a detailed accounting at the end of each fiscal year of all expenses incurred under the terms of the MOO, If a co-permittee's legislative body does not appropriate its share of General Program Element costs in a given year, then the participation of said co-permittee in the MOD and regional permit shall be automatically terminated and the co-permittee will be subject to enforcement action by the RWQCB, including the issuance of an individual NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit by the RWQCB no later than the following year. The proposed MOD also establishes a management committee to provide overall program direction and to review and recommend an annual budget for general programs for approval by the co-permittees' respective legislative bodies in accordance with the San Diego County Storm Water Management Plan. The management committee will be a forum for discussion of alternatives and formulations of decisions, The life of the MOD is intended to run with the life of the permit from July of 1995 to June of 2000. Staff had originally scheduled this item for the City Council meeting of January 10, 1995, However, the RWQCB sent a certified letter dated December 23, 1994 to each of the co-permittees in which they indicated that: A The RWQCB will not be a party to the proposed MOD, All references to the responsibilities of the RWQCB in the MOD are to be deleted, B. Any enforcement action involving "collective activities" (such as wet weather monitoring) will be pursued on a collective basis, If one agency does not pay its share of the cost for the activity, the remaining agencies will be required to pick up that share, rather than reducing the scope of the program, If the full program is not carried out, enforcement actions will be taken against the full group of co-permittees, I~~ 'I ---.---.-..-----.---,,-.---.--.........--..--.....----..----.--...-..... -... -...- ---. Page 5, Item /~ Meeting Date 2/14/95 C The RWQCB staff may decide to issue two or three permits based on watersheds. This is a departure from the current situation, in which one permit was written for the full region, Chula Vista could be one of nine agencies included in the permit for agencies tributary to San Diego Bay, The impact that such splitting up of the group will have on permit fees has not yet been determined, Follow-up discussions with RWQCB staff revealed that a final decision on the number of permits to be issued has not yet been made and that a single permit is still possible, D, The new permit(s) will emphasize pollution prevention rather than pollution control. From previous discussions, we anticipate that this means that planting or covering pads or other flat graded areas will be required on construction sites instead of collecting siltation at points where runoff leaves a property, E, All construction sites, without regard to size must implement best management practices to prevent erosion/siltation, All landowners of construction sites are supposed to contact RWQCB for the details of the construction permit. F, Each municipality must have a formal written procedure to follow up on citizen complaints of illicit discharges or connections to storm drains and to provide feedback to RWQCB on the resolution of complaints, Our action in submitting the documents prior to Council's approval was taken in order to meet the deadline imposed by the RWQCB for submittal of the permit application, In consideration of the noted letter dated December 23, 1994, staff has revised the proposed MOU to the minimum extent we feel is necessary and forwarded it to the City of San Diego with the originally proposed Storm Water Management Plan for inclusion in the overall permit application, We anticipate that the RWQCB will require a number of changes in these items as discussed above before issuing a permit this July, However, we believe that making revisions to the plan later is preferable to risking an enforcement action based on the late filing of the plan, even though the late filing would have been caused by the last minute decisions by the RWQCB staff, FISCAL IMPACT: On June 18, 1991, the Chula Vista City Council enacted Ordinance 2463 which established a Storm Drain Fee to fund the development and implementation of the Storm Water Quality Management Programs required by the NPDES permit. Anticipated funding requirements associated with the proposed program range from $ 406,500 in FY 1996 to $ 425,000 in FY 2000, Please see Exhibit IIC". Projected revenues will be sufficient to cover these funding requirements, We currently have a balance of $547,039 in this fund, Exhibit A: Proposed Permit Application Exhibit B: Memorandum of Understanding Exhibit C: Anticipated Funding Requirements SMN/sb/kpa [M:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \NPDES96.SMN] /:2 ~5 /;2-& ~..___.._____,.~__._m_.""-"'_'__ ___', ____ . ,..,_____'._m..______'" ...__..m.._......___..··_._ __ __~.__,_... EXHIBIT ""A" f~ Jd, CITY OF CHULA VISTA The proposed permit application outlines the City of Chula Vista's commitments and programs to be included in the overall area-wide Storm Water Quality Management Program. The proposed application is fashioned after a model developed by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board and known as the "Mumley Memorandum". It is important to point out that the Principal Permittee, the City of San Diego, will be providing those sections of the permit that have regional tamifications. L PROGRAM MANAGEMENT A. PROGRAM STRUCTURE (Management Committee, Subcommittees) (provided by Principal Permittee, City of San Diego) B. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS 1. Program Participant Arrangements (provided by Principal Permittee, City of San Diego) 2. Area-wide Interagency Arrangements (provided by Principal Permittee, City of San Diego) 3. City of Chula Vista Interagency Arrangements Within the City, the Department of Public Works has been assigned responsibility for management of the storm water quality program. Within the Department of Public Works, the Engineering Division serves as program manager, disseminating storm water quality management objectives and inforination. Participating divisions within the Department of Public Works include Engineering and Operations. The Department of Public Works also provides information and coordinates with the plAnning, Parks and Recreation, Building and Housing, and Police Departments. C. FISCAL RESOURCES This Storm Water Quality Management Plan is based on the experience gained during the current five-year program. The, program elements and emphasis have evolved from field experience and represent the most effective and efficient use of City resources. Existing and potential fiscal resources are described below. ß~ Jd--7 ...-.-..-..... -- ._,.----_.----,-~-- CITY OF CHULA VISTA I. Area-wide a. Funding Sources The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal StoTll) Water Permit Program is an unfunded, Federally mandated program. On June 18, 1991, the City of Chula Vista City Council enacted Ordinance No, 2463, which established a Storm Drain Fee, This Storm Drain Fee was established in order to fund the development and implementation of storm water pollution control programs required by the NPDES Permit. This fee currently generates approximately $405,000 per year in direct revenue. The fund balance at the end of Fiscal Year 1994-95 is projected to be approximately $650,000. Throughout the term of the permit, the City of Chula Vista will use the Storm Drain Fee as a revenue source to fund storm water management program activities. Other storm water management activities that have a positive water quality impact (e.g., street sweeping, recycling, solid waste management, etc,) are suppoRed by other, stable funding sources. b. Staff Resources (provided by Principal Permittee, City of San Diego) c. Contract Services (provided by Principal Permittee, City of San Diego) d. Cost Share (funds associated with existing activities/related programs) N/A 2. City of Chula Vista Fiscal Resources a, Funding Source As indicated above, the City of Chula Vista established a Storm Drain Fee to fund the development and implementation of the storm water quality management programs required by the NPDES Permit. The Storm Drain Fee is reviewed annually to assure that adequate funding is maintained. If expenditures exceed revenues/ available funds, then the Storm Drain Fee will be increased accordingly. The City of Chula Vista's storm water quality management activities are currently funded as part of the Department of Public Works' NPDES Program budget. þ-'r' J cJ -[Š CITY OF CHULA VISTA Anticipated funding requirements for the term of the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit are as follows: mCAL YEAR ACTIVITY 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 Monitorine: Dry Weather Field $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 ScreeninglField Worlc Wet Weather (Joint Co- 50,000 SO,OOO SO,OOO 50,000 50,000 Permittee Program) NPDES Permit/BPTCP 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Fees Public WorlcslEngineering lll,OOO 114,000 117,000 120,000 123,000 & Code Enforcement Staff Storm Drain Maint...ance 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 Sweetwater River Channel 26,500 26,500 28,000 28,000 28,000 Maintenance (City Share) Public Education 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Dlicit ConnectionlDlegal SO,OOO SO,OOO SO,ooo SO,OOO SO,OOO Discbarge Detection Program Miscellaneous 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 TOTALS $406,500 $409,500 $419,000 $422,000 $425,000 In addition to the programs mentioned in the above table, the City of Chula VISta has a number of other programs that have a positive impact upon storm water quality, although their primary purpose is not improvement of storm water quality. These programs include, but are not limited to, street sweeping, recycling, and solid waste management. These programs are not dependent upon funding by the Storm Drain Fee, but are supported by stable funding sources. These programs will be discussed in Section V. b. Staff Resources The City of Chula Vista has allocated one full-time equivalent Engineering staff position for developmeét and implementation of the NPDES Storm Water Management Program each year since Fiscal Year 1990-91. In addition, the ~ /,2-; - ,- ..- .... --_._---~~-_.__._.---_...._._--_.._._-- CITY OF CHULA VISTA Department of Public Works/Operations Division has acquired a vacuum-type sanitary sewer and storm drain maintenance vehicle, which is operated by a full-time two-person crew, During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, it is anticipated that additional staff resources may be rèquired for enforcement of the City's Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. c. Contract Services Currently, the City has two active contracts for wet weather and dry weather monitoring services, These services are funded by the Storm Drain Fee. The City of Chula Vista also uses contractors for street sweeping, solid waste collection, and recycling services. These services are funded by stable funding sources, such as user fees. The City of Chula Vista is currently exploring the feasibility of using County of San Diego Department of Health Services personnel to perform megal DischargelIllicit Connection Detection (ICIDD) inspections of industrial and commercial facilities. It is proposed that these services be funded using the Storm Drain Fee. d. Cost share (funds associated with existing activities/re1ated programs) Programs that are not primarily performed to improve storm water quality, but that have a positive impact upon storm water quality, include, but are not limited to, street sweeping, recycling, and solid waste management. These programs are not dependent upon Storm Drain Fee funding and are supported by stable funding sources, such as user fees. D. LEGAL AUTHORITY I. List of Essential Authorities a. Area-wide (principal Permittee, City of San Diego, to insert list of all city and Port District Ordinances and other regulations and authorities) b. City-specific Existing ordinances which give the City the legal authority to control discharges to the municipal storm water conveyance system are: ~ /,;} ~/¿? CITY OF CHULA VISTA · Subdivision Ordinance · Zoning Ordinance · Grading Ordinance · Watercourse Ordinance · Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance · Sewer Ordinance · Recycling Ordinance · Solid Waste Ordinance · Public Nuisance Abatement Ordinance In addition, the City of Chula Vista's General Plan contains a number of goals, objectives, and policies that potentially have a significant positive impact upon storm water quality. These goals, objectives, and policies include: · Sediment control for new developments; · Maximum use of natural channels or channels that simulate natural channels and allow a degree of infiltration, sediment control, and pollutant control; · Use of detention basins in major channels for large developments in order to decrease peak flow rates and volumes and to reduce sediment transport to receiving waters; · Recycling of any material which has a reusable nature; · Reduction of wastes; and, · Control of solid and hazardous waste. 2. Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance The City's Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on September 13, 1994. This ordinance gives the City the legal authority to prohibit the discharge of non-storm water into the muiúcipal storm water conveyance system. - 3. Implementation Procedures The City's Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance provides for inspection of vehicles, sites, and premises by authorized enforcement officials. The ordinance gives the enforcement official the authority to perform or order sampling, metering, and related operations. The owner or operator may request and receive splits of representative samples collected. The ordinance provides for enforcement and abatement through administrative and judicial actions, as follows: y /;2-/1 _.n'_"___'______. .__._..__~._.__'"'.____._ ...____.'__.. CITY OF CHULA VISTA a, Administrative 1) Cease and Desist Orders 2) Notice and Order to Clean, Test, or Abate 3) Public Nuisance Abatement b. Iudicial 1) Arrest or Issue Citations 2) Civil Penalties 3) Criminal Penalties Implementation and enforcement procedures for field and enforcement personnel are currently being developed, 4. Responsible Parties The City's ordinance designates the Director of Public Works or his or her designee as the responsible parties for enforcement. The ordinance will be enforced through a joint effort among the Public Works, Building and Housing, Planning, and Police Departments, as well as the City Attorney's Office. y /;2,/;2 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ll. ll..LICIT DISCHARGES A. ll..LICIT CONNECTIONS (System survey, On-going system inspections, and Reporting) Order No, 90-42 required all permittees to develop and implement an Illicit ConnectionlIllegal Discharge Detection (ICIDD) Programs to identify and eliminate non- storm water discharges to storm water conveyance systems. An informal illicit connection program has been in place for many years in the City of Chula Vista as part of flood control, drainage, and road culvert facility maintenance. The existing program includes maintenance crew inspection of all drainage facilities. Functional and safety inspections routinely include examination for illegal connections or dumping, A system inventory was provided to the RWQCB in the July 31, 1991 report detailing the storm water conveyance system maintained by the City of Chula Vista. The system is inspected annually and cleaned as required by Department of Public Works/Operations staff. Removal of illicit connections and illegally dumped materials is done promptly and is done by private individuals (dischargers) or staff, as appropriate. Under the City's Geographic Information System program, the Chula Vista storm water conveyance system maps and inventory are currently in the Pl'Qcess of being updated. Department of Public Works/Operations staff maintain phone and correspondence mes of all maintenance perfo~ed and complaints received. During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, staff will refme system survey, inspection, and reporting procedures. B. ll..LEGAL DUMPING (Out.-.c:h, System surveillance, Spill response, Complaint response, Coordination of alternative disposal, and Reporting) Reference Section II.A. above. The City of Chula Vista Fire Department and County of San Diego Health Services Hazardous Materials Management Division provide emergency response to spills for the City. The County of San Diego !Public Works Solid Waste Management Division operates several programs for disposal of various pollutants at landfills (including recycling) and special event community clean-up activities (abandoned vehicle recycle programs, hazardous materials, disposal programs, and recycling programs). The City of Chula Vista has also implemented a curbside recycling program for newspapers, bottles, and cans and a yard waste composting program. These programs have a significant impact on urban runoff and storm water quality by providing alternative disposal methods. ~ /J.~J3 _.."._-,---_.._-_._------------~--_. .- CITY OF CHUL\ VISTA C. ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES The City of Chula Vista Illicit ConnectionlI1legal Discharge Detection (ICIDD) Program involves two parts: 1. A Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance prohibiting the discharge of pollutants, either directly or indirectly, into the municipal storm water conveyance system; and, 2. Identification of violations through dry weather discharge field screening, inspection, and/or complaints. Chula Vista is currently developing implementation and enforcement procedures utilizing the Public Works, Police, Planning, and Building and Housing Departments' personnel as well as the City Attorney's Office. The City also utilizes County of San Diego Department of Health Services personnel to enforce the ordinance in the City in instances in which the County has jurisdictional authority. Over the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, staff will monitor the implementation and enforcement of the ordinance and will recommend modifications to the ordinance and enforcement procedures, as necessary, to assure compliance with the City's NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit. D. COORDINATION WITH STATE NON-STORM WATER PERMITS (Identification or permissiblelpermittable discharges, Appropriate management . practices, and Reporting) During the City's Environmental Review process for new developments, project applicants are informed of the need to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction or Industrial Activity. During the City's Land Development· Plan Review process, all applicants proposing developments that will result in soil disturbance of five acres or more are notified of State NPDES General Construction Permit requirements and are encouraged to incorporate Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans into grading and construction plans. Currently, the City of Chula Vista does not require the implementation of specific management practices beyond those already required by the City's Grading Ordinance. In addition, the City requires a statement on grading plans acknowledging the land owner'S/developer's obligation to obtain coverage under the State NPDES General Construction Permit and the requirement to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. The State NPDES General Permits are administered and enforced by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. !:-Ý/.2~/f CITY OF CHULA VISTA m. INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL SOURCES A. IDENTIFICATION OF SOURCES (Categorical list, Ranking, Update procedure) Under Order No. 90-42, the City notified several categories of dischargers that they are required to obtain NPDES General Construction or Industrial Permit coverage, During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, City of Chula Vista staff will use the City's geographic database to identify all standard industrial categories in the City that are required to have coverage under the NPDES General Industrial Storm Water Permit. Those sources that have the greatest potential to pollute will be identified and notified first. B. CONTROL MEASURES (pollution prevention measures - Site design options, HousekeepinglMaintenance practices, Structural [treatment) measures - Applicability, Effectiveness, Retrofit opportunities) Unless and until it is determined that a specific business or a type of business contributes to a violation of NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit requirements and/or water quality standards, the City will not mandate specific measures or practices. However, the City's Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance makes it unlawful to not utilize Best Management Practices to the Maximum Extent Practicable to reduce and/or eliminate pollutant discharge to the municipal storm water conveyance system. Further, on a case-by-case basis' III!!. after a violation has been discovered, the ordinance gives the City enforcement official the authority to order the implementation of specific BMPs, C. OUTREACH (General guidance, Industrial category pidance, Industrial activity guidance) Outreach will be coordinated through the City's public education program. Pollution prevention guidances will be developed and distributed for specific industrial and commercial categories and activities during the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period. D. INSPECTIONS (Checklist, Schedule, Reports, Follow-up procedures) The City of Chula Vista is currently exploring the feasibility of using County of San Diego Department of Health Services personnel to perform Dlegal DischargeJIllicit Connection Detection inspections of certain industrial and commercial facilities. This is because the County of San Diego Department of Health Services has specific authority under existing permits (i.e., HAZMAT permits, food handling permits, etc.) to enter a premises at any time for any purpose. /' ft/9 J;<~J~ --~--_..__.._...._------ CITY OF CHULA VISTA However, if the City of Chula Vista is unable to obtain the services of the County of San Diego Department of Health Services, then staff will perform inspections only at those industrial/commercial facilities that have been determined to be polluters through direct evidence andlor probable cause, which is the level of the current program. In either case, inspection procedures, checklists, reports, and follow-up procedures will need to be developed, The City's proposed program will be submitted to the RWQCB for review in the early stages of the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit. E. WCAL PERMlTSIINCENTIVE PROGRAM The City of Chula Vista does not plan to institute any new permits in conjunction with the NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit program. Incentive programs for industrial and commercial facilities will be considered in conjunction with public education and outreach activities. F. TRAINING (public employees, Inspectors) During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, a wider range of City employees will be trained to recognize illicit connections and illegal discharges to the City's storm water conveyance system. Training will include appropriate response and follow-up procedures. G. COORDINATION WITH STATE INDUSTRIAL STORM WATER PERMIT (Memorandum of Undentanding, Reports, Other luues) The City of Chula Vista will not enforce the State NPDES General Industrial Permit and does not desire to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the RWQCB for enforcement of the State's permit. However, the City will coordina~ enforcement of its Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance with RWQCB staff and refer violations of the State NPDES General Industrial Permit to the RWQCB for follow-up action. ~ j.1-)þ CITY OF CØULA VISTA IV. NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT A. PLANNING PROCESS 1. Watershed Protection Policies The City of Chula Vista General Plan contains specific sections that address development in watercourses and on steep slopes. City development policies encourage planned developments to shift densio/ away from steep areas or from flood plains to avoid development impacts on flood plains or steep areas. Those areas are typically preserved in a natural state with open space easements. 2. Coordination with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15080 of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code requires examination of projects subject to the prov~ions of the California Environmental Quality Act for consistency with the General Plan. During the review process, a determination is made regarding the need to obtain NPDES General Industrial or Constmction Permit coverage. In addition, a project's potential to adversely impact or degrade surface water quality is evaluated, when necessary. 3. Site Planning Practices Site Plans are used to identify unique site characteristics requiring special consideration in development planning. Storm water quality issues are addressed in Site Plans, when applicable. 4. General Plan Changes The existing City of Chula Vista General Plan adequately addresses storm water quality issues. Therefore, no changes to the General Plan are proposed. 5. Use of Master Plans The City of Chula Vista requires Master Plans, Sectional Planning Area Plans, and Site Plans to identify unique site! characteristics requiring special consideration, including storm water quality issues when applicable, in development planning. 6. Other Policies N/A ~ 1;;.~/7 ... --..--......-...-..---.--..-.-----.-...----- CITY OF CHULA VISTA 7, Planning - Public Works Interface The Public Works and Planning Departments are involved in all stages of project planning and development. Storm water quality issues are addressed during the planning stage, 8. Implementation Procedures The land development process is administered and enforced through the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Watercourse Ordinance, and the Grading Ordinance, During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, staff will review existing land development policies, standards, and procedures and recommend modifications, as necessary, to assure compliance with the City's Municipal NPDES Storm Water Permit. B. CONSTRUcnON SITES (Erosion control requirements; Chemical and waste management requirements; and Inspections: Checklist, Schedule, Reports, and Follow- up procedures) Land development in the City of Chula Vista is regulated by the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Grading Ordinance, Watercourse Ordinance, and Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. Any project requiring discretionary approval action by the City can be required to adhere to specific timing requirements in the Development Agreement. The Subdivision Ordinance gives the City Engineer the authority to require the incorporation of erosion control measures into grading plans. These measures may include, but are not limited to, sandbagging, landscaping, irrigation, and maintenance requirements. The implementation of erosion control measures are guaranteed through the use of bonding securities. , All persons proposing projects that will disturb five acres or more (including City Capital Improvement Program projects) are informed of the requirement to obtain State NPDES General Construction Permit coverage prior to the issuance of City Grading Permits and/or Building Permits. Existing requirements are adequate, although follow-up procedures need to be refmed. Further, storm water quality improvement will be maximized with proper coordination between· the City of· Chula Vista, which is required to enforce its ordinances and requirements only, and the RWQCB, which is required to enforce the NPDES General . Construction Permit. ß-A /.2..-I¡f . CITY OF CHULA VISTA C. LOCAL PERMITS (Coordination with existing permits and New permit issues) The City of Chula Vista does not plan to institute any new permits in conjunction with the NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit program. D. TRAINING (planning personnel, Public Works personnel, and Inspectors) Reference Section II. C, above, and VII below for City of Chula Vista education and training programs. E. CONTROL MEASURES 1. Pollution Prevention Measures (Site Design, Educationffraining, etc.) The City of Chula Vista incorporates a number of permanent pollution prevention measures into site designs/requirements. These include such structural controls as channel grade control, desilting basins, detention basins, retention basins, natural channels, grass-lined/vegetated channels, infiltration, etc. and non-structural controls such as Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) in planned communities. Because many of the structural controls require the dedication of relatively large areas of land in contrast to concrete-lined channels and concrete drainage facilities, structural controls are utilized primarily in developing areas where sufficient land area is available. Developers are required to develop Storm Water Pol1ution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The responsibility to educate and train the developer's contractors and personnel rests with the developer. The City of Chula Vista educates and trains its staff. 2. Post-Construction Treatment Measures (Applicability, Effectiveness, and Retrofit Opportunities) Post-construction treatment measures utilized by the City are described above. The effectiveness of these measures has been demonstrated through their widespread use throughout the nation. Additional post-construction treatment measures will be considered if proven to be effective in other locales. Retrofit opportunities are limited in developed areas due to insufficient land area. However, during the FY 1995 to FY 2000 permit period, City staffwill research Droven post-construction treatment technologies for possible retrofit of existing facilities. If a specific measure is considered practical and feasible, City staff will present recommendations for said measure's inclusion in site designs/requirements. ~ /2-/7 _.__'"..,___.____~~_._._..___....___...__.__"____._._""_._____.._"0·___..·. _ - - - -_._.._---_.....-_.._._------_...._---,,--_.._.__.,_._._~_...-,..._--- CITY OF CHULA VISTA 3, Operation and Maintenance (Requirements and Responsible Party) The City of Chula Vista is responsible for maintenance of all public drainage facilities, In older areas of Chula Vista, drainage facility maintenance is funded primarily by the Storm Drain Fee and General Funds. In newer areas, facility maintenance districts have been formed to pay for major drainage facility maintenance. In some cases, developers are responsible for drainage facility maintenance until development is complete, at which time the City assumes maintenance responsibilities. 4, Conflicts with Other Mandates (Identification of Conflicts and Conflict Resolution) One mandate that has been identified as possibly being in conflict with NPDES storm water regulations is the requirement to utilize recycled wastewater for irrigation. Recycled wastewater uses higher levels of chlorine for disinfection than potable water. These higher levels of chlorine may have an adverse impact upon downstream aquatic communities, In order to minimize the potential impact to aquatic communities, irrigation runoff is minimized. No additional conflicts have been identified to date. F. OUTREACH (Developers, contrac:ton, and other panies) Information has been provided to developers and contractors by information fliers, meetings, and other methods as outlined in Sections n and VII. The City of Chula Vista and the RWQCB have discussed jointly sponsoring a local 5f!n\inAr to inform developers and contractors of their requirements under the NPDES Nonpoint Source program. G. ENFORCEMENT (Local Ordinances) The City of Chula Vista enforces its Grading Ordinance by requiring developers to post bonding securities for specific items of work, such as grading, erosion control, and landscaping, The Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance authorizes a number of enforcement powers to assure compliance with the ordinance's discharge prohibitions. These include the following: · Issuance of Cease and Desist Orders; · Issuance of Notices to Clean and Abate; · Summarily Abate Public Nuisances; · Issuance of Citations; · Arrest Authority; · Assessment of Civil Penalties; · Assessment of Criminal Penalties; and, · Issuance of Orders to Develop and Implement Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans, ~ /~--2{/ CITY OF CHULA VISTA H. COORDINATION WITH STATE CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER PERMIT (Memorandum of Understanding, Reports, and Other issues) The City of Chula Vista will not enforce the State NPDES General Construction Permit and does not desire to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the RWQCB for enforcement of the State's permit However, the City will coordinate enforcement of its Grading Ordinance and Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance with RWQCB staff and refer violations of the State NPDES General Construction Permit to the RWQCB for follow-up action. .j!::fr'/ 1..2 - .;L / ___._._______...___-+...___ _. ,. ,___...,··.·_._.__.____.___~__'·M_ CITY OF CHULA VISTA v. PUBLIC AGENCY ACTMTIES A. SEWAGE SYSTEMS The City owns and operates a municipal sewage conveyance system that conveys approximately twelve million gallons of raw sewage daily to the San Diego METRO transmission sewer for treatment at the City of San Diego's Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Department of Public Works is responsible for sewerage facility operation, maintenance, and planning. A sewage spill response plan is already in-place for sewage spills from City-owned sewerage facilities and for sewage spills from private sewerage facilities that enter the public right-of-way. Since Fiscal Year 1990-91, the Department of Public Works has had a closed-circuit television inspection program and a sewer rehabilitation program which identify and rehabilitate deteriorated segments of sanitary sewer pipe, thereby significantly reducing the potential for sewage system overflow to the City's storm water conveyance system from pipe failure, surcharge, or backup. B. CORPORATION YARDS (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans) The City of Chula Vista is currently considering hiring a consultant to develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Pian (SWPPP) for its Corporation Yard, located at 707 "F" Street, C. PARKS AND RECREATION (Fertilizen/pesticides (use/application management and storage] and facility management (wash waters, maintenance, and swimming pool waten)) From July 1993 to July 1994, the City of Chula Vista and the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) worked jointly on a one year pollution prevention project known as the Municipal Pollution PreVention Project (MPPP). The main focus of the MPPP consisted primarily of replacing roxic materials with non-toxic or least-toxic materials in City operations, where practical. A Pollution Prevention Policy is currently being developed that will ensure that the City is using the best available options for pollution prevention throughout the City. The City's two public swimming pools are maintained by Department of Public Works personnel. Personnel are aware of the discharge prohibitions related to swimming pool waters and either dechlorinate swimming pool water prior to discharge to the storm drain system or discharge swimming pool water to the sanitary sewer. þ-tß a" ..2d-. CITY OF CHULA VISTA D. STORM DRAIN SYSTEM OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT (Inlet maintenance, drain maintenance, waste management, new system designs, and retro-fit opportunities) The City of Chula Vista Department of Public Works inventories and maintains over 130 miles of pipes, lined and unlined channels, and culverts. Maintenance of facilities has improved water quality by removing silt, organic material, oil/grease, metals, chemicals, and other pollutants before they entered storm water or receiving waters. The Department of Public Works currently proposes to improve the maintenance of the City's municipal storm water conveyance system during the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period to the extent permitted by use of the new City equipment referenced below. In Fiscal Year 1992-93, the Department of Public Works obtained a vacuum-type sanitary sewer and storm drain maintenab.ce vehicle, which is operated by a full-time two-person crew. Public Works staff has received training to operate the vehicle and to properly dispose of collected waste and pollutants. This vehicle has greatly improved the City's ability to remove pollutants from the City's curb inlets, catch basins, and cleanout structures, thereby reducing the mass and volume of pollutants discharged to receiving waters via the City's storm water conveyance system. It is anticipated that the level of maintenance of the City's curb inlets, catch basins, and cleanout stlUctures will further expand in the future if an increase in the Storm Drain Fee is approved by the City Council. E. STREETS AND ROADS (Sweeping, storm water quality bued operations, wute management, street/pavement wuhing, Maintenance - a: ..,,-cut slurry management, b: paving practices, c: "ute management; d: medians (irrigation and fertilizer/pesticides]) Street sweeping is performed by the City's street sweeping contractor. All public streets in the City are swept twice per month, except for the streets in the City's downtown business districts, which are swept at least once per week. Street sweeping uses only a minimal amount of water for dust control. Wastes are disposed of at the Otay Landf1l1 in southeastern ChuJa Vista. The City of Chula Vista has an ongoing, aggressive, and well-developed program of pavement repair and maintenance that keeps the City's paved surface streets in good condition, thereby preventing a large volume of pavement debris and degradation products from being washed into storm drains. Waste products generated by roadway maintenance activities are properly disposed of and recycled, if possible. ~/02-~J ------.'.-,.,--,--.-.'.....-----------.--------------.-..------......----- - - ---- - -- ~-~~~----~- CITY OF CHULA VISTA F. FLOOD CONTROL (Coordination with new projects, Coordination of maintenance activities - Desiltinglsediment removal, Vegetation management, Waste management, Operation of facilities (Detention basins/other, Retrofit opportunities) The City of Chula Vista's General Plan contains a number of goals, objectives, and policies for flood control facilities that have a significant positive impact upon storm water quality, These goals, objectives, and policies include: · Sediment control for new developments; · Maximum use of natural channels or channels that simulate natural channels and that allow a degree of infiltration, sediment removal, and pollutant control; and, · Use of detention basins in major channels for large developments in order to decrease peak flow rates and volumes and to reduce sediment transport to receiving waters, Because many of the structural measures require the dedication of relatively large areas of land in contrast to concrete-lined channels and concrete drainage facilities, they are utilized primarily in developing areas where sufficient land area is available. The Department of Public Works maintains a vast majority of the City's flood control facilities, In some cases, developers have maintenance responsibilities until project buildout. In either case, flood control facilities are inspected by Department of Public Works staff before, during, and after the rainy season to assure that these facilities are in a proper state of maintenance and are able to function as intended. City of Chula Vista vegetation management of its flood control facilities involves selective vegetation removal and maintenance of healthy channel vegetation to reduce channel erosion potential, The City's Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance requires all persons in the City that own or occupy property through which a watercourse passes to keep and maintain the watercourse free of trash, debris, and other obstacles which would pollute, contaminate, or significantly retard the flow of water through it. All vegetation, wastes, and debris that are removed from watercourses and flood control facilities are properly disposed of. G. PUBLIC FACILITIES (parking facilities, golf counes, schools, hospitals, landscapes, and other buildings/plazasletc.) The City's public parking facilities are located primarily in the City's Downtown Business District and are swept once per month. The City's municipal golf course is located within the Sweetwater River flood plain and is operated and maintained by a private contractor. The contract is administered by the City's jVT8 /.2.-2/ -". CITY OF CHULA VISTA Parks and Recreation Department. During the FY 1995 to FY 2000 permit period, a review of operation and maintenance procedures will be necessary. Public landscaping and buildings are maintained by Public Works Department and Parks and Recreation Department personnel. During the FY 1995 to FY 2000 permit period, a review of operation and maintenance procedures will be necessary, The City of Chula Vista does not own or operate any schools or hospitals, H. PONDS, FOUNTAINS, AND OTHER PUBLIC WATER BODIES (algae control [use of chemicals], chlorine management and maintenance) These public facilities are operated and maintained by the Department of Public Works Department. Maintenance crews have been informed about the requirements of the City's storm water permit and now discharge to the sanitary sewer and de-chlorinate water before discharging to the storm water conveyance system. ~ ).2 - .2.S' . ._~.._.____._.....,_.. ___'__,' _'_'n,_ _ _ ..___.n ._,".._.. n','_'_.,___"_ ,. ___.. ____ "n ----- ---,------..----------...-.----- ~_.._- CITY OF CHULA VISTA VI. RESIDENTIAL (Not Elsewhere Covered) During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, the City of Chula Vista will expand its existing public education and outreach program to residents by more effectively demonstrating the problem of storm water and urban runoff pollution from urban activities, including: · Private vehicle washing and maintenance; · Use of household chemicals, such as pesticides, herbicides, and paints; · Swimming pool maintenance; and, · Landscape irrigation and maintenance. Residents will be educated about the need for pollution prevention and the benefits of using safer substitutes, It is proposed that this outreach program be accomplished on both countywide and local levels. IJ :=Acf /.2 -.2. ? /' .: CITY OF CHULA VISTA vn. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND PARTICIPATION A. GENERAL OUTREACH (Written material, audio material, video material, ~nd distribution plan) In December 1993 and January 1994, the City of Chula Vista obtained 3000 watershed protection calendars from the Environmental Health Coalition for free distribution to the public and to City of Chula Vista employees. These calendars were placed at counters in a number of Civic Center buildings, the Chula Vista Public Library, the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, and the Chula Vista Nature Center. Additional outreach materials are described below in Section vn.C. During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, the City of Chula Vista will reach all addresses in the City with mass-mailers and focused outreach efforts. B. FOCUSED OUTREACH (pollutant specific, Practice/activity specific, and Business specific) In September 1992, the City of Chula Vista sent certified letters to all Grading Permit- holders in the City Chula Vista informing them of the requirement to obtain coverage under the State's NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity and the requirement to implement Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans. In November 1994, a similar letter was sent to all Grading Permit holders in Eastern Chula Vista reminding them of erosion control requirements contained in their grading plans and they were also reminded that they are required to have a State NPDES Permit. During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, City of Chula Vista staff will perform additional outreach activities aimed at specific businesses and activities. Those dischargers with the greatest potential to negatively impact storm water quality will be contacted first. C. EDUCATION PROGRAMS (public employees, K-12 and other) The City of Chula Vista has made a number of presentations to City staff regarding the NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit requirements. Employee education and outreach will be increased during the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period. The City of Chula Vista received a Used Oil Block Grant from the California Integrated Waste Management Board for the establishment of a comprehensive watershed protection education program in conjunction with the Chula Vista School District and the City's Nature Interpretive Center. Details of this program are currently being developed. þ--1f /.)-;27 __.~____._._.__._ __..__._,._~_.._ __._~.____._,_.,......,..____.____. 'M"'" '0___ ~---.---..-----------.._----~- - CITY OF CHULA VISTA The City of Chula Vista also received a Used Oil Opportunity Grant from the California Integrated Waste Management Board for the development of a used oil recycling program. The proposed used oil recycling program will: · Establish State of California-certified used oil collection centers throughout the South Bay region at existing oil change businesses; · Provide the collection centers with technical assistance, fInancial incentives, and free advertizing; · Provide the collection centers and the general public with used oil collection containers; · Promote the used oil collection program through business and customer incentives and through paid print and broadcast media advertisements; · Promote proper disposal of used oil through point of purchase displays that provide a list of available used oil recycling centers; · Promote used oil recycling among target generators at high school and community college automobile shop classes; · Promote proper disposal habits through the Chula Vista Nature Center's annual interactive science classes for all third grade public school students by relating proper used oil disposal with watershed protection; and, · Create awareness among the Chula Vista Nature Center's 80,000 annual visitors about the link between the improper disposal of used oil and hazardous materials and their negative impacts upon the environment; This program is a cooperative, regional program among the Cities of Chula VISta, National City, and Imperial Beach, with administration and coordination by the City of Chula Vista. D. CITIZENS PARTICIPATION (Volunteer monitoring, cooperative outreach, and complaint procedures) In April 1995, the City of Chula Vista will participate in I Love a Clean San Diego, Inc.'s annual storm drain stenciling day. It is hoped that this program will also be ongoing year round. During the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, the City of Chula VISta will explore ways to facilitate citizen participation in the storm water quality program. E. EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION Programs have not been in effect for a sufficient time to allow meaningful evaluation, During the early stages of the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, a process to evaluate program effectiveness will need to be developed. .<'~ /c:<-,;¡g . CITY OF CHULA VISTA VITI.PROGRAM EVALUATION A. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (Development Procedure, Role of subcommittees, Activity/source/action area specific) Prior to the end of the ftrst year of the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period, the San Diego County Co-Permittees will need to develop evaluation procedures and criteria to judge the effectiveness of their activities and control measures. Development of program evaluation procedures and criteria must be accomplished for statewide, countywide, and agency-wide storm water management program activities in order to assure the most effective use of scarce resources. Once developed, performance evaluations should occur on a yearly basis, prior to the preparation of annual budgets, for each storm water management program activity, Evaluations must include specific recommendations, including minimal level of effort, and, if applicable, a means to follow-up on the implementation of said recommendations. B. ANNUAL REPORTS (Format/structure, Effectiveness measures, Content) Reports shall be submitted to the RWQCB at the end of each year. The Co-Permittees will submit a single report and a format acceptable to the RWQCB. The report shall address the programs implemented during the previous fIScal year and a proposed plan to be implemented during the current year. If revisions to the FY 1996 to FY 2000 plan are necessary in light of performance evaluations, then said revisions shall be identified and justified in the report. C. SUB-ANNUAL REPORTS (purpose, Formatlstruc:ture, Coateat) Sub-annual reports shall be submitted to the RWQCB prior to the end of each fIScal year. Sub-annual reports will contain a draft preliminary report addressing the implementation of that year's program, a preliminary budget for the next year's program, and a preliminary plan for the next year indicating proposed revisions to the FY 1996 to FY 2000 plan. D. INTERNAL REPORTING (Standard forms, Procedures, Record keepiag) N/A E. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN REVISIONS (process, Reporting) All proposed revisions to the Storm Water Management Plan shall be in accordance with the procedures identified in Sectiol I and as further identified in the Memorandum of Understanding, which has been made a part hereof. ~.:~ J~ 'cJ-j _ _____..___.__+__~~____._~__~_."..___ .__,__u...._____,_..."_·~___~__,.,_·_.._ __.____. _ _ _ ___ _~. --.-.--.--.. - CITY OF CHULA VISTA IX. MONITORING A. SYSTEM CHARACTERIZATION 1. Watershed Characterization The City of Chula Vista is within the San Diego Bay watershed. The State Water Resources Control Board Water Quality Assessment (wQA) indicates that the San Diego Bay is impaired by petroleum distillates, trace elements, synthetic organics (except herbicides and pesticides), coliform bacteria and other microbes, debris, and metals, Watershed characterization and land use data for San Diego Bay was previously submitted to the RWQCB as part of the co-permittees' Wet Weather Monitoring Program. 2. City of Chula Vista Storm Drain System An inventory of the City of Chula Vista's municipal storm water conveyance systems was prepared and submitted to the RWQCB in conformance with Order 90-42 requirements as the Storm Water Report of July 31,1991. The Chula Vista storm water conveyance system maps and inventory are currently in the process of being updated as part of the City's Geographic Information System development program. Characterization of the City's storm drain system was submitted to the RWQCB in July 1991. This information is currently being updated through the City's Geographic Information System program. When completed, this updated information will be submitted to the RWQCB. 3. City of Chula Vista Receiving Waters a. Streams: Telegraph Canyon Creek, Poggi Canyon Creek, Rice Canyon Creek, Long Canyon Creek, Salt Creek b. Lakes: Upper Otay Lake, Lower Otay Lake c. Bays: San Diego Bay d. Wetlands: Sweetwater National Wildlife Refuge, Sweetwater River, Otay River e. Other habitat: City Open Space Easements The WQA indicates that the Lower Otay River has segments which may be affected by toxic pollutants or segments with concentrations of toxic pollutants that warrant concern. The WQA does not list Upper Otay Lake, Lower Otay Lake, or Sweetwater River as impaired. The remaining receiving waters are not included in the WQA. As sufficient amounts of dry weather field screening data is developed during the FY 1995 to FY 2000 ~ /;2- )/J CITY OF CHULA VISTA permit period, it may be possible to evaluate the receiving waters that are not listed in the WQA. 4, Land Use (General Categories/Specific Features) Land use data was submitted with Co-Permittees' Wet Weather Monitoring Program. B. SOURCE IDENTIFICATION (Specific Land Use/Activity) Drv Weather MonitorinlZ Dry weather monitoring furnishes data relative to pollutants entering the storm water conveyance system from fIfty-nine outfalls. Initial data collecûon began in 1994. Land use in the areas tributary to most of the screened outfa11s are relatively homogeneous and have revealed some initial data regarding the types of pollutants from residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. Probable illegal discharges were detected at four of the outfalls tested during the period of August 1994 to October 1994. City staff has identified the probable upstream sources of these illegal discharges and has followed up by meeting with upstream business owners, by requesting the County of San Diego Department of Health Services to perform inspecûon of suspected dischargers, and by discussing the impropriety of the discharges with the dischargers. The City will continue to monitor for the same parameters through the FY 1996 to FY 2000 permit period and will modify field screening procedures and add/delete outfa11s, as necessary, as dry weather monitoring data is developed. Proposed changes, if appropriate, will be submitted to the RWQCB for review and approval. Wet Weather MonitorinlZ The regional wet weather monitoring program currently includes land use monitoring and construcûon site monitoring, C. CONTROL MEASURE EFFECTIVENESS (Specific sources, specific activities, and special studies) Consultant wet weather monitoring and reports conducted to date are on file with the City of San Diego and the RWQCB. D. POLLUTANT LOADS (System widelLand Use SpecificlLong Term stations) The fifteen sites monitored to date have varying mixes of residential, commercial, industrial, and open space land uses. The San Diego River station is probably the most representative sample station of the County. Page 5-3 of the July 29, 1994, monitoring report indicates that ~~ 1.2-)/ - --.--,-..---.------ --~_.._-'.---- ,-_..'"-,,,------_..._---- . __.__m .,._._...._______ _____..___....._........_..__ CITY OF CHULA VISTA the San Diego River station consistently has low event mean concentration (EMC) measurements for trace metals. Residential, industrial, and commercial land uses are represented by the various sites established in the Order No, 90-42 NPDES No, CA 0108758 monitoring and reporting program issued 6/30/94. E. COMPONENTS OF A MONITORING PROGRAM PLAN On June 30, 1994, the RWQCB issued Monitoring and Reporting Program Order No. 90-42, which directed the San Diego County co-permittees to develop and implement a Wet Weather Monitoring and Reporting Program. This order cited specific monitoring program requirements for each of the following program components: · Monitoring and sampling locations; · Storm sampling plan; · Manual of field techniques; · Flow analysis for sampled storm event; · Compliance with USEPA Title 40 CFR 136 sampling and testing protocols; · Testing laboratory; · Quality Assurance/Quality Control; · Analyses to be performed; and, · Data analysis and reporting. In response to the RWQCB order, the co-permittees developed and implemented a Wet Weather Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the above requirements and submitted it to the RWQCB for approval. This program is also on fùe with the Principal Permittee (City of San Diego) and the co-permittee's consultant. The RWQCB has neither approved nor disapproved the co-permittee's monitoring program. The co-permittee's program addresses each of the items contained within Section IX.E. of the Mumley Memo. The City of Chula Vista's Dry Weather Field Screening Program Plan was submitted to, and approved by, the RWQCB in 1993. The City's plan includes requirements for each of the following program components: · Monitoring/sampling locations; · Dry weather sampling frequency, monitored parameters, and method of documenting outfall field inspections; · Compliance with USEPA Title 40 CPR 136 sampling and testing protocols; · Testing laboratory; · Quality Assurance/Quality Control; · Analyses to be performed; and, · Data analysis and reporting. ~ }.2-J;1- CITY OF CHULA VISTA The City's Dry Weather Field Screening Program has been reviewed and approved by the RWQCB and addresses each of the applicable items contained within Section IX.E. of the Mumley Memo. F. DATA MANAGEMENT (Data analysis, database, system, accessibility, and reports) As stated above, RWQCB Monitoring and Reporting Program Order No. 90-42 included specific requirements for data management. Wet weather monitoring data is collected, analyzed, and stored in accordance with the order. Further, this data is maintained by the Principal Permittee (City of San Diego) and by the co-permittee's consultant. The City's Dry Weather Field Screening Program includes specific data management requirements, which are based upon the federal NPDES regulations and Order No. 90-42 and which address each of the applicable items contained within Section IX.F. of the Mumley Memo. All dry weather field screening data is collected, analyzed, and stored in accordance with these requirements. All data is maintained by the City of Chula Vista and by its consultant. Further, the City of Chula Vista's dry weather monitoring data is maintained in database and spreadsheet format by the City of Chula Vista and by the City's consultant. (M:IIIOMElENGlNEERIADVl'LANINl'DESft.APP] ~ /;2~JJ - -_._---_._._-~---_._..._._-~-- ---".. ----- ,..,...--. "---~-_._.__._--_.__.__._~_._._- -~ . - Thif Page Blank - , / I ~ /)-JY EXHIBIT ~~B" NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM SAN DIEGO COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN SAN DIEGO COUNTY CO-PERMITTEES MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This Memorandum of Understanding, entered into by the County of San Diego, (herein called COUNTY), the San Diego Unified Port District, (herein called PORT) , the incorporated cities of San Diego, Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, San Marcos, Del Mar, EI Cajon, Encinitas, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, Santee, Solana Beach and Vista (herein called CITIES), collectively called CO-PERMITTEES, and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, (herein called REGIONAL BOARD) establishes. the responsibilities of each party with respect to compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit regulations administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the authority granted by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) 33 USCA 1251 et. seq. as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987. RECITALS WHEREAS, in 1987 Congress amended Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 USCA 1342p) to require the EPA to promulgate regulations for applications for permits for stormwater discharges; and /" ~ /).-)-> ---_"'__····__·~··_··..·___r --..-------"-.-------...------- -- "-- --_.__._._~-~-_.._-_._-----~_...._.- WHEREAS, the EPA adopted final permit regulations on November 16, 1990; and WHEREAS, these permit regulations require the control of pollutants from stormwater discharges by requiring a NPDES permit which would . allow the lawful discharge of stormwaters into waters of the United states; and WHEREAS, the EPA regulations require NPDES permits for discharge from municipal storm sewers on a system-wide or jurisdiction-wide basis; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, the PORT, the CITIES and the REGIONAL BOARD desire to implement an integrated stormwater management program with the objective of improving surface water quality in the County of San Diego; and WHEREAS, the California state Water Resources Control Board (CSWRCB) as designee of the EPA has delegated authority to the REGIONAL BOARD for administration of the NPDES stormwater permit within the boundaries of its region; and WHEREAS, on or about July 16, 1995, the REGIONAL BOARD will issue a NPDES permit and Board Order governing waste discharge , requirements for stormwater and urban runoff from the COUNTY, the PORT, and the CITIES, naming these entities co-permittees; and WHEREAS, said permit and order require that the co-permittees cooperate in the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan including the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding; . ~ );2-36 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows: 1. DESIGNATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PRINCIPAL PERMITTEE A. The city of San Diego is hereby designated Principal Permittee, but also maintains the same responsibilities . as a co-permittee. B. The Principal Permittee sha 11 be responsible for the overall program coordination, including: 1- Coordination of activities of all co-permittees with the REGIONAL BOARD. 2. Submittal to the REGIONAL BOARD of all reports, plans and programs as required by the permit. 3. Coordination, implementation and administration of all co-permittee joint activities as outlined in this Memorandum of Understanding. 4. Maintaining knowledge of and advising the co- permittees regarding current and proposed State and Federal policies, regulations, and programs that impact non-point source pollutant control programs; assisting the co-permittees in development and presentation of positions on these issues before local, State and Federal agencies. 5. Representing the co-permittees on the Stormwater Advisory Task Force to the California Water Resources Control Board. 6. Formally advising the appropriate state and Federal agencies of termination or amendment of this ;ß--~.) -Ji - - - ^--"._---~.._~._---;-- ---_.._._--_.._~"._-,_..._---_._._-- ___~__. _____._ ..._..___._._"__m..___._""_'-- Memorandum of Understanding. 7. Establishing committees as may be necessary to fulfill the requirements of the permit. 8. Notifying all co-permittee representatives at least 30 days in advance of any and all official votes to be taken by the Management Committee. 9. Submitting any proposed wet weather monitoring plan modifications for the NEXT following fiscal year to the REGIONAL BOARD by July 1st of each year (i.e. by July 1995 for the 1996-97 Fiscal Year). II. RESPONSIBILITIES OF CO-PERMITTEES A. The co-permittees shall be responsible for the funding and implementation of stormwater and urban runoff management programs within their sole jurisdictions for storm drainage systems where they have ownership and maintenance responsibilities as delineated by the appropriate eaSement conveyances (herein referred to as "sole jurisdiction") including: l. Conducting stormwater conveyance system inspections within the co-permittees' sole jurisdiction as required in the Stormwater Management Plan. 2. Planning and conducting surveys and characterizations needed to identify the pollutant source and drainage areas where there is . sole jurisdiction over such drainage areas. 3. Participating in management programs, monitoring Y;. - J( - programs and other plans as required to comply with the permit. 4. Implementing management programs, monitoring programs, and other plans as necessary to meet the requirements of the permit. 5. Maintaining maps of stormwater conveyance systems which are within the sole jurisdiction of the co- permittee with periodic revisions as necessary. 6. Preparing and submitting all reports that are required by the permit to the Principal Permittee a minimum of two weeks prior to their due date to the REGIONAL BOARD and in a format acceptable to the Principal Permittee. 7. Assisting and cooperating with Regional Board in pursuing enforcement action as necessary to ensure compliance with the stormwater quality management programs. 8. Pursuing enforcement of local laws, codes and ordinances as necessary to insure implementation of plans where it has statutory authority to pursue such enforcement actions. 9. Ensuring adequate response to emergency situations such as accidental spills, leaks, illicit discharges, etc. within each co-permittee's sole jurisdiction. 10. Abiding by the terms of this Memorandum of ~/.2~JJ - - --...--~._--.--.._......--...---..---. - "--.-.-. --~_.._----"._~--_._----- Understanding where it does not conflict with any other statutory requirements. III. REGIONAL WATER OUALITY CONTROL BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES A. The REGIONAL BOARD shall insure that all co-permittees . signatory to this Memorandum of Understanding are in compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit. If a co-permittee is determined by the REGIONAL BOARD to be in non-compliance with the permit, the Executive Officer shall notify the Principal Permittee within five (5) working days of the determination. B. The Executive Officer of the Regional Board shall review and approve or reject in writing all program proposals, plans, reports, data and other information or documents reasonably required by law that are submitted by the co- permittees to the REGIONAL BOARD within ninety (90) days of receipt of said submittals. If, at the end of the ninety day period, the REGIONAL BOARD has not provided written comments to the co-permittees regarding the adequacy of co-permittee's submittal, the submittal shall be deemed "approved" and in full compliance with permit requirements. Submittals which become "approved" in the manner described above shall not be subject to future compliance and/or enforcement action if reviewed at a later date within the permit period and determined to be inadequate or in non-compliance. y))~VtJ - - C. Prior to October 1st of each year, REGIONAL BOARD shall approve or amend, based on prior year's test results, wet weather monitoring and testing program submitted by PRINCIPAL PERMITTEE. Any increase by the Regional Board . to the Scope of the Program over and above that proposed by the co-permittees shall be accompanied by a cost estimate therefore prepared by an independent and qualified firm experienced in stormwater sampling and testing. IV. JOINT RESPONSIBILITIES/ACTIVITIES OF CO-PERMITTEES A. Certain elements of the San Diego County Stormwater Management Plan which provide a general and collective benefit to all co-permittees (such as stormwater monitoring/testing, education programs, print and broadcast media programs, etc.) herein called General Programs, will be developed and implemented throughout the permit period. A description of General Program elements, major tasks, schedules and budgets will be developed by November 1st of each year for those elements to be instit~ted in the ensuing fiscal years. Each co- permittee will insure that sufficient funds are budgeted specifically for its share of the cost of each element. V. MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE A. A Management Committee is hereby established to provide overall program direction and to review and recommend an annual budget for General Programs for approval by the ~ /,). ~'I) ---------_.------._~.------- ^~_._^_.--_. --_._-.__......~-,_._--_...- "------~-_.,._.__._._-----_.~~'~----_. co-permittees respective legislative bodies in accordance with the San Diego County Stormwater Management Plan. The Management Committee is a forum for discussion of alternatives and formulation of decisions. It represents all of the co-permittees in a format conducive to timely action. It is a mechanism for facilitating communication, planning, scheduling and evaluation. One of its primary responsibilities is to provide information necessary for future program implementation requirements and related budget requirements so that co-permittee governing bodies have sufficient time to consider fiscal impacts. B. PURPOSE AND RESPONSIBILITY 1- The purpose. of the Management Committee is to direct the continued development and implementation of the Stormwater Management Plan. Refinement and· completion of both Individual and General Program Plan elements require the input and participation of all co-permittees. The Management Committee provides a productive forum for representation of all co-permittees interests in the presentation, discussion and evaluation of proposals and the development of consensus. 2. Responsibilities of the Management Committee include: a. Preparation of the General Program annual ~ /)~J-/:2 ./ - , budget. The budget will be based on the Fiscal Year beginning July 1 and ending on June 30. The budget consists of two parts: L Funding for program costs which are shared by all co-permittees including, but not limited to, administration costs and the wet weather stormwater monitoring program, and ii. Funding for cooperative programs involving more than one but less than all co-permittees. The preliminary draft budget will be distributed to the co-permittees for review and comment by November 1 of each year. After consideration of comments and discussion, the final budget will be prepared, approved, and distributed by March 1 of each year. b. Preparation of an annual budget forecast for budget categories (i) and (ii) above for the remaining years of the permit. c. Reviewing program costs and updating cost and budgeting data as needed. d. Advisory to the Principal Permittee on the creation of special subcommittees to develop and oversee specific program elements such as program evaluation, illicit discharges, ~ /,2- </3 /' - - ______ _..____,__.___._~ "._. __ .___..__..,_._..__.__._,_.___,___....____n_ -- --,-- -- ._------_.,_._.._._~-_._---- , monitoring and Best Management Practices for , new development, including preparation of task assignments and review and approval of General . Program Elements recommendations. . e. Ongoing evaluation and adjustment of General Program Elements. f. Development, refinement and adjustment of implementation schedules. C. MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MAKEUP L Management Committee members and their alternates shall be appointed by the City Manager or the equivalent of the respective co-permittees and a confirming letter of said appointments sent to the REGIONAL BOARD and to the Principal Permittee. 2. Each co-permittee is allocated one voting member. 3. Approval of the Management Committee recommendations shall require a two-thirds affirmative vote of the total number of co- permittees. D. CO-PERMITTEE TERMINATION L The participation of any co-permittee and parties signatory to this Memorandum of Understanding shall be automatically terminated in any year in which the funds necessary for its agreed upon share of the General Program Elements are not appropriated by its legislative body. o ),2-t/y - · VI. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITIES A. All co-permittees will share in General Program Element and administration costs and reasonable costs incurred by the Principal Permittee in fulfilling its duties pursuant to section 1. Costs sha 11 be allocated to the co- permittees as follows: 1. The PORT shall pay 50% divided by the total number of co-permittees sharing General Program Element costs. 2. The remaining shared costs will be allocated to the other co-permittees as follows: a. Forty percent will be distributed based on population within each co-permittee's jurisdiction using SANDAG most recent January 1 "Population and Housing Estimates" using the "HOUSEHOLD" population figures. COUNTY population figure for purposes of this cost distribution shall be based upon population within the County "Urban Limit Lines". b. Forty percent will be distributed based on urbanized area within each co-permittee's jurisdiction using SANDAG Landuse database as most recently updated. Urbanized area will consist of the following categories: Single- family residential, multi-family residential, Commercial, Light Industry, and Heavy/General -~ /;2-lj,?' - - _.._-_.~-- - - ~._.~..~..__.,.__. ,--~._-- - .----,-...- ._.._....._-,~~_...- ---_..-----_...._~ ..__.,-.._~------~~---_.. Industry. COUNTY area figure for purposes of this cost distribution shall be based on area within the County "Urban Limit Lines." c. Twenty percént distributed equally. . 3. Permit fees, both regular and extraordinary, shall be distributed as follows: a. The NPDES regular annual permit fee shall be divided equally among all co-permittees. b. The Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup fee shall be divided half equally among all co- permittees and half equally among co- permittees tributary to aTl'l impaired water body as determined by the State Water Quality Control Board. c. Any other permit fees levied for any reason either temporarily or permanently against the San Diego County Stormwater permit shall be divided by methods approved by a two-thirds vote of the Management Committee. B. Each co-permittee shall pay its share of expenses within 60 days of receipt of an invoice from the Principal Permittee. Funds collected and not expended in any fiscal year shall be carried over as a credit to the next fiscal year. C. The Principal Permittee shall provide a detailed accounting at the end of each fiscal year of the costs ~~)cJ-¡? - - · and expenses incurred under section I above. VII. LIFE OF AGREEMENT The term of this Memorandum of Understanding commences on its execution by each and all of the duly authorized representatives in the COUNTY, the PORT, the CITIES and the REGIONAL BOARD. The life of the MOU shall run with the life of the permit. VIII. WITHDRAWAL OF CO-PERMITTEE Participation in the Memorandum of Understanding may be terminated by any co-permittee for any reason after the co-permittee complies with all of the conditions of termination. The conditions of termination include the following: 1- The co-permittee shall notify all of the other co- permittees in writing 90 days prior to its intended date of termination. 2. The terminating co-permittee shall obtain its own NPDES stormwater permit. 3. The terminating co-permittee shall have its name deleted as Ii co-permittee to the county NPDES permit. Any expenses associated with termination, including but not limited to filing and obtaining the terminating co- permittee's individual NPDES permit and the amendment of the County NPDES permit will be solely the responsibility of the terminating co-permittee. ~ /;2-tJ? ~._-----_._-_.......__.._-,_.... ---... ---~------~---~_._---- - ..._._-----_..~-_._--~---_..__..- IX. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PERMIT REOUIREMENTS Any participant to this Memorandum of Understanding found to be in non-compliance with the conditions of the permit within their sole jurisdictional responsibilities shall . be solely liable for any lawfully assessed penalties. Non-compliance disputes shall be heard by the REGIONAL BOARD. X. AMENDMENTS TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This Memorandum of Understanding may be amended by consent of four-fifths of all signatories hereto. No amendment shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by the duly authorized representatives of four- fifths of the co-permittees. XI. GOVERNING LAW This Memorandum of Understanding shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. If any provision or provisions shall be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. XII. CONSENT AND BREACH NOT WAIVER No term or provision hereof shall be deemed waived and no breach excused, unless such waiver or consent shall be in writing and signed by the co-permittee to have waived or consented. Any consent by any co-permittee to, or waiver of, a breach by the other, whether expressed or implied, ~ /;2- 'If' - , , shall not constitute a consent to, waiver of, or excuse for any other different or subsequent breach. XIII. INDEMNIFICATION Each party to this Memorandum of Understanding (1) shall . have the sole responsibility to comply with the Permit, (2) shall pay all fines, penalties and costs which may arise out of such party's non-compliance with .the Permit, and (3) sha 11 indemnify the other parties of this Memorandum of Understanding against any fines, penalties or costs (including attorneys fees) they may incur as a result of its failure to comply with the Permit. XIV. APPLICATION OF PRIOR AGR~EMENTS The document constitutes the entire Memorandum of Understanding between the co-permittee with respect to the subject matter; all prior agreements, representations, statements, negotiations and undertakings are superseded hereby. .IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Memorandum of Understanding has been executed as of day of , 19~4. ATTEST: , City Clerk ~ /;2-'/j' - _._-----~"_...._,." -,_._--_...._-~.."_.._._-_._-_._...,._~-,- . . - This Page Blank - ~j)¿t/ EXHIBIT "C" ANTICIPATED FUNDING REQUIREMENTS FISCAL \'EAR ACTIVITY 95-96 '6-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 Monitorine: , Dry W cather Ficld Screening S 70,000 S 70,000 S 75,000 S 75,000 S 75,000 Wet Wcather (Co-Permittce Prognun) 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 NPDES PermitIBPTCP Fees 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Public WoIkslEnginccring 111,000 114,000 117,000 120,000 123,000 Storm Drain Maintenance 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 Sweetwater River Channcl Maintenance (City 26,500 26,500 28,000 28,000 28,000 Share) Public Education 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 nlicit Connectionlll1cgal Discharge Detection 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Prognun Miscellaneous 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 TOTALS $406,SOO $409,500 $419,000 $422,000 $425,000 V~ /;2-5/ ./ ___."_..__._~.~"."_ _._."_._.~_______._..,,____,____.__..___..__'M'·_·" _ _..._____~____.__,____·_~·_.m__._'_ ,___,~. · - This Page Blank - ß4 /-2?~ RESOLUTION NO. I?fj"p Y RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR 1996/2000 NPDES STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN/PERMIT APPLICATION TO THE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD (RWQCB) WHEREAS, on February 19, 1991, the Chula vista city Council passed a resolution approving the city's participation in its first National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit; and WHEREAS, said permit was considered an "early" NPDES permit issued by the RWQCB prior to the promulgation of final united States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations; and WHEREAS, at the time, EPA regulations required NPDES permits for discharges from municipal storm drains on a system-wide or jurisdiction-wide basis; and WHEREAS, the county of San Diego, the 18 incorporated cities of San Diego County, and the San Diego Unified Port District were all parties to the early NPDES permit and the Implementation Agreement associated with it; and WHEREAS, under the early permit, the co-permittees cooperated in the development and implementation of a comprehensive county-wide storm water/urban runoff management program in which the City of San Diego took the lead as the principal permittee; and WHEREAS, the early NPDES permit issued on July 16, 1990 allowed agencies in San Diego County an opportunity to gradually come into compliance with the EPA requirements; and WHEREAS, said permit expires on July 16, 1995. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the submittal of the city's Fiscal Year 1996/2000 NPDES Storm Water Management Plan/Permit Application to the Regional Water Quality Control Boa (RWQCB). Presented by John P. Lippitt, Director of , City Public Works /:l.A~ J .'_.,-,---- _ ---------.-----.--... -----.-- ----.-- RESOLUTION NO. 17Kt7~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE FISCAL YEAR 1996/2000 REGIONAL NPDES STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WHEREAS, City staff has been working with representatives from other agencies on the development of the second permit and also a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to serve as a guide for implementation of the next five year permit; and WHEREAS, the proposed MOU also establishes a management committee to provide overall program direction and to review and recommend an annual budget for general programs for approval by the co-permittees' respective legislative bodies in accordance with the San Diego County Storm Water Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the management committee will be a forum for discussion of alternative and formulations of decisions; and WHEREAS, the life of the MOU is intended to run with the life of the permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the City's participation in the Fiscal Year 1996/2000 Regional NPDES Storm Water Management Plan and Memorandum of Understanding. Presented by John P. Lippitt, Director of Bruce M. Public Works Attorney C:\rs\NPDES J,2./J --I . "--.----, -'. __ ____.__ _ __..._._ __.-.____,_.'.__ __~M .~_.__....._----_._.~---------~~- .--~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item /3 Meeting Date 2/14/95 ITEM TITLE: A. Report: Consideration of request for City Council support for processing a minor Sphere amendment and annexation prior to completing the City's pending comprehensive Sphere-of-Influence update Eastlake Development Company. !!. Resolution }7FJP . . supportmg LAFCO processmg of the proposed Sphere amendment and annexation in advance of the City's pending comprehensive Sphere-of-Influence update, and requesting that LAFCO waive conducting authority (City Council) proceedings in the matter. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning /if¿ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~1.. (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ NoX) On December 12, 1994, the City received a letter from Eastlake Development Company requesting City Council support for processing the noted Sphere amendment and annexation involving a 22.7 acre area associated with the Eastlake Greens project (please see Exhibits A and B). Eastlake' s letter came in response to a request of the Local Agency Fonnation Commission (LAFCO) that Council indicate its support of the application, since it involves a Sphere amendment which would occur prior to completion of the City's comprehensive Sphere-of- Influence update process presently underway with LAFCO (see Exhibit C). Eastlake and City staff originally met with LAFCO in early 1994 to discuss processing the application. At that time it was anticipated that the Sphere update would be completed by late 1994, and Eastlake accordingly agreed to delay their application. The Sphere study and deliberations are now, however, on a more protracted timetable with LAFCO consideration to occur some time in the July to September 1995 timeframe. LAFCO has therefore agreed to consider Eastlake's application at this time, but requires Council support. In addition, changes in State law brought about by AB 1335, and effective January 1 ,1994, provide that LAFCO may waive conducting authority (City Council) proceedings in an annexation when certain conditions exist. Eastlake's application meets those conditions, and the request for waiver, if approved, will streamline the process without any material effect to the City. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution attached as Exhibit D for forwarding to LAFCO. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. /;!~.. / --~-"--~- ._--_._--_.__..._~_.__.,_.._-_."-------~_..__..__. ------ - ------~~-_.._---_._---_.._----_._-- ----.-- Page 2, Item J}. Meeting Date 2/14/95 DISCUSSION: Backl!round As noted in Eastlake's letter (see Exhibit B), in August, 1994, the City Council approved GDP and SPA amendments for approximately 22.7 acres of unincorporated land acquired by Eastlake as part of the "land swap" with the Baldwin Company. Those acres are planned for development as part of the Eastlake Greens project, and involve portions of neighborhood units R-20, R-23 and R-lO (see Exhibit A). Eastlake has already begun grading operations in the R- 20 and R-23 neighborhood areas, and anticipates the commencement of housing unit construction in March, 1995. With regard to the R-I0 area, Eastlake is presently processing grading and improvement plans with the City, and anticipates the commencement of earthwork by Summer 1995. When Eastlake and City staff initially met with LAFCO in early 1994 regarding the need to annex these areas, LAFCO advised withholding application processing since the areas were not within the City's adopted sphere, and were subject to the sphere Special Study Area for Otay Ranch. That advice stemmed from LAFCO policy which prohibits sphere amendments during the processing of the City's comprehensive sphere-of-influence update, which was already underway at that time. Since the update study was then anticipated for completion by the end of 1994, it appeared that the filing delay would not materially affect Eastlake's construction schedules and the according need to annex the land to Chula Vista. It was stated, however, that should the sphere update study schedule become protracted, LAFCO would consider Eastlake's application prior to completion of the comprehensive sphere update study. That circumstance has arisen, as the present sphere update study may not be finally acted upon by LAFCO until as late as September, 1995. Given this situation, and the above noted construction schedules, Eastlake now finds it necessary to move forward with the sphere amendment and annexation application at this time. Staff supports Eastlake's request, and recommends that Council indicate support for the application as required by LAFCO. If the application is not processed at this time, Eastlake and the City would be faced with having to coordinate and procure "off-site" permitting authority through the County of San Diego. This would complicate rather than simplify the permitting process, and result in interruptions and costly delays to construction of those neighborhood units which are already largely within the City's jurisdiction. Reouest for Waiver of Conductinl! Authoritv Proceedinl!s Major changes were made to the Cortese/Knox Local Government Reorganization Act in 1993, through the enactment of AB 1335. The Cortese/Knox Act provides authoritative and operating frameworks for the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). /:U'~ --~..--.-~~----~---~.--_._--.~'..-"..--..-..--..~ ... .',. .'-_._.". - _._--_._----~_._----_._---- Page 3, Item J J Meeting Date 2/14/95 One of AB 1335's changes is the establishment of methods to streamline the conducting authority proceedings for changes of organization or reorganization. When territory is to be annexed to Chula Vista, "conducting authority proceedings" refers to the City Council's hearing process to consider and act on the proposal after it has been acted upon by LAFCO. Waiving the conducting authority proceedings allows LAFCO's action to approve and order the change of organization or reorganization, and reduces typical processing timeframes by approximately two months. To avoid complications when proposals may involve intricate issues, and it is therefore necessary and/or desirable for the City Council to also consider the proposal, waivers under AB 1335 may only be considered when all of the following conditions are present: (1) the subject area is uninhabited (less than 12 registered voters), (2) all owners of land within the affected territory have given their written consent, and (3) all annexing agencies have given their written consent to the waiver. Eastlake's request meets all these conditions. The rationale behind these conditions is that they are reflective of non-complicated, non- controversial proposals where lands are vacant, and involved parties are all in agreement and consenting to the proposed reorganization. In such circumstances, LAFCO and the City (conducting authority) are typically not required to hold public hearings, and the proposal is acted upon as a consent calendar item. As such, the City Council (conducting authority) proceedings are essentially a matter of formality which has proven to be cumbersome, repetitious and time consuming. Therefore, in the spirit of streamlining, and in recognition of Eastlake's in-process construction activities in the affected neighborhoods, staff is recommending that Council also request LAFCO to grant the waiver. It should be noted that in this instance such a waiver will not lessen, jeopardize or otherwise negatively impact the review process, or public and/or agency input, but rather solely provide that the formal review and approval process will reside with LAFCO. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The applicant is reimbursing staff time through a deposit account. Exhibits: A, Locator Map B, Eastlake request letter C, LAFCO letter authorizing application filing D, Council support resolution A:\ANNEXS\EL-SPHER\CC-SUPPT .A13) 1:119:3 /f3A-lf ,--------,..._----_."~----_._------ - -,- '"_.,,.---- -----_.~.._._._---- "." -,---------.. - -...-.----- 0 T A Y R A N C H fÙ'(\J\l~ PROPOSED SPHERE AMENDMENT AND ANNEXATION AREA APPROX. I I EASTLAKE GREENS ¡ PROJECT BOUNDARY 22.7 TOTAL ACRES I······~ CITY BOUNDARY C HULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR APPliCANT: Eastlake Development PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Company ANNEXATION C9 ADDRESS: Request: Eastlake Greens expansion sphere amendment and annexation. SCAlE: FILE NUMBER: NORTH 1" = 800' ANX-95-04 /:J1f - 5ß3A -~e- X,." &, T A ._.____....._.__,_' ." ._,_.________n._______...._·'....__..____.___ ,.._ _"___'__"_"'_" ..'____".'.,_,_.,_ __ ____u..- December 7, 1994 Mr. Robert Leiter ¡" Director of Planning '- (L: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Bob: On August 16, 1994 the City Council approved GDP and SPA amendments and IS-94-19 on approximately 22,7 acres of unincorporated land that EastLake Development Company acquired as part of the land exchange with the Baldwin Company, One parcel is a strip of land north of East Orange Avenue, east of the SDG&E easement, and the second is a triangular parcel northeast of the easement. These two parcels are planned to be developed in conjunction with EastLake i Greens. ... It is our intent to annex the subject parcels to the City of Chula Vista. Because the .. parcels are included in the Special Study Area for the Otay Ranch and are subject .... to the LAFCO Sphere of Influence Study we delayed our application for annexation. It appears now that the Sphere Study and deliberations will be more EASTLAKE protracted than originally anticipated and we are compelled by business and DEVELOPMENT COMPANY marketing conditions to move ahead with the application. LAFCO has indicated a willingness to consider our application, which would be an exception to their sphere policy. However, LAFCO is requiring that written confirmation from the Chula Vista City Council be included indicating support for the application prior to the sphere update. Weare requesting that staff docket this item as soon as possible in order to obtain Council confirmation. .... Thank you for your consideration of this matter. su;w~ Katy Wright Project Manager KW/gmo cc: Ed Batchelder, City ofChula Vista Gerald Jamrisk, Otay Ranch Project Team f:\orcuttlwinwordlkatyllettersllafco,doc 900 lone Avenue Suite 100 o Chula Visto, CA 91914 _ 619) 421,0127 JJ,1 ? f3^'1xHl¡¡;;- 8 -..------,-----.-- - -----_.~_.. .....--.,--.. - --,-------------- ---..- . -".- .. ".. "-'-""-,_. ...__..-. .---- - i ~ . I jLAFCO 1600 Pacific Highway t Room 452 1 San Diego, CA 92101 · (619) 531-5400 ! San Diego Local Agency Formation ¡Commission , , ,Chairperson November 8, 1994 I .0<. Ulllan M. Child. ¡HeliX Wt1Ar DIsttIct ¡Members ¡Dianne Ja<:ob Laurie J. McKinley ¡County Boord of , SupeMOOrs McKinley-Nielsen Associates, Inc. j John MacDonald 416 University Avenue, Suite 200 i County Board of San Diego, CA 92103 ¡ SupeMoore I SUBJECT: proposed Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Amendment · Leonard M. Mooro ! Councllmember, CIty of (Eastlake Development) i Chuta Vi$tl. ¡ : Joan Shoemaker ! Mayor, CIty of Dear laurie: 1 EJ Cajon I ì C!eorge Stoven. Thank you for the Information on the proposed sphere of influence , Deputy Mayor. City of , San Di.go amendment associated with the Eastlake Development. After reviewing the · John Sasso information, we have determined that, because the sphere line spllis the , ....aid.nt, Borrego property ownership and given the uncertaIn timeframe for Chula Vista's , Water CI.tt1ct comprehensive sphere update, we will accept the Eastlake Developrrlent's Dr. Unell Fromm sphere amendment and annexation application. The property owner should Publlo Member be aware, however, that processing the sphere amendment would be an I Alternate Members exception to our policy and there would be no assurance that It woLild be I , Stlan P. Bllbray approved by the Commission. Processing the proposal at this time would County Boord of Supervlsoro require that the Commission not only evaluate the merits of the sphere ¡ Julianne Nyøaord amendment and annexation, but determine that the circumstances ~rrant i Councllmember, CIty of making an exception to our sphere policy. , : Car1abad ; If it Is decided to move forward with thls proposal, please coordinate the 1 Juan Vargas , Counollm.mber, CIty of submission of the application with the City. Specifically, the proposal 'SanDiego application should include written confirmation from the City Còuncil · Ronald W. Wootton, indicating that it supports processing the sphere amendmen~ and ~ Fire Protection DiWICI annexation prior to completing the comprehensive sphere update, Æso, if DavId A. Perldn. it has not already done so, the City wlli have to prezone the propertY and Public Member make the appropriate environmental determinations, Lastly, the applicable executive Officer LAFCO fees need to be submitted so that the proposal can be procassed. MIch.-I o. Oft . 13/1'" eXH/ølr a Counsel ~ ~ laurie J, McKinley November 8, 1994 Page Two i If you have any questions please contact me at 531-5400, i , I Sincerely, , ! ad-a OE CONVERY Local Governmenta Analyst JFC:lh co: Ed Batchelder, City of Chula Vista Gerald J. Jamrlska, Otay Ranch Project Team · , · I · · I I i ¡ ! ! ì . i ¡ , . i ¡ i , i IJ/}~/(/ ~ ---'-.---.------ -- ------~--~- ----- ------ --~--- RESOLUTION NO. J7~1J A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING LAFCO PROCESSING OF THE PROPOSED "EASTLAKE GREENS EXPANSION SPHERE AMENDMENT AND ANNEXATION" (SA95-3, CA95-3) PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE SPHERE-OF INFLUENCE UPDATE, AND REQUESTING WAIVER OF CONDUCTING AUTHORITY PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER WHEREAS, on November 8, 1994, the San Diego Local Agency Fonnation Commission (LAFCO) issued a letter to Eastlake Development Company authorizing submission of the above referenced sphere amendment an annexation application predicated upon receiving written confinnation of support from the Chula Vista City Council; and, WHEREAS, on December 12, 1994, the City received a letter from Eastlake Development Company requesting that the City Council indicate such support; and, WHEREAS, the two subject areas totaling approximately 22.7 acres are an intended part of the Eastlake Greens planned community already within the City boundary and presently under construction; and, WHEREAS, the subject areas were added to the Eastlake Greens project as part of a land exchange with the Baldwin Company to effectuate more logical planning boundaries between the Eastlake and Otay Ranch project areas; and, WHEREAS, being a previous part of the Otay Ranch project holdings, the subject areas are not presently within the sphere-of-influence for Chula Vista, and are thereby subject to the City's comprehensive sphere-of-influence update study presently underway with LAFCO; and, WHEREAS, the timetable for consideration of the City's sphere-of-influence update study has become more protracted than originally anticipated, and it has thereby become necessary for Eastlake Development Company as a matter of business and marketing conditions to proceed with their LAFCO application at this time; and, WHEREAS, consideration of Eastlake's application in advance of completion of the City's comprehensive sphere-of-influence update would represent an exception to LAFCO policy, and for which support of the City Council is necessary; and, WHEREAS, the Cortese/Knox Local Government Reorganization Act, as amended by AB1335 effective July 1, 1994, provides that LAFCO may waive conducting authority (City Council) proceedings for a change of organization or reorganization if all of the following conditions apply: (1) the subject area is uninhabited (less than 12 registered voters), (2) all owners of land within the affected territory have given their written consent, and, (3) all annexing agencies have given their written consent to the waiver; and, I;J[J'J E,KHIIJ/7 /) "'-"""-'-"---".-.---, - -'.--.."-,-.----'.------.-,.." -.....--------- -- _n __~.__._____,_._ WHEREAS, all those conditions are met by the subject proposal; and, WHEREAS, on February 14, 1995, the City Council considered the aforementioned matters. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby fmd, detennine, resolve and order as follows: I. That the City Council supports LAFCO processing of the subject application prior to completing the City's comprehensive sphere-of-influence update since the affected areas are an integral part of the developing Eastlake Greens project now split by the adopted sphere-of -influence boundary. 2. That the proposal meets all criteria for waiver of conducting authority proceedings under Government Code §56837(c), and the City Council requests that LAFCO grant such waiver for the proposed "Eastlake Greens Expansion Sphere Amendment and Annexation" (SA95-3, CA95-3). 3. That the City Clerk shall provide a certified copy of this resolution to LAFCO and the applicant. Presented by ~ Robert A. Leiter Bruce M. Boogaard Director of Planning City Attorney (A:\ANNEXSIEL,SPHERICC,SUPPT,RSO) /;!ß -;¿ -_.--------,_..__.- ....._..,._-_..,_._._-----~.~._-"-------------_..._- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item L Meeting Date 2114195 ITEM TITLE: Report: Consideration of Draft Request for Qualifications to be the Preserve Owner/Manager for the Otay Ranch Properties. SUBMITTED BY: Special Planning Projects M c Project REVIEWED BY: City Manager~~l' 4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No~ On October 28, 1993, the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors jointly approved the Otay Ranch General Development Plan(GDP)jSubregional Plan (SRP). The GDP requires the selection and retention of a Preserve Owner/Manager (POM) prior to approval of the first City of Chula Vista Sectional Planning Area (SPA) or County Specific Plan Area. The POM will be responsible for resource management, restoration and enforcement of the 11,375+ acre Otay Ranch open space preserve. On July 26, 1994, The Otay Ranch, L.P. (Baldwin Co.) submitted an application for the first Sectional Planning Area to the City of Chula Vista. SPA One contains Otay Ranch Village Five and the majority of Village One. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Council: 1. Accept the Draft Request for Qualifications to be the Preserve Owner/Manager for the Otay Ranch Properties Report; and 2. Direct and authorize Staff to transmit the Request for Qualifications to potential Preserve Owner/Managers, as identified in Attachment 1. jJ/~/ -_...-.-,---_..",.._._._._._._._---_.._------_.'"~-_.."...- -~.~-~.._-.-~-_.~.._--- --~---_._-_._.---_.._.- Page 2, Item ILl Meeting Date 2114195 DISCUSSION: Backcround In response to the SPA application submitted by The Otay Ranch, L.P., Otay Ranch Project Team Staff, in cooperation with San Diego County staff, prepared the January 31, 1995 Draft Request for Qualifications for the Preserve Owner ¡Manager of the Otay Ranch. GDP policies require that selection of the POM be acceptable to the City of Chula Vista and San Diego County after seeking the "advice of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)." The policies further state that "the POM may be a local government, a public resource agency, a non-profit organization, or any other entity or entities acceptable to the landowner, City of Chula Vista and San Diego County." The Preserve Owner ¡Manager may be an entity or entities working within a cooperative agreement to fulfill the duties of the POM. The Preserve Owner ¡Manager will oversee the day-to-day and long-range activities within the Management Preserve. The POM will take an active role in the maintenance and enhancement of biological resources, the development of educational programs, and the implementation of the Phase 1 and 2 Resource Management Plan (RMP) policies related to management of the Preserve. The POM will be involved in the decision- making processes for all activities and amendments to the GDP or RMP or both that potentially effect the integrity of the Preserve. The "goal" of the Otay Ranch Management Preserve is to establish an open space system that will become a permanent preserve dedicated to the protection and enhancement of the biological, paleontological, cultural, flood plain and scenic resources within Otay Ranch, maintenance of long- term biological diversity, and the assurance of the survival and recovery of native species and habitats within the preserve. The "vision" of the Otay Ranch Preserve is to design a functional "living museum" to protect the sensitive natural and cultural resources and to increase public awareness and appreciation of these sensitive resources under the stewardship of an experienced Preserve Owner ¡Manager. 11j~,). ."------------.--"-----...---------. ..----------..---...- ___ ___'._.._.__'_.__._m_...__"'__._..__._.___._..'__._'~.______. _ Page 3, Item 1'1 Meeting Date 2/14195 The desirable qualifications for the Preserve Owner !Manager include: 1. At least 5 years of demonstrated experience managing biological resources including listed species; 2. At least 5 years of previous experience with law enforcement or the ability to contract with law enforcement agencies; 3. At least 5 years of previous experience with access control; 4. Demonstrated ability to interact effectively with local and regional conservation agencies, recreational agencies and the local community; 5. Prior experience in conducting or coordinating with individuals involved in ongoing scientific research; 6. Demonstrated ability to coordinate continued monitoring efforts of the Preserve's biota, as shown by staff experience and existing programs; 7. Cultural resource management experience; 8. Demonstrated experience in long-term management of large open space areas with numerous sensitive species; 9. Demonstrated ability to efficiently manage personnel and finances over a long-term; 10. Demonstrated experience or ability to establish and operate environmental educational and interpretive programs; l1.Demonstrated ability and willingness to cooperate with local and regional agencles and direct expenence m working with governing boards and/or advisory committees representing such agencies; and 12. Demonstrated ability to conduct community volunteer and community outreach programs. Future Steps in the Process Upon approval, by the City Council and the Board of Supervisors, staff will distribute the RFQ to approximately 25 potential POMs. There have been over twenty-five agencies expressmg interest in submitting a response to the RFQ, including The County Department of Parks and Recreation, Bayfront Conservancy Trust, Center for Natural Lands Management, San Diego Zoological Society, City of Chula Vista Parks Department, etc. Responses to the RFQ must be submitted to the Otay Ranch Project Office by April 10, 1995. Qualifications will be forwarded to a City/County Screening Committee. The Screening Committee is comprised of four voting members, two members representing the City of Chula Vista, and two members representing the County of San Diego. 1'1"3 --_._-------_._---~--_.-_..._._._,-_._-------,_._...._....-.-.- -- _..... - -_._._._~-_._...._.._---- -- ------ --_.....~--- Page 4, Item pI Meeting Date 2114195 Representatives of the property owner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish & Game will be invited to attend and participate in Screening Committee interviews and deliberations. The evaluation process will take approximately one week, with interviews tentatively scheduled for April 24, 1995. The Screening Committee will review the recommended POM and draft retention contract in April, 1995. The City/County Screening Committee will make a recommendation to the City of Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors in May, 1995. The Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors will consider the recommendation and take separate action to approve/select the Preserve OwnerjManager in May, 1995. FISCAL IMPACT: A draft funding program will be submitted by the Baldwin Co. m conjunction with the review of the first SPA. The draft funding program will include a five year management plan; proposed staffing plan; and provisions for the availability of initial start-up funds upon conveyance of the first parcel to the preserve. This draft document must be reviewed and adopted by the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, with the advice and consultation of the POM, and interested agencies. A final funding program must be adopted prior to or concurrent with the approval of the first SPA. Sources of funding for the Preserve OwnerjManager will be not dependent upon City or County General Funds. Pursuant to the Otay Ranch GDP, financing mechanisms for restoration activities conducted within the Preserve that are regarded as mitigation for development activities within the Ranch shall be borne by the individual developers in Otay Ranch. The developers of Otay Ranch must also insure provision of adequate funds to initiate appropriate management activities with conveyance of the first parcel to the preserve. Attachments 1. Draft Request for Qualifications to be the Preserve OwnerjManager for the Otay Ranch Properties Report 2. Potential Preserve OwnerjManager Distribution List /'-i _.__.-.-~ ..------..-----.------- -- --- _ __..__.-u_.~~_____.__._._~_______ _ _ ..__"_____..._.__... REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS TO BE THE PRESERVE OWNER/MANAGER FOR THE OTAY RANCH PROPERTIES PREPARED AND COORDINATED BY THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA AND SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA January 31, 1995 JJ/~.s __.___~_~_~___._..____.~_._u,.____,...__._._.____ _._._..__.__._..__...__.___ ~. I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Planning for Otay Ranch has been a cooperative effort between the City of Chula Vista and San Diego County. On October 28, 1993, in joint session, the City of Chula Vista City Council and the Board of Supervisors adopted a General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) for the Otay Ranch site. This Joint planning effort has resulted in this Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP)/Sub-Regional Plan (SRP), which sets forth a comprehensive plan for Otay Ranch. The GDP/SRP is an integrated policy document which combines the requirements of the City of Chula Vista and San Diego County. This GDP/SRP: · Identifies the land use pattern and intensities for the Otay Ranch community; · Identifies Otay Ranch land use, facility, environmental, economic and social goals, objectives and policies; · Informs citizens, the land owner, decision-makers and local jurisdictions of the policies which will guide development within the Otay Ranch; · Guides the coordinated development of Otay Ranch consistent with the goals of the City of Chula Vista, San Diego County and the region; and · Provides a foundation for the subsequent consideration and approval of Sectional Planning Area/Specific Plans and Subdivision Maps. Contained within the adopted plans are numerous policies. One policy requires the selection and retention of a Preserve Owner/!VIanager (POM) prior to approval of the first City of Chula Vista Sectional Planning Area (SPA) or County Specific Plan Area. The POM will be responsible for resource management, restoration and enforcement of the 11,375+ acre open space preserve. On July 26, 1994, the Otay Ranch, LP submitted to the City of Chula Vista an application for the first Sectional Planning Area. SPA One contains Village 5 and a portion of Village 1. GDP/SRP policies require that selection of the POM be acceptable to the City of Chula Vista and San Diego County after seeking the "advice of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)". The policies further state that "the POM may be a local government, a public resource agency, a non-profit organization, or any other entity or entities acceptable to the landowner, City of Chula Vista and San Diego County." Printed: 1/31/35 JI.j-¿' Page: :?/21 JJJ/....rfq-pom.doc --_._."--_._----~-_.~--_._------_.._-_..~~._.--,. ~--_...._-- -' -...- ..."....--.-- -~--- ----_._-,.~_. Other policies contained within the GDP requires that a draft funding program, prepared by the applicant, be submitted for review in conjunction with the first SPA. This draft document will be reviewed and adopted by the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, with the advice and consultation of the POM, and interested agencies. A final funding program will be adopted prior to or concurrent with the approval of the first SPA. The program will include all sources of funding, not dependent upon City or County General Funds; a five- year budget; a five-year management plan; proposed staffing plan; and provisions for the availability of initial start-up funds upon conveyance of the first parcel to the preserve. Financing mechanisms for restoration activities conducted within the Preserve that are regarded as mitigation for development activities within the Ranch shall be borne by the individual developers m Otay Ranch pursuant to the requirements set forth in the adopted Findings of Fact. The developers of Otay Ranch will also insure provision of adequate funds to initiate appropriate management activities with conveyance of the first parcel to the preserve. II. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROJECT TO THE REGION Otay Ranch is located in southwestern San Diego County approximately 3.5 miles east of downtown Chula Vista and 13 miles southeast of downtown San Diego. The property lies between the eastern edge of the City of Chula Vista and the western edge of the unincorporated community of Dulzura. The rural community of Jamul lies directly northeast of the project area, and the United States-Mexico international border is 2 miles south of the southernmost boundary of Otay Ranch. The combined properties span a distance of approximately 12 miles from east to west and 8.5 miles from north to south. A majority (22,509 acres) of the Otay Ranch is located within the unincorporated area of San Diego County; the remaining 390 acres are situated in the Otay Mesa area of the City of San Diego. The 2,900-acre area surrounding and including the Otay Lakes is owned by the City of San Diego. For planning purposes. Otay Ranch is grouped geographically to form three distinct parcels: · Otay Valley Parcel · San Ysidro Mountains Parcel · Proctor Valley Parcel Printed: 1/31;95 11/-7 Page: &'21 JJJ/..,rfq'pom,doc ~-~----_._-----_._---_._-- "._.-~--- -- ~._._--- -~......._-_. Otav Valley Parcel: The Otay Valley Parcel is the largest parcel of Otay Ranch comprising 9,449 acres. This area of land is bounded by Telegraph Canyon Road on the north. Heritage Road and the Otay Landfill Site on the west, Brown Field on the south, and Lower Otay Lake on the east. The Otay River Valley bisects the southern portion of this parcel east to west. Several natural landforms are situated within this parcel: Wolf Canyon, Salt Creek, Poggi Canyon, Johnson Canyon, O'Neal Canyon and Rock Mountain. The six "outparcels" (property not owned by Baldwin Vista) within the boundaries of the Otay Valley Parcel correspond to lands dedicated to reservoirs in the Otay Water District and City of San Diego water system, a Federal Aviation Administration airway control facility, a rock mining quarry and several private parcels. Proctor Valley Parcel: The Proctor Valley Parcel comprises 7,895 acres. The Proctor Valley area is the northernmost portion of the Otay Ranch and is generally bounded by Otay Lakes Road and Lower Otay Lake to the south, the Upper Otay Lake and San Miguel Mountains to the west, the community of Jamul to the north, and vacant agricultural land to the east. The Proctor Valley Parcel also includes the Mary Birch-Patrick Estate and the inverted "L" areas. The four outparcels encompassed by the Proctor Valley Parcel correspond to two sections of land owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), a City of San Diego reservoir and two, private holdings. Major landforms include the Jamul and Callahan Mountains. San Ysidro Mountains Parcel: The San Ysidro Mountains Parcel is comprised of 5,555 acres located in the southeastern portion of the project area, along the fringes of the northern foothills of the San Ysidro Mountains and Otay Mountain. The parcel is generally bounded by the eastern arm of Lower Otay Lake and vacant land along Otay Lakes Road to the north, the main body of Lower Otay Lake to the west, land owned by the BLM to the south, and vacant land just west of the community of Dulzura to the east. Major landforms contained within this region include Little and Big Cedar Canyons and Hubbard Springs. Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) The Otay Ranch Preserve is considered a cornerstone of South San Diego County's regional wildlife habitat area. A similar conservation program is currently being prepared. The Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) is still in preliminary draft form and is not expected to be released for public review until early 1995. The Otay Ranch Preserve are presumed to be dedicated to the POM by fee interest in accordance with a conveyance plan yet to be prepared and approved. Given the timing of the MSCP versus the first Otay Ranch SPA approval, it is likely that the retention of the Otay Ranch POM and Printed: 1/31/95 I'I-Y Page: 4/21 JJJ(....rfq-pom.doc ~~_._---~_.- ~~_._._._m. . conveyance of Otay Ranch Preserve lands will precede the larger, regional MSCP. The POM selected for the Otay Ranch Preserve will have to coordinate closely with the MSCP. Regional preserve management agreements may be used to ensure working relationships are established between other open space preserves. III. MANAGEMENT PRESERVE GOAL AND VISION The "goal" of the Otay Ranch Management Preserve is to establish an open space system that will become a permanent preserve dedicated to the protection and enhancement of the biological, paleontological, cultural resources, flood plain, and scenic resources of the ranch, maintenance of long-term biological diversity, and the assurance of the survival and recovery of native species and habitats within the preserve. The "vision" of the Otay Ranch Preserve is to design a functional "living museum" to protect the sensitive natural and cultural resources and to increase public awareness and appreciation of these sensitive resources under the stewardship of an experienced Preserve OwnerjManager. The "vision" incorporates three key elements: 1) Resource Protection and Management The Preserve will: · provide large, connected natural areas with varied habitats that offer refuge, food and shelter to multiple species of native plants and animals; · protect scenic, paleontological, and cultural resources; and · provide management tools to assure that Preserve resources are not adversely affected by urban development located adjacent to the Preserve. 2) Research The Preserve will provide a unique and multi-faceted living laboratory for research related to: · habitat, paleontological, and cultural resource protection and management; · experimental approaches to enhancing and restoring degraded habitats; and · understanding species and habitat needs and conditions that adversely affect sensitive plant and animal species. Printed: 1/31;95 IJ/-<¡ Page: [V21 JJJ/....rfq-pom.doc ----'-'-----~--- -- --~--_.-.-._-,._-----_._._-_.._- ------ ------- ----------. .-----. _n,,_.______"_' 3) Public Education and Appreciation The Preserve will provide carefully controlled opportunities, consistent with resource protection needs, for the public to learn about and appreciate the natural and cultural diversity of the area, including: · its biological diversity and cultural heritage; · the inter-relationships between sensitive species and natural habitats; · the opportunity to observe biological and cultural resources in their natural setting; and · the importance of preservation of natural areas and understanding challenges to the survival of remaining natural ecosystems. IV. THE PRESERVE The following is a description of the Preserve concept, focusing on each of the three major parcels of Otay Ranch: the Otay Valley parcel, the Proctor Valley parcel, and the San Y sidro Mountains parcel. Sensitive species, sensitive habitats, and important wildlife linkages encompassed by each parcel are described (see Exhibit "C"). Otay Valley Parcel The Otay Valley Parcel includes 9,449 acres of which 3,518 acres are designated for the Preserve. The land is generally located in the western portion of the Ranch, encompassing the Otay River Valley and the slopes to the north and south, Salt Creek, portions of Wolf Canyon and Poggi Canyon, and the mesa area south of the Otay River Valley. The Otay River Valley portion of this parcel includes a diversity of natural and disturbed habitats that function primarily as a large, continuous, topographically well defined region that includes riparian, coastal sage scrub, and grassland habitat. The region is likely to constitute a part of a larger regional corridor for wildlife movement between Lower Otay Lakes Reservoir/San Ysidro Mountains and natural habitat and open space to the west. Although much of the area within this portion of the preserve system is degraded, supporting non-native grassland, cattle grazing and agriculture, the main drainage (Otay River Valley) supports several sensitive plant species. The lower portion of the floodplain has high potential for riparian habitat creation/restoration. The Salt Creek portion of the Otay River Valley parcel includes coastal sage scrub and a majority of the maritime succulent scrub habitat on the Ranch, both of which support numerous sensitive plant species. It also includes perches, nesting sites, and foraging territories for numerous raptors. Also included in this parcel is the extensive vernal pool system on the mesa south of the Otay River Valley. The pools support a variety of sensitive plants. Printed: 1/31;95 )0/ -/P Page: &'21 JJJ/....rfq-pom.doc - -,-,._._-----~-_..__.~-- - --- -_.__.~--"'-. _.._,._..----_.~-- ------ _._____. n" _0_ Proctor Valley Parcel The Proctor Valley Parcel includes 7,895 acres of which 4,658 acres are designated for the Preserve. The land is generally located in the northem portion of the Ranch with valuable corridor linkages through Proctor Valley to the San Miguel Mountains, and from the Jamul Mountains to Otay Lakes and the San Ysidro Mountains. This 4,658-acre parcel surrounds a 745-acre parcel in the Jamul Mountains currently owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The addition of the BLM parcel increases the natural open space to 5,403 acres. The Jamul Mountains encompasses extensive acreage of coastal sage scrub and some chaparral habitat supporting numerous sensitive plants. The southwestem portion of the parcel includes an isolated mesa supporting vemal pools. In addition to habitat included within the Preserve, approximately 396 acres of coastal sage scrub situated in the "restricted development area" within the SPA that occupies the north em portion of Proctor Valley will be included in non-preserve open space. San Y sidra Mountains Parcel The San Ysidro Mountains includes 5,555 acres of which 3,199 acres are designated for the Preserve. The land will serve not only as high quality habitat but link the existing BLM wildlife management area with Otay Lakes and the rest of the Preserve system. This parcel contributes the greatest diversity of habitats of any of the parcels, and hence, represents a major contribution to the bio-diversity of the preserve system. V. QUALIFICATIONS The Preserve OwnerjManager (POM) may be a local govemment, a public resource agency, a non-profit organization, or any other entity or a combination of existing entities acceptable to the landowner, City of Chula Vista, and San Diego County. The Preserve OwnerjManager may be an entity or entities working within a cooperative agreement to fulfill the duties of the POM. The desirable qualifications for the POM include: 1. At least 5 years of demonstrated experience managing biological resources including listed species; 2. At least 5 years of previous experience with law enforcement or thè ability to contract with law enforcement agencies; 3. At least 5 years of previous experience with access control; 4. Demonstrated ability to interact effectively with local and regional conservation agencies, recreational agencies and the local community; 5. Prior experience in conducting or coordinating with individuals involved in ongoing scientific research; Printed: ]j31f.J5 1'1-/1 Page: 7/23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc ---.-.--.---.-.-.-.---- ___..__._.~___.___u.__.______ ___ __.._~_..._ 6. Demonstrated ability to coordinate continued monitoring efforts of the Preserve's biota, as shown by staff experience and existing programs; 7. Cultural resource management experience; 8. Demonstrated experience in long-term management of large open space areas with numerous sensitive species; 9. Demonstrated ability to efficiently manage personnel and finances over a long-term; 10. Demonstrated expenence or ability to establish and operate environmental educational and interpretive programs; 11. Demonstrated ability and willingness to cooperate with local and regional agencies and direct experience in working with governing boards an<Vor advisory committees representing such agencies; and 12.Demonstrated ability to conduct community volunteer and community outreach programs. VI. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PRESERVE OWNEWMANAGER The Preserve Owner !Manager will oversee the day-to-day and long-range activities within the Management Preserve. The POM will take an active role in the maintenance and enhancement of biological resources, the development of educational programs, and the implementation of RMP land II policies related to management of the Preserve. The POM will be involved in the decision- making processes for all activities and amendments to the GDP or RMP or both that potentially effect the integrity of the Preserve. The duties and responsibilities of the POM may include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Maintenance and enhancement of all resources through the prevention of further disturbance, including controlling access to the Preserve, prohibiting off-road traffic, enforcing "no trespassing" rules, and curtailing activities that degrade resources, such as grazing, shooting, and illegal dumping; 2. Monitoring of resources to identify changes in the quality and quantity of sensitive resources and habitats to assure compliance with the adopted mitigation monitoring reporting program; 3. Implementation and monitoring of restoration activities, as appropriate (it is understood that some restoration activities may be carried out by individual Otay Ranch developers in coordination with the Preserve Owner !Manager); 4. Implementation of maintenance activities including removal of trash, litter, and other debris, maintenance of trail systems, removal and control of exotic plant species (weeds), and control of cowbirds through trapping efforts; Printed: 1/3]/.J5 1'1-1,)" Page: &'23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc -.--- 5. Development of. educational facilities and interpretive programs; 6. Implementation and/or coordination and accommodation of research programs; 7. Coordination with local jurisdictions, resource agencies, and adjacent ownerships; 8. Coordination with the Otay Valley Regional Park JEPA, or subsequent park planning entity, regarding issues associated with Otay Valley Regional Park; 9. Enforcement activities; 10. Review of RMP Amendments, Preserve boundary adjustments, infrastructure plans, plans for active recreational uses with the Preserve, plans for land uses adjacent to the Preserve and other activitie&"studies as identified in the RMP; I1.Develop and implement a strategy that facilitates effective, long-term management of the Preserve consistent with the goal of the ·RMP; 12. Development and implementation of management to ensure no reduction in habitat values and no adverse impacts to biological resources are included within the Preserve; 13. Establish a comprehensive monitoring program for the biota of the Preserve in conjunction with the Phase II RMP; 14.Develop and implement an annual monitoring program designed to identify changes in quality and quantity of on-site biological resources, including sensitive wildlife speCies, sensitive plant speCies, and sensitive habitat types; and 15. Coordination with the MSCP, NCCP, or other adopted subregional habitat planning program to assure consistency with regional conservation efforts and plans. VII. SUB¡MISSION REQUIREMENTS The response to the RFQ shall be submitted, no later than March 20, 1994, 5:00 Pl\1, to the Otay Ranch Project Office, Attn. Jerry Jamriska, 315 Fourth Avenue, Suite A, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Twenty (20) single-spaced copies, no more than 50 pages in length excluding exhibits and appendices, are required for proposal submittal. Qualifications should be as brief as possible, while adequately and comprehensively responding to the requirements of the RFQ. Proposal creativity is encouraged, but extravagance in proposal style and format is discouraged. Printed: 1/31/95 11/- IJ Page: 9;23 GJJj...rfq-pom.doc ..--- - --,----------.-..-..------..--- -------- -----~-- The response must include the name and title of the primary contact person during the qualification process, as well as the name of the individual(s) having the authority to negotiate and contractually bind the POM entity for a minimum 60-day period. The response shall include all of the following: 1. A Letter of Interest; 2. Summary of Qualifications of each entity; 3. Organizational Chart for the POM; 4. Related Project Experience of each entity; and 5. Response to the fOllowing statements and questions: a. Describe your understanding of the POM; b. Describe, in detail, the ability of the entity to implement the Management Preserve Vision; c. Describe your experience with the enhancement, restoration, and re-establishment of sensitive biological resources in disturbed areas where the resources either formerly occurred or have a high potential for establishment; d. Describe the process to develop a work program that establishes the location, timing and responsibilities for the provision of a nature interpretive center within the Preserve; e. How would you provide resource-related educational and interpretive programs to increase public sensitivity, awareness and appreciation of resources within the Preserve, consistent with the "vision" of the Preserve?; f. Describe the development and implementation strategy to facilitate effective, long-term management of the Management Preserve consistent with the goals stated earlier in this RFQ; g. Describe the proposed operational and organizational relationships of the POM in order to achieve the "vision"; h. Describe your approach in developing a work program for the first year of operation of the POM activities; 1. Describe the anticipated management, legal, insurance, and financial relationships of the various entities of the POM; j. Demonstrate the ability to prepare and implement operational budgets for preserve operations; k. Identify desirable elements to be considered in a funding program; I. Demonstrate the ability to track grants and other revenues to supplement preserve financing mechanisms; and m. What are the potential relationships between the MSCP and the Proposed Preserve Program to maximize the preservation of sensitive resources? o. Explain effective and desirable duration of a length of contract for the POM. Printed: 1/31;95 /1/. ¡. Page: 10/23 GJJ/...rfq-pom,doc -, ._---_._~_.- --~-- ----- ....-------.- ----~---_.- -- ~------- VIII. THE SELECTION PROCESS Qualifications will be forwarded to a City/County Screening Committee. The evaluation process will take approximately one week with interviews tentatively be scheduled for the March 27, 1995 and POM candidates should insure they will be available on that date. The City/County Screening Committee will make a recommendation of a POM and a retention contract to the City of Chula Vista City Council and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. This is expected to occur in May, 1995. The recommended POM is expected to attend these meetings. The selection process will review the response to the qualifications and submission requirements stated in Section V and VII. IX. ADMINISTRATION. CONTRACT PRICE AND ALLOWABLE COSTS Jerry Jamriska, the Otay Ranch Special Planning Projects Manager for the City of Chula Vista, and Mike Evans, San Diego County Department of Planning and Land Use, will be responsible for overseeing the administration of this RFQ. The response to this RFQ and contract preparation is the responsibility of the selected POM utilizing the standard third-party agreement of the City of Chula Vista. This contract shall be to the satisfaction of the City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, and The Otay Ranch, LP (major property owner). It is anticipated that the title to the Preserve will be in fee with a reversionary clause to revert to the City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego. The selected POM shall provide and furnish all of the labor, technical, administrative, professional and other personnel, all supplies and materials, machinery, equipment, printing, vehicles, transportation, office space and facilities, and other means necessary or proper to perform and complete the work and provide the services required of the POM as set forth in the contract. The proposal shall contain a statement that all work will be performed at a "not to exceed" contract price, except as specified, and this will become the fixed price upon completion of contract negotiations. A reimbursement payment schedule will be negotiated with the selected POM by a City and County Staff Committee. Payments will be tied to the successful and satisfactory completion of work tasks as determined by the Committee and as set forth in the adopted contract. Printed: 1/31/95 J'I~ If Page: 11/23 G.JJ/...rfq-pom.doe --~ ----_._-_._._-_._--_.._..,._---~~~._--- x. TIMELINE The following is the tentative process leading to the selection of the Preserve Owner/Manager: January 6, 1995 The City of Chula Vista distributes Draft RFQ for review and comment. January 13, 1995 City, County and Baldwin comments due on Draft RFQ. City and County staff begin the docket process and begin staff reports for Council and Board action. January 16, 1995 Revised RFQ is distributed to City and County staff for final approval. February 14, 1995 The City of Chula Vista City Council action on the RFQ selection criteria and process. March 7, 1995 The San Diego County.Board of Supervisors action on the RFQ selection criteria and process. March 9, 1995 RFQ is distributed to potential entities. April 10, 1995 Submission deadline of RFQ's. April 17, 1995 Initial screening of POM applicants with Selection Committee. April 24, 1995 Selection Committee interviews with top POM candidates. April 24, 1995 POM tentatively selected, pending Council and Board approval. Prepare and negotiate POM draft contract. City and County schedule and begin staff reports for Council and Board action. May 8, 1995 The City of Chula Vista and San Diego County Subcommittee review of POM and draft retention contract. Printed: Jl3J¡95 /I/'/~ Page: 1\?¡23 GJJj...rfq-pom.doc --,.._.._-_.-._-~~--~-_.._._._--_._~--_. ----.--,.._-- May 23, 1995 Approval of POM and contract agreement by the City of Chula Vista City Council. May 23, 1995 Approval of POM and contract agreement by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. May 24, 1995 City/County staff liaison and transition assistance to selected POM. XI. AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO COUNTY All reports, documents, pertinent data and materials prepared under this agreement shall be the property of the City of Chula Vista and San Diego County and may not be used or reproduced in any form without the written consent of both agencies. POM candidates should expect to have access only to those public reports and files of local government agencies pertinent to proposal or report preparation. No data compilation, tabulation, or analysis, nor any definitions or opinions should be expected from public agency staff. This Request for Qualifications does not commit the award of a contract to pay any costs incurred in the preparation of any proposal in response to this request, or to procure or contract for services or supplies. The City of Chula Vista and San Diego County reserves the right to accept or reject any or all Request for Qualifications received as a result of this proposal, to negotiate with any qualified source, or to cancel in part or entirely this Request for Qualifications, if it is in the best interest of the City of Chula Vista or San Diego County. Printed: 1/31/95 IL/·¡? Page: 1&'23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc -~---_.- ._.~._.~_______ 'm _ __.___._~ --~.~-- XII. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Requests for additional information should be directed to either of the following agencies: City of Chula Vista San Diego County Otay Ranch Project Office Dept. Of Planning and Land Use Attn. Jerry Jamriska, A.I.C.P. Attn. Mike Evans 315 Fourth Avenue 5201 Ruffin Road Suite A Suite B Chula Vista, CA 91910 San Diego, CA 92123 619-422-7158 619-694-2968 FAX 619-422-7690 Exhibits: The following is a list of documents which are attached to the Request for Qualifications and are incorporated by reference as if they were set forth in full: "Exhibit A" Inventory of Existing Otay Ranch Database "Exhibit B" Resource Maps "Exhibit C" Resource Management Plan I Printed: 1/31/95 /l/~/ 3" Page: 14/23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc ..n_"~____________ _ _______,___~_____.__ _ ~____.__.__..______.. ---.---....--.-- "EXHIBIT A" INVENTORY OF EXISTING OTAY RANCH DATABASE An extensive Otay Ranch database of information has been developed and will be made available during the planning process. Every attempt will be made to utilize existing data and graphics whenever feasible. Due to the large volume of information, it will be necessary to review these documents at the Otay Ranch Project Office. Environmental Impact Reports and General Information: 1. Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Update EIR 94-03 2. Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan Final Program EIR (EIR 90-01), Prepared by Ogden Environmental, December, 1992, with accompanying Technical Reports and Appendices. 3. City of Chula Vista General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report, Prepared by P&D Technologies, May 31, 1989. 4. Phase I Resource Management Plan Otay Ranch, September 4, 1990. Prepared for Interjurisdictional Task Force, Joint Project Planning Team- Otay Ranch. 5. Resource Sensitivity Analysis. June 12, 1991. 6. South Coast Proposed RMP and FEIS. US Department of Interior, BLM, November, 1992. CulturaV Archeololrical Studies: 1. Final Cultural Evaluation of the 23,088 acre Otay Ranch. Ogden, December, 1992. 2. Otay Ranch Archaeological Survey: San Ysidro Mountains Parcel, Proctor Valley Parcel and the Otay River Parcel, October 2, 1989. Prepared for The Baldwin Company by Regional Environmental Consultants. Draina~e Studies: 1. Drainage and Flood Control Plan for the Development of Otay Ranch, June 13, 1989 and revised October 2, 1989. Prepared for The Baldwin Company by VTN Southwest, Inc. Updated by Church Engineering, May, 1990. 2. Draft Drainage and Flood Control Plan for the Development of Otay Ranch. VTN Southwest, Inc. June 13, 1989. Revised October 12, 1989. Updated by Church Engineering, May, 1990. Printed: I/3Jt.J5 IIf - /9 Page: liV23 GJJj...rfq-pom.doc -_._-----~"-'" -~.._,~- -~._----_._~ ,------ 3. Draft Master Drainage Plan. Church Engineering, Map, 1990. 4. Draft Lower Otay Reservoir. Urban Runoff Protection Report, San Diego County, CA. Wilson Engineering, May, 1990. Biological Studies: 1. Biological Resources Inventory Report for the Otay Ranch property, October 12, 1989. Revised February 20, 1991. Prepared for The Baldwin Company by Regional Environmental Consultants. 2. A Biological Overview for the United Enterprise Properties located in Otay Mesa. Prepared for United Enterprise. 3. Biological Resources Survey Report, Otay Ranch-Proctor Valley Area, San Diego, California. September 1989. Prepared for The Baldwin Company by Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. 4. Otay Spring Survey, 1990. 5. Biological Resources Along Millar Ranch Road and the Hidden Valley Estates Project Area, ERCjMBA, 1991. 6. Biological Resources Survey Report, Otay Ranch-Proctor Valley Area, San Diego, CA. Michael Brandman Associates, Inc., September 1989. 7. Botanical Resources Report for the Otay Ranch Property Rare Plant Survey Results. Dudek & Associates, Spring 1990. 8. Sensitive Plant Species Survey Report Otay Ranch - Proctor ValleyjJamul Mountains Area San Diego County, CA. Dudek & Associates, August 24, 1990. 9. Biological Resources Inventory Report for the Otay Ranch Property. RECON, October 12, 1989. Revised February 20, 1991. 10. Report on the Hydrology and Flora of the Otay Ranch Vernal Pools, 1990 San Diego County, CA. MBA, March 5, 1991. 11. Baldwin Otay Ranch Wildlife Corridor Studies: Phase 1 Report. Ogden, January 1992. 12. Report on the Flora of the Otay Ranch Vernal Pools, 1990-1991 San Diego County, CA. Dudek & Associates, March 12, 1992. 13. Baldwin Otay Ranch Wildlife Corridor Studies. Ogden, December 1992. Printed: 1/31/95 /1/' .:2P Page: 1[)f23 GJJj...rfq-pom.doc --_.__._--~.__.._. ---- --- . --- --.--------...- ..-...,--...---.- - - -,._~_..__._--_..._----_._..- 14. Report on the Hydrology and Flora of the Otay Ranch Vernal Pools, 1990. Prepared by MBA, March 5, 1991. Transportation Studies: 1. Transportation Analysis for the Otay Ranch New Town Plan October 26, 1990. Prepared for Interjurisdictional Task Force, Joint Planning Project Team-Otay Ranch. Prepared by Urban Systems Associatei;, Inc. Updated February 1991. 2. Draft Final Report - South Bay Rail Transit Extension Study. February 5, 1991. Prepared for SANDAG. Prepared by BRW, Inc. 3. East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan. Willdan Associates, June 2, 1989. 4. Final Public Review Draft Transit-Oriented Development Design Guidelines. Calthorpe Associates, September 1990. 5. Transportation Analysis for the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment. JHK & Associateev'RBF & Associates, November 1990. 6. Technical Summary of the Transportation Analyses for the Otay Ranch GPA. Prepared by JHK & Associates, November 8, 1990. Public Facilities and Services: 1. Otay Ranch Master Plan of Water and Sewage, San Diego County, California October 30, 1989. Prepared for Interjurisdictional Task Force, Joint Planning Project Team-Otay Ranch. Prepared by Wilson Engineering. 2. Public Services Technical Report-Otay Ranch, October 23, 1989. Prepared for Baldwin Vista by JBF & Associates. 3. Community Service Master Plan, Otay Ranch, June 8, 1990. Prepared by Estrada Land Planning. Individual reports have been prepared in the following areas: Law and Justice, Reclaimed Water, Solid Waste, Fire and Emergency Medical Services, Health and Medical Services, Arts and Culture, Churches and Benevolent Organizations, Libraries, Child Care, Animal Control, Cemeteries, Schools and Governmental Services. 4. Calculations of Service Costs and Revenues for the Macro-analysis of Three Development Alternatives for the Otay Ranch. February 1, 1991. Prepared by Hughes, Heiss & Associates and Angus McDonald & Associates. 5. Chula Vista Public Library Master Plan. HBW Associates, March 13, 1987. Printed: 1/31/95 1'/-';/ Page: 17/23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc _.~~~~--_._--- --------"--_."-_.~-~~..._.._.~_.__. 6. Draft Master Plan of Water for Otay Ranch. Wilson Engineering, February 1990. 7. Draft New Town Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Overview. Kleinfelder, Inc., May 1990. 8. Draft Master Plan of Sewerage. Wilson Engineering, May 1990. 9. Draft Master Plan of Reclaimed Water for Otay Ranch. Wilson Engineering, May 1990. 10. Fiscal Impact analysis Phase I Project Plan Otay Ranch. Ralph Andersen & Associates, November 3, 1991. 11. Fiscal Impact Model (FIND) Development Status Report. Ralph Anders.en & Associates, January 14, 1992. 12. Otay Ranch Fiscal Impact Cos1;lRevenue Allocations. Ralph Andersen & Associates, April 6, 1992. 13. Preliminary Analysis of the Project Team Alternatives, Kenneth Levanthal & Company, July 6, 1990. , 14. Otay Ranch FIND Model Study Assumptions and Methodology. Ralph Andersen & Associates, July 10, 1992. 15. Facilities Implementation Plan. November 1992. 16. Fiscal Impact Analysis Assuming All Development in the County. Ralph Andersen & Associates, November 3, 1992. 17. Final Report Fiscal Impact Analysis of the City/County Recommended Plan. Ralph Andersen & Associates, January 21, 1993. 18. long-range Master Plan for Educational Facilities in Otay Ranch. The Professional Research Office. Geological Studies: 1. Phase II Geotechnical Investigations and Conceptual Reclaimed Waste Water Disposal Plan for United Enterprises, LD. June 30, 1987. Prepared for United Enterprises, LTD. Prepared by Gregg Associates, Inc. 2. Preliminary Geological and Soils Engineering Study 500-acre Portion, Rancho San Miguel Otay Rancho Area, San Diego County, CA Geosoils, Inc., February 26, 1988. Printed: 1/31/95 /¥-.).). Page: 1&'23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc --,.-. _.._..~____~..___..____...__~___.__.__._ __ _____.___n__ ...__.~ ~_._---...- ----.---.-... -..-...-- Land Use Studies and Reports: 1. Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Chula Vista and San Diego County to Establish a Joint Planning Project Team for the Processing of the Otay Ranch Project. August 1, 1989. 2. Otay Ranch New Town Plan, Appendix I and Appendix II. October 30, 1989. prepared for The Baldwin Company. Prepared by Estrada Land Planning, JBF & Associates and Langdon, Wilson, Mumper. 3. Land Use Maps: Development Alternatives, Original Submission Project Team Alternative, including existing General Plans, Environmental Alternative, Low Density Alternative and Phase I Progress Plan. 4. Geographic Information system (GIS) Maps, including Base Map, Farm Land, Slope Clarification, Vegetation, Geology, Soils, Animals, Drainage, ArchaeologyjHistory, Nearby Development, Noise contours, Traffic, Proposed Project and Alternatives and Combinations of City and County General Plans. 5. Otay Ranch Village Phasing Plan, October 26, 1992. 6. University of California New Campus Sites. October 1989. 7. Otay Ranch, Policies. RBF, November 1989. 8. Otay Ranch, Goals and Objectives. RBF, December 11, 1989. 9. New Town Plan Review. RBF, March 15, 1990. 10. Project Team Land Use Alternatives. RBF, June 21, 1990. 11. Citizen's Report, Report of the Otay Ranch Community Advising Task Forces. July 1990. 12. Citizen Advisory committee Recommendations. June 1992. 13. Joint Planning Commission workshop, Neo-Traditional Planning Literature. June 1992. 14. Land Use Maps for New Town Plan (Land Use, Open Space); Project Team Alternative; Environmental Alternative; Low Density Alternative; and Fourth Alternative). 15. Neo-traditional Town Planning "Suburban Sprawl or Livable Neighborhoods" The Decline of the Suburbs. Planners Training Service, American Institute of Certified Planners. 16. San Diego County General Plan, Parts I, II, XII, XIII, XIV. Printed: 1/3Jj95 /J./-,},3 Page: 19;23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc --_._---'~-~------".,---~- . · "Exhibit B" Resource Maps Printed: 1,/31;95 /L/-~i Page: 20¡23 GJJ/...rfq-pom.doc ~._._~. --"---"-"'-"'-~'---~--'-'-- --~."-------~----'- ,.--'-----,---~----- , , 0 , , , " 0 , '. , , ........_-.. .--' -'. , " , ". , ," " , -----........-- " , , " " , ,--. ", , , .-. " -..-' .... ~ a¡ ., 0 , , , . '\ , . , . , , , , I , '. , " ~ , " , , , - )..---... '- 0 . , , ' - , , 0 Brawn Field , , " , , , , I~ , - . 1"- r , , ---... , . .....- ~ . ~ sage scrub Ii 1laritime succulent scrub ~ Agriculture . r.h8mi~ chaparral !II Baccharis scrub ~~:~:~~ Tamarisk scrub/ IIIIIIJ Non-native grassland · Kulefat scrub KuIefat scrub ." Disturbed/ Coastal ." m Exotic trees · Southern willow scrub .. . sage scrub ~~{~f~ Coastal sage scrub/ · Tamarisk scrub . Developed ~ Non-native ~Iand . Grœand ~ Non-native ~and/ Coastal sa!e scrub SOURCe: Ogden, Draft Program SR, June 1992 1" '" 4000' I q,V=f/;'1' ".2>' Phase 1 Otay Ranch RMP IR"4"i Existing Vegetation (Sheet 1) -~-'---~-- - --.._...._-~--,-,--,------_..- ----- .. ----~-_.- -- .-.._--~ - . , ; , , ....-...--....-...,... ~ . , , , . , . , . , . , , , , , , , - , . , , - - , .......'.._--'.. , - - , '. - , , , , . San Wl.u_l , WOU,ÁC.·ILD -----, . - , . , . . , , , , , , - , , · - , , , , · , , , , · , , , · ,-- . . , · , , , , , , , , , , , , , , " , Ii, "- ' . , '\ , i ,--~ , " · · , , , ----, 1 ' · , ' . - · , , , q; , " , , · \ '..'" · , , , "JV .:;- , '..' , , , ,,\ · , ~.o ' . , ,,' -_/I" , · , · _"",-" " I i'..._ · , , - I , , , · I , , I , , - , . , p , , , , . , " , . I , . ,.....~- I , " I . ~ , , , , I , , , , I , I , , , , , , , '- I - , --- , Lower -- , --~ Olay I I , Lake , - , ---~""",,,,\ ,. 'l --. ...',...... ). - , ,--- '~ Coastal sage scrub IIIJII] Southern mixed chaparral . Aquatic habitat , ~;:~:~~ Chamise chaparral · Valley needlegrass . Disturbed valley · Coast live oak woodland grassland needlegraæ grassland ~ Disturbed coastal sage æ; Developed m Non-native graSsland scrub · Exotic trees · A1kali meadow ~ · Southern willow scrub III Disturbed alkali meadow SOURCE: Ogden, Draft Program SR, June 1992 1" _ 4000' Jtf-.ì.? Phase 1 Otay Ranch RMP I R~R'j Existing Vegetation (Sheet 2) -- -_._~- _.~_.._-_.._._- ------~ .._----". -----_._------~- - , , , ~ . . ò E , ' " , , 8 , , , (l) , , .., C , . , ¡¡: I , , , n , , , .. ...--- , ......-... ...... . , , , a.. -. ,-- - - . , - ...--- :E ~ .......- ri Ct: ..... ..--'--' ¡¡¡ (1) E ~ .. " (1) ~ sa - c: .1:. co Q . __.....E:. à: C'C en , , ....::11.... a:: " ... ...-' :¡¡--:¡¡ ~ - -.....-- 1¡1 ~N 00> >- C _,----.. -r.....-'~.._...-... ...--..... I;, I;, 0> C'C "-r; ... , \ '..(_...... U u ë- .... 0 .. ¡;r .~ II " 0 ,,' "........ := .- .. I ..." '\.-......-... .. - '0<: ..... J .. co::> ''I .. \ .. .. .. 'i' 0... 'I.. ..'\1\.... €I ca '" .. ~ .... .. g w ..... .." .. ... "" "" ..... .. I I·~" U Q) (1) · , ' ~nm rn ~ . ~" en ~ C'C ., ~ ~ (1) 0 :';:¡!. a.. > .' , , ...,'" ~ , ~ I , , ' '''':¡' , , C , , I ...' . ... , , I . , , ;-' ~ I co .- , I , ~~~¡ ..... , I I ...,,,, , tn I , " ~ , , I · , , .!lllt .- , -' , , >< , , ., , I , W , , , I , .' , , .. J , ....' , og'1!'1!'1! .....-....-,-. , " --,......,---...-... .::di ,; ;i I ,. .,' , . , lilllWI "'-.....' , ,. ...,...--_. , , , , ...... ,>--..,-.. , .( , · " " I "',_ " Y , ,. 'n I - "...-....-.;.:..... , I I I .- I -~.. I , , , , ,. ' . , :-,.. \ , I , I , . .... , .; I \ , , . · , I \ , .- . .... I , . i jg,[li , , · ,. . \ , , · .' 'r '" "I" I;, \ / , 'ii.s.... . , , ; s- :iI~:i , , , 'II , ,. J ¡ ~Jil . , " ..._-----... , , . , , , II I I . . I -~-'-,_..,'-- ~ ...J .-----.. " - r.=f·' -....:.._- -, , , , 111 f ,å] , I , , , , . , I t .. ~ ~ l:¡¡ . I , . , , , , , lofI!!~s , , , . ¡r. :sOC , , , , ;i ~ ] ~1 , , , , , , ~[ill~ml , , . , ...-.. -.---.--. --_.~-_._~--_. -..--. ----~._.__._.__. . o Ii ;¡:: ('"»>Cl. 0 o~ ::> 0'" 0 fJ0 ':i ~fJ 0 3 -» (1)< '" 09. ::> .0- - ct> g. ~ (J)tÐ '" q." fJ '" <:0 ~ CT~ < no ;u '" fJ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ õ' nJ ::> :Þ ... CD III III :Þ < !!!. œ C" iD -" o:T ... .. .. (')'" en~ eno ... ::D,~ CD:c ~.. 05 jjJ:T =.::c os:: :=" . ~@ 1'I,,~r ~ o!ä ¡¡ , m ~~-~---- ---- - - -~------- ----~-------- --- ----.-.-.. (l) ~ \ ~ NI :.. ~ c ::!:o CC-.¡= ~ e g 0 ..... a: III 'CD ~a: ... 0'1:1 ~ C «I .,- ..... ~~ .. 0 ... CD :E .!!! .- «I > oct III «I CD .. oct ~ ~ ~C: ~ 00 ., 1.1-::0 ~ ., 0 ~ - 0 Q. '""- 0", - =QJ C ga:: QJ <'0 ~ "'c: '" c.E 0 .,_ c: ~., 0 ,,<3: :::!õ ~aD V ·1' -' I /~'.2 9 ----- -- - - - - . lif 0 If B a.t ~ ø>o.. -iil g 0; SL~'t 0 ~a ~ m .0 -'" ê:! ;_ g» 8 _. a.. < ~ - CD c "Ii: ::> ",= CICIo _ (Dc . 3 ~ "en S!: ¡ ..,-(1) , '" 0 8: en ...."T'1 n. CD ~O 1.1 :< Õ·~ s: (1):::JZ '*0 ~ ~. ~ » ... CD III en » < !!!. i» dB C" iD ~. : -: I:, - 0 ... 2 I» .. .¡:- CD Ci) ... "t1 III =r en '" en '" _CD III _ ~ CoO .... :0'" CD:'< en :II ..", o ::J ... () 1II=r =.:0 o š: ~ "t1 ~ @] ~Q) jJ/~.3tJ Næ ~ m ---.------- ~_...,.,_....._--'"-_. -"------ -- ------- ~-- ~~ rn "N Ii! :.. . a..C ~O a:'- ... ~G " .. c 0 ",... a:UI :>.11) Ole:: ... 0- 0 _0 'í. ",c.. "'- '" G ~C a.... II) > .. 0 ... II) :ë .!! .- G > <t UI G II) .. <t ~ * <: 0 .2 Q) .... õ < ~ t:rI~ .. 1 0.... .Iii u_ Q. L.&.. 0 >- :g Ia:...~-e ..... ""C øt- C1>~:J ~ 'å~!i :De::: (ñ 0.. . ~:I 8. ~_ _ 15:§~~~ ço -0 - <: t ~og Q) lIB: <Cl.. Cl.. E ii ¡; .a- (,1)- __ CD 15 it C 00 0 '" lii","i CDEE g B -S'B- ~ '" - "'0<> ~ ~ ~~a..-3~ ~ 110 "h15:] 0'. . j a.¡¡.!i:;¡õ (J. II ¡;j.:>;gp ......J' 0...Æ:.s g :J * -" . IJ/- JI - ---- - - - - - -- - . ~ § ;1;: 1m ~I i,' ï' » ËJI~IO~ "C "C ~ i [ f j [ .. 0 < · n i' Q. '" ell Co .,,"" "'!I "tI~ g. It '" 8. 9- -., iUn Q en ::I II> . - "tIO ...... ~ .... [ ~ !! ell ., cn< . ~ ... ! .... ell ::c § r I .. ., < '" ell n a ::r Š::C Q š:: I "C-c ~ , J~I\~Q) /'/'3,,2 _u ---------~-- --~ _.._.._.....m_.. _ _ __ ----~~,_._-- · Chapter 4 Implementation Guidelines ·······.'I'ABLE. 3;·. sUMl\fAR.'tg~i~~g·i'l."!,!·U;S¡~~!i··...·.···.···..........·.............·..........,..........i.i). ASSOCIATEU..WPiJI·..:i!:,/\,mJª*iI).GJDQJi1;J,'H ..}...~...·.....·..}i..}.············ IIi; .·.··..·,ðìiii1f!itiiiiii BIological Identify key resource areas . 1.1 ./ Resources Complete biological studies. 1.2 ./ Include key biological resource areas in Preserve. 2.1 ./ Preserve coastal sage scrùb. 2.2 ./ ./ ./ Preserve native grassland. 2.3 ./ ./ ./ Preserve southern interior 2.4 ./ ./ ./ cypress forest, coast live oak, oak riparian forest, riparian woodland, sycámore alluvial woodland. Maintain viable populations 2.5 ./ ./ ./ of California gnatcatcher and cactus wren. Preserve Stale and Federally 2.6 ./ ./ ./ listed species. Preserve CNPS listed 2.7 ./ ./ ./ species. Preserve USFWS Category 2 2.7 ./ ./ ./ species. Prepare Vernal Pool 2.9 ./ Preservation/Management Plan. Preserve and enhance 2.10 ./ ./ ./ wetlands. Preserve raptor habitat. 2.11 ./ ./ ./ Identify potential restoration 3.1 ./ areas. - 141 - 1'1- :JJ --.-.-,------'-.---.- ,,- ...-- _.--'~' . Chapter 4 Implementation Guidelines TABLE3Š1:.tM:M:ARYOFRMPAê.J.[v1~:.il;isìŠœtmms:': ÃSSÕ~I.TÊDW'I'Üt~Ä.CHS:rÁ'~t>~:;Î;H~i~ '-:':,;;;:::;;;:::;;::;:::;;:::::,;:'<{ ,-. . _.., :',';,:',::.,'.: :-:. _:_ _ _.; ._..::1.::_', .::'..:..,.:>.. _-:-- : , ,,: . .\:/,:;:'_:,'.:;..;.;.::::\::::::::.:./?::,)_...-...-:.>L,.;;::.:<.;.:.:.:.,:tC!::)):/:::)}:';:;;;:;:·:;:>:·,.... ... ,ilí~¡¡i¡il!tl~ .. ...... ... Biological Prepare conceptual coastal 3.2 ,/ Resources sage scrnb n:storation plan. (Cont'd.) Prepare coastal sage scrub 3.2 ,/ n:storation implementation plans. Prepare conceptual riparian 3.3 ,/ n:storation plan Prepare riparian n:storation 3.3 ,/ impl"m""tation plans ' Prepare conceptual native 3.4 ,/ grassland n:storation plans Prepare native grassland 3.4 ,/ n:storation implelIl""tation . plans Develop programs for 3.6 ,/ creation of habitat for species formerly pn:sent on Otay Ranch. Incotporate habitat linkages 4.1 ,/ ,/ ,/ and wildlife corridors in the Preserve. Assure consistency with 4.2 ,/ ,/ ,/ NCCP data collection requirements. Cultural Complete systematic survey 1.3 ,/ Resources for cultural resources. Preserve significant cultural 2.12 ,/ ,/ ,/ resources. - 142 - /t/:J'I ___________m'._._._.'·_._. - . . . Chapter 4 ImplemenlaJion Guidelines ......... .... .···..............ii·.··.i.TABLE·.3.·.·.··..suM:M:Aiy.···ÔÊ··RM::ê··Aêi.:.i~û:~sí§TîIDms·· . ·········.···.····..·.·.·/.)....}·}.·ii. ......................................................·.·...·......·....;4.sS.õçIÅTF;D.···W1iltijjj~.~ji..·§T~~~~:!~~~~....... ....................;! IIII.~ Prominent Identify major landforms and 1.6 ./ Landforms/ incorporate in the Preserve. Steep Slopes Floodplains Identify and map floodplains. 1.5 ./ Design drainage 2.13 ./ ./ improvements compatible with resource protection. Paleonto- Recover fossils during 1.4 ./ logical grading. Resources Agriculture Identify and map agricultural 1.8 ./ lands. . Provide demonstration 2.14 ./ ./ agriculture within the Preserve. Recreation Identify recreation 1.7 ./ opportunities. Umit active recreation within 6.2 ./ ./ ./ the Preserve to 400 acres. Provide biking and walking 6.3 ./ trails in the Preserve. Provide wilderness camping 6.4 ./ and picnicking in non- sensitive areas. Management Identify required 5.1 ./ qualifications of Preserve Owner/Manager. Select Preserve 5.1 ./ Owner/Manager. - 143 - /11-- Jþ' --_._----_._.,._-_._---_._~-_._- --~-- . . Chapter 4 Implemen/aJion Guidelines . ···~~s~~~=~~ï~~ît~vi~~w!.'¡¡j!¡t..~¡t (,,···;·······m"· .....--.:...:.;.;., . .:. 111\l1! .-...--......,.....-...-........ Management Defme responsibilities of 5.2 ,f (Cont'd.) Preserve OwnerlManager Develop management 5.3 ,f ,f ,f strategies Establish overall monitoring 5.4 ,f program Carry out monitoring 5.5 ,f Develop plan for conveyance 5.6 ,f of parcels to the Preseive Permit changes in order of 5.7 ,f ,f conveyance Require Preserve conveyance 5.8,5.9 ,f ,f on a SPA-by-SPA basis regardless of changes in ownership Identify RMP costs and 5.12 ,f funding strategies Provide educational and 6.1 ,f interpretive programs 5.10 Use Restrict motorized vehicular 6.5 ,f Restrictionsl access Regulatory Identify restricted areas 6.6 ,f Framework within the Preserve Develop general ,f infrastructure plan including 6.6 standards and criteria to guide infrastructure siting and design. - 144- /¥'J¿ ----_.~._-------~-~_.~~- ---.- - . . . Chapter 4 Implementation Guidelines .··TABLE··3·..·..··.·..S'I:.JM:M'ARY.··ÔF.· RMP·AC·l'lVl:i·lliSisTûÐWJi;··i..·iii·..i? ..... ....·.·.·.·.·.........··.....ASs6êÎÂTÊn..WìTH·.·ÊÁêH·STAGÊ.·.OÊT.B:EkMR·,··············i..iiWi············ ., ::':-,,:,;:::":::)::::/ - -.,> .-; ::- - ;-(.-:-',:::,:: " -', ';:.:- '.>,::,::::::::, - '\: .:{:::::::;:::~::{::::{:}::.::::.:.:....... .......,...,_.,."..... .. ., ......,--,.---.,.-...-......-..-..--......-.,.;.-.;.;...,..."."...'.......--... ... ...-,." .,.-,',--,',-,'-'--'-"-':':." , RMP ··ii iìfupìê1' .'··...·I~ritä.d¡;~······· Use Site and design infrastrUcture 6.7 " Restrictions! to minimize impacts to Regulatory Preserve resources. Framework (Cont'd.) Pennit fire roads only where 6.8 " absolutely necessary. Permit ecologically neœssary 6.9 " controlled burning. Prepare "edge plans" for 7.1,7.2 " " uses adjacent to Preserve. Maintain existing conditions 8.1 " " prior to conveyance. Manage ongoing mineraI 8.2 " " " extraction through the pennit process. Develop Range Management " Plan. 8.4 Carry out early consultation 9.1 " with resource agencies. Encourage MOA(s) with 9.2 " resource agencies. Complete wetlands 9.3 " " delineations. Identify areas subject to 9.4 " " CDFG Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreements. Complete CEQA review of 9.5 " " individual Otay Ranch developments. - 145 - /t/~J '} ~--".,----_._._--~,- ._---_.~._-~-- - . .' Chapter 4 Implementation Guidelinu ,.... ..,... ········TABLE"3·S~YÔFR:M:P'AêTíYTrìES/S'I'UI)mS·:·· ..,..:........,.', ....-::,.-:.:',':,<:-:(:)):,' - : ~::::-' . - .:/;:.-'" .:::" <"'. :;: ". ,':' : - ' :'.::::::: :...:.:...:.;.,....:;::,\:;;:::::,...:,.;.:y:::: . ····ASSOCiATEDWttH·ÊÂêö·ST.Â.GÊÔFTHERMP········· . .. .....:...;.: . ,'" -. ".:,..' . -, ," - .:: .:" ',', ""::::,:::.,:-(.", -', ---.:..-" . ,.'. ....'--_... ...,.....,."..........,....;,..;.:...-...:'.':..'-,_.,--,-: 11.;1 Use Establisl1 procedure for RMP 9.6 ", Restrictionsl amendments. Regulatory Framework Amend RMP as appropriate. 9.7 ", ", (Cont'd.) Permit Preserve boundary 9.8 ", ", modifications to ....h.nÇP. resource protection. . - 146 - If' J Y ---,-----_.~_._,.,_._..... ._..__...__..._-----,-_.._.~-----_._._.- ----,----.---- · -Exhibit C" Resource Mana2'ement Plan I Attached. Printed: ]/31/35 / 'I' J~ Page: 21/23 GJJj...rfq-pom.doc ^.--.-.-..,-.-,.--'- --_._-~-~-----~.~~---_.- r--.. - ". '" :'\ I OTAY RANCH PRESERVE OWNER/MANAGER NaV - 8 1994 - organizations Expressing Interest -, I ' , November 1, 1994 '" L -- , ......_~. Orqanization Comments city of Chula vista Contact person changed from Bob Jess Valenzuela Leiter to Jess Valenzuela. No Parks Director Response to date. (n9) County of San Dieqo Interested, per letter dated II/I. Michael Kemp Interim Parks Director (619) 694-3030 Otay River Valley JEPA Interested, per letter dated 11/1. Anne Rast Special Operations Division (619) 694""3030 MSCP Subarea Plan Coalition No SAP's in existance. New JPA None identified. USFWS Interested. Peter stein telecon Gail Kobetich 10/28; Letter dated II/I. possible Carlsbad Regional Office partnership(s). (619) 431-9440 CDFG No response to date. William Tippets NCCP Regional Coordinator (619) 688-4267 Bruce Eliason Environmental Services Coordinator (213) 590-5737 Carrie·oShaw Public Lands Planner (916) 327-5656 California Park Service No response to date. Ed Navarro Director, San Diego District (619) 220-5400 State Coastal Conservancy Interested. Telecon 10/25 with Marc Beyeler Beye1er indicated possible joint (510) 286-4172 partnership. Letter of 10/25 indicating interest. ILj/ '!J4f'l~ ,/p "--,_..- ~-_... -..'"-..,..---.- · Oraanization Comments BLM Interested, per letter dated 10/31. Julia Dugan possible partnership. (619) 251-4800 RCD's Interested. Contact person changed Penny Dockry to Penny Dockry, Executive Director (619) 745-2061 per letter dated 10/26. Back Countrv Land Trust Interested, per letter dated 10/30. Dianne Janssen, Chair (619) 445-1777 Clark Waite (619) 445-4482 Bavfront Conservancv Trust Interested. Possible Stephen Neudecker partnership(s) per letter of 10/25. (619) 422-8100 Primary interest is in Interpretive Center and education programs. Contract enforcement only. Center for Natural Lands Interested. Possible partnership Manaaement or independently per letter of Sherry Teresa 10/20/94. Executive Director (916) 481-6454 Environmental Land Trust No response to date. Don Hunsaker (619) 573-1835 Nature Conservancv No response to date. Gary Bell (714) 677-6951 Trust for Public Lands Not interested, per letter of 10/25 Elizabeth Byers (415) 495-5660 Center for Conservation and No response to date. Education Strateaies Wallace Tucker (619) 728-0889 National AUdubon Society Contact person changed per telecon Jessie Grantham w/ Phil Pryde. City/Co. letter Western Regional Office forwarded. No response to date. 555 Audobon Place sacramento, CA 95825 (916) JlI ~J/I __··'__.'....n.._._._._____._...._..___.._ _____."'_._.__" ._.__.__._____. --"_._..,.._--,-----_.._--_.~_._--------~.- · Oraanization Comments , New Non-Profit Trust None identified. San Dieao Zooloaical Societv Interested, per letter of 10/28 Bill Toone or Jeff Opdyck (619) 738-5057 Natural Historv Museum Per telecon (prior to city/Co. Michael Hager letter) interested in Interpretive (619) 237-3821 ext. 216 Center only. H:/ORPOM.INT B. Healy 11/1/94 pl-'¡~ ______..,..,___.__m_._..~.,..,._. ,'.,. _...._~.__._,_..__,.._,.___...____.. .'m.'__'_ - ------~.~_.._- -.----..---.---.-----....---..-.......----. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item /.s- Meeting Date 02/14/95 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit PCC-95-16; request to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility on the site of the Gtay Water District water tank, located at the easterly terminus of Gotham Street - AirTouch Cellular (Continued) Resolution granting Conditional Use Permit PCC-95-16 to AirTouch Cellular to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility at the easterly terminus of Gotham Street SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning /2J!; (g(¿/.(" REVIEWED BY: City Manager ,frJ (4/Sths Vote: Yes~oX) This item was continued by Council from the meeting of January 24, 1995 to allow AirTouch Cellular to address several issues of concern to Council. In the attached letter dated February 2, 1995, AirTouch has requested a continuance of the public hearing to March 14, 1995 because additional research is needed. The neighbors that spoke at the previous hearing have been notified of the continuance. RECOMMENDATION: That Council continue the public hearing to its regularly scheduled meeting of March 14,1995. M:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AIRTODCH\9516A.113 /5,/ ~-~ _~___.._·..______'._____"____~__._"'·_M·'_ --------. - .-----.-. 02/02/95 12:28 '0'619 560 8157 5B&0 ~ 0021002 S B- ..·&0 February 2, 1995 Job No. 50930.00 Martin Miller Planning CITY OF CHULA VISTA Design Planning Department Consultation 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 RE: AirTouch Cellular EastJake Communications Facility/PCC 95-16 Dear Martin: On behalf of AirTouch Cellular, we hereby request a continuance of our hearing on the above referenced project until March 14, 1995. Originally the Council had continued us three weeks from January 24 to February 14, 1995; however, there were a number of requests for information or clarification that will require some additional research on our part. We feel the additional time is required not only to prepare a package for staff and Council, but to give staff adequate review time before the next hearing. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, SB&O, INC. ~- Susan K, Lay Planning Manager SKL:abh cc: Kevin McGee/ AirTouch Cellular W,\CIVILlAIRTOUCHlL TRS\S09JQOO,AIiII S I:! & 0, INC. LAND PLANNING. CIVil, ENGINEERING. LI..\D SURVfTlNi; IÝø< 3615 KeamyVilla Road, Suite 201· San Dieh'IJ, California' 0212;3' (019) õ60,11~1 . Fas ((;HI) 5Gij,81Gí -~~- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT /~ I~ Meeting Date 11 /9 "t.'Cq:. ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to consider detaching from Open Space District No. 1 and ,µ~~ Open Space District No. 10 those territories within Open Space No. 20; to be effective FY 1995-96, Resolution /7?8"~rdering the detachment from Open Space District No.1 and Open Space District No. 10 those territories within Open Space No. 20; to be effective FY 1995-96, SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public WorkV' REVIEWED BY: /~ (,'/ City ManagerLi? - {t. (4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX) K" The open space maintenance district that was created for the Rancho del Rey development overlapped two existing open space districts. The City's intention is to assess the subject parcels through just one open space district, however, title reports show these parcels to be in two districts and thereby subject to a double assessment. Tonight's action will eliminate the overlap and was requested by Rancho del Rey Investors so that the ultimate property owners will only have one open space district on their disclosure statement and tax bill. RECOMMENDATION: That Council conduct the public hearing to detach from Open Space District No.1 and Open Space District No. 10 those territories within OSD-20; to be effective FY 1995-96, and approve the resolution ordering the .detachments. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Backl!round Open Space District No. 1 (OSD-l) was created over 20 years ago to provide for the maintenance of open space lots in the area bordered by East H Street, Otay Lakes Road, Telegraph Canyon Road, and Paseo Ranchero. Open Space District No. 10 (OSD-I0) was created 10 years ago and borders East J Street from Cassia Place to Paseo Ladera and includes those properties bordered by Telegraph Canyon Road, Paseo Ladera, Paseo Ranchero and East J Street (see attached plats, Exhibit A). OSD-20 was fonned for the perpetual maintenance of open spaces and other facilities within Rancho del Rey. However, some of the undeveloped land in SPA Ill, Rancho del Rey, was already included inother open space maintenance districts (OSD-l and OSD-I0, See Exhibit A). The developer for Rancho del Rey SPA Ill, would like to clarify that the SPA III properties are to be assessed for only one open space district's maintenance (OSD-20) and so that the ultimate property owners will have less confusion on their disclosure sheet and title reports. .-.IJ' ..~ , /Þ-j ~ "._-"_._---~~~_._- On December 20, 1994 Council adopted Resolution 17768 (see Exhibit B) which declared the City's intention to detach the following parcels from Districts 1 and 10: OSD-l OSD-I0 Assessor's Parcel No. Assessor's Parcel No. 640-060-11 640-080-32 640-090-04 640-080-31 641-030-12 640-080-43 642-040-01 641-020-11 642-040-02 641-030-12 642-040-12 640-080-33 642-040-13 640-090-12 642-040-15 640-090-11 , 648-080-17 640-193-35 640-198-28 640-192-22 T "T\dscaDinl! Act of 1972 Open space maintenance districts, as outlined in the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 are created so that those who benefit by the open space are those who are assessed the maintenance cost. The new district boundaries will better reflect the benefit enjoyed by the property owners , within each of the three districts. Those within OSD-20 will contribute to the maintenance of the East H Street and Telegraph Canyon Road medians and parkways. The right of majority protest and public noticing as outlined in section 22609 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 is limited to the territory proposed to be detached. The sole property owner in this case is Rancho del Rey Investors who support this action and have been notified of this meeting. Costs The cost for OSD-l for fiscal year 94-95 was $72.62 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). It . is estimated thlit the net impact of the proposed change of boundary will be a $6 per EDU increase, thereby increasing the cost to $78.64 per EDU (see attached worksheet for breakdown, Exhibit C). This increase is mostly due to the maintenance cost being spread among fewer units, 796 before and 652 after. The detached lands include a small lot which was being maintained by OSD-l; the detachment of which will serve to lower the OSD-l's assessment slightly, however, the net change is an increase in cost per equivalent dwelling unit. The assessment for OSD-IO will not change since the properties proposed to be detached are currently neither maintained nor assessed by OSD-IO. . The detachments will not impact Rancho del Rey, SPA III (OSD-20, Zone 7) due to there not being any assessment for the open space yet to be constructed. It is anticipated that any future ~~ ~ /¿~c7- Page 3, Item Meeting Date cost for SPA III open space would be assessed to SPA III developments (Zone 7), whether or not the lands were in OSD-10 or 1. Therefore tonight's action has no impact on OSD-20. All changes will be effective on the FY 1995-96 tax roll. MaDS After the public hearing, the maps for Open Space District 1 and 10 will be revised to show the new boundaries as delineated in Exhibit A, sheets 2 and 3. Notice Section 22609 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 requires that the areas to be detached be noticed of the public hearing, Rancho del Rey Investors is the sole owner of these areas and will be noticed. The result of the detachment will cause a net increase in cost per EDU to the remaining properties in Open Space District No.1 however if the areas were detached from OSD-20 and left in OSD-I. the assessment would increased bv over $201EDU to a total of $931. much higher than the DroDOsed increase of $6IEDU. In any case, all property owners within districts 1, 10 and 20 (zone 7) were noticed of the public hearing, Section 22609 limits the majority protest to only those lands being detached (SPA III of Rancho del Rey), FISCAL IMPACT: Open space districts are funded by property owners within the districts so there is no fiscal impact to the City, The cost of detachment proceedings is estimated at $4,000 plus all noticing costs. Rancho del Rey Investors have deposited these funds. File No.:OS-036 Attachments: Exhibit A - Area Plats: Map of Areas to be Detached 1 of 3 New OSD-l Boundary 2 of 3 New OSD-I0 Boundary 3 of 3 Exhibit B - Resolution 17768 Exhibit C - Cost Breakdown Worksheet TA:ab ""-'\onioecr\ogen\do1achPH." 1 Existing maintenance cost ($57,810) plus new improvements ($50,350) divided by existing EDU's plus new net EDU's (1158). -J~:J- /¿-;! ~ ---.-- ----.--. ------- ~-_..__...__.__._,_."...__.,.__._-- · THIS PAGE BLANK ~!# 1;' /t -i, '~.~' RESOLUTION NO. 17 7 ~¡'" RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE DETACHMENT FROM OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 10 THOSE TERRITORIES WITHIN OPEN SPACE NO. 20; TO BE EFFECTIVE FY 1995-96 WHEREAS, the open space maintenance district that was created for the Rancho del Rey development overlapped two existing open space districts, Open Space District No. 1 and Open Space District No. 10; and WHEREAS, this action will eliminate the overlap and was requested by Rancho del Rey Investors so that the ultimate property owners will only have one open space district on their disclosure statement and tax bill; and WHEREAS, section 22609 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 requires that the areas to be detached be noticed of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, Rancho del Rey Investors is the sole owner of these areas and has been noticed; and WHEREAS, the result of the detachment will cause a net increase in cost per EDU to the remaining properties in Open space District No.1 however, if the areas were detached from OSD-20 and left in OSD-l, the increase would be much higher than the proposed $6/EDU. and all property owners within districts 1, 10 and 20 will be noticed of the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby order the detachment from Open Space District No. 1 and Open Space District No. 10 those territories within open Space No. 20 to be ective Y 1995-96. Presented by John P. Lippitt, Director of , City Public Works C:\ra\detach.RDR ~ ---. /¿{-,!7 ~ ---....----... - THIS PAGE BLANK . . ~A ç / ¡, -~ __rr .~ . .. ..\ y . E}(~'B'T A 'OF ..3 I. Map of Areas to be Detached . . , .ð o~ c.o~'" ~ (ofi~ "\.'.~ ... .. ..... ._'__1. Detach from 050-10 " --_1111I Detach from 050-1 II I II ð,.n ~c.e 1>isf~ Ñ.. 1.0 /¿{- ~ _.,_ -0 ._._.._._---_._--_._-----_._~-_._-,_._--,_._---_.__.,---.-- . E.)(\oH8IT A . OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 10 . (A,f..u.f" t>~1"\VCT"~ ' , .; . Not to ac... .. - . , " IJ' r #Y . ~/b-r . .' . 3oF3 .. E,c\·hB\T A Open Space District No. ·1 . ()t. C1;.. {Q+. ~.s- ~O' . ~ð t,>4,(\ ~ {r>Q '~eCa ,\e ~ . IIeI"_ .. .... New Bou.ndary ...,.,...,. Existing Boundary ~ At'eQ "'t'o \¡e d&'Tac."''' ~roM ØS~\ /¿-1 ~-_.__._--- ~.~.._U._.._'..- E~\bì"- \S RESOLUTION NO. 17768 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO DETACH FROM OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 10 THOSE TERRITORIES WITHIN OPEN SPACE NO. 20; TO BE EFFECTIVE FY 1995-96, AND SETTING JANUARY 17, 1995 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATE AND TIME FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER SAID DETACHMENTS WHEREAS, the open space maintenance district that was created for the Rancho del Rey development overlapped two existing open space districts; and WHEREAS, it was requested by Rancho del Rey Investors to eliminate the overlap that exists between Open Space Districts 1, 10 and 20 so that the ultimate property owners will only have one open space district on their disclosure statement and tax bill; and , WHEREAS, it has been Council's policy in the past to simplify the open space maintenance program by detaching parcels that lie within two districts from the district that'they receive the least amount of benefit from; and WHEREAS, Section 22609 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 requires that the areas to be detached be noticed of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, Rancho del Rey Investors is the sole owner of these areas and was noticed; and · WHEREAS, the result of the detachment will cause a net increase in cost per EDU to the remaining properties in Open Space District 1, however, if the areas were detached from OSD-20 and left in OSD-1, the increase would be much higher than the proposed $6/EDU; and WHEREAS, in any case, all property owners within district 1, 10, 20 will be noticed of the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby declare its intèntion to detach from Open Space District No. 1 and Open Space District No. 10 those · territories within Open Space No. 20; to be effective FY 1995-96 and setting January 17, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. as the date and time for the public hearing to consider said detachments. Presented by ~pproved as to ·4-At. John P. Lippitt, Director of Bruce M. Boogaard, City Public Works Attorney · ~A - ~'Ó' C:\ro\datachoo.to -... - ~ /,6 .-- J £}. . . . Exhibit C -, Cost Breakdown Worbbeet Existing Alter Detachments ()pen Space District 1 Maintcnance cost . SS7,810 SSl,310 EDU', 796 6S2.4 Coat per EDU $72.63 S78.6S . ()pen Space District 10 Maintcnance cost SSS,010 SSS,010 EDU', 630 630 Coat per EDU S87 .32 S87 .32 I , N_ n.e _ IN..... an FY t9M·I995 _11aIa_1IIII"",,oct to........ wilh ..Y .......In ..In_ _ '1100 mai.l_ _I al 050·1 .... ... due to the detocll_' al.I.6_....... 10 eo 70 eo ë50 . k !40 ao 20 m- , ~~'''' " 10 . _ ~ ~PtfA. Ðet«"",,-~ ~ . . JA~ y- - . M:..\OIeIIa~dt wql , ~ . " Ik-// ~ -".---,,- __ _,.__.__n_._ __.__.___........___.._....___.____.__.__. - THIS PAGE BLANK -V /~ /¿-/d-- '~'~I Mayor's Comments ~I~ ITEM NO: ø<.tJð/ =~;;.: ~.::~~ CIlY OF CHULA VISTA MEMORANDUM February 8, 1995 TO The Honorable Mayor and City Council , tþ~ FROM John D. Goss, City Manager~~i 1/1/ SUBJECT Requested Information on Special Events At the January 24, 1995 City Council meeting staff was requested to provide information on funding and attendance at City-sponsored special events. Attached is a spreadsheet which lists the primary special events for which the City provides full or partial funding. Included in the spreadsheet is the base cost of the event, additional City staff support costs and a listing of the approximate attendance at each event. For your additional information is a calculation of the City funding per event attendee, and under comments is information on funding provided for these events from other agencies or groups. Should you desire to have staff provide an analysis or any other information on the issue of special events, please contact me. A:\(DH)\SPECIAL.EVT filða- .. / -~---~._.... ---.-,.---'--. -- --.-.--.--......----..-- ---~-_._._----- .._----~- ii . . "8 ...... 0 õ'~Qg;S:Qg'~~i'¡¡:~g61 ~ '" . ... <! '" QJ~g.Ci S; ~ ~ ~. ~ ã g. QJ § -a g s a ª " tI1 I > -, ¡;; o.~=O g ~ fi a ::;: ~ JÞ ~ ~ ~o g8'< æ.~~ 0 g....::t,g ~ g ª to) 00 0 ª '" ~ 8 > ~ ~ ~ ~ go$! Ö!.! 2, g, o c (31 " ¡¡ - o.~~õ o :¡ 8 .., Q) .... .... """ ~ ¡¡ 8 ;:; ~ 8", S~.c:;~~~ 80~~ ~E. 8 g @ - ., " Q . ¡.@ ~~ g'B"i :1.-; n 0". 0 ~,<CaqVl ....::1n ~::; ~ cr~ ~' S' g "' S8~Qg~' 9W8 ~~ " ., - _ 0 to) Õ' "' ~ Ëf ~ ~ c .... -< ::;.t;:aq- c::tR -. ., " ., 5- o.~ ~ R&g~ ....8- ~ ., - :;0 " -!.! a:!1~g a 0 ¡d g c šO'g. ¡:: '1} :=:- &"',< o~(")::r 0 ., . " !.! ~" ::j ~ g ~ ~ :: ~. 0 Q. t¡;t¡; 0 ::r ..,-< g, ~ ' o.:öi " ".:-1'18 '" z " -, ¡¡ '< ~ - "'''' W9W9W9~ 00 , '" "8 a 8 !! Q S'" ~ - - '" '" E.4W9~¡.-Io¡.-lo¡.-loN ~ Q ;:¡~6i :"1 § !2 S. ~V1 ~fXJ ~ W9 ~W ~~ ¡.-IoV1\ONOO'\-....I V. §§8~8§ "o...\c"o...g~1-,)'th .., 8 ., - 00 " C' g: ~~~ 8õ ",>i " go " 0. " " - " - PI.., 5- n" 0 ~ - ~ ., "" ~ ., [" õ o~· So.§.. " ¡r¡ ~ 0. _. ~!1, '1 ¡(Öo;; '" '" '" "'::8' t¡; -, -. W9 ~W9foo't ~~¡.-Io-EA64N g ~ ¡¡.>a co W9 ~O'\ ~V1 J"-> ~~ W9 ~~ ..W ~V1 ~O'\ ..-....I :-" ~ - " ~ 8 g" 800~64¡.-1oV1V1¡.-108~OV1-....1~ '< ~ g ~c!c!~8c!8 ~~8~ · i 8. " "' "¡:: '5 " ., -, ~ ~ ., ," _. 0. >-+. ::! S' Q. g¡>::- ~õ' ~CJQ-< (');¡ -, "" " 8 '" - §: ~ ~ ,¡, " " Š W964 E.4-EA64W9W9¡ !.! S"8 ¡.-Io W964-EA¡.-Io¡.-loN¡.-Io 5'''~ ~VlJ;~W9Vt~~O'\..,r.~~o~w..-....I O'\_~.. "'0 to) ::;¡ c <: "11 §' ~ §fXJfXJ...O'\VlVI-....I-....Ioo1A~8 , &""~ ~' ~ ~c!~~8c!~~c!~8 II ~g8. - ., o ¡¡ ~ '2: » E. 0 Q ., - '< ~:g 00 - ... 0. ~ ~ §~g " ~ ¡¡' ~ " ~ n " :g r" ¡¡ ß'. g ~'::1 §~:c ß NÑN¡.-IoNN8; ~VI~...,t-)&; ~ ~ o.~~ "8 'g"8"§"§1fg"§ §"§"§"§"§ §'g · C' ~. 0 2- · :5: ¡¡'C'!1 ~ '< 1'1 8." , ::2. "r.I § 0.- ~~Q 00 "" g !I 0. "' " 0 " ¡;;" :. O".::t:I Õ ~-< ~. ;; <:0 ~ " '" " ~ § ~. ~_n '" ~t3~~~t3~t3P~p~;=~ It a èn g - '1} 5 P1 ~ 6 8 ~~t¡ttS~æ:~~~¡t!;)~~ - ~ i ägF "11(') (');>:;0............ § -, "" ~.~. -'0.00000 ã ,..- -<0.~~~::1~ " -< '< ., 8 g: .~~~ë' 8 ., - " !! g ¡; g ¡; 5!-c8.cccc " " .. j;! ~oo 0, e. " P1' P1' P1' P1' ¡;; o ., 0' aq........ - -, g~~~~~~ " " "' ~ " ¡¡ On....o.o.o.o. g~ C ::r 0 ~. 8:' ~':=" o S'>-+'-' ._._. >-+'OCI~OOOO " ~ë'~ ~~~~ ë! SC§-EAW9-EA64 ~ ....~ NW¡.-IoOO m ia!~§§~ '" ... z " a O'_~~o " §:::'<~~Q;; " o.c8000c ~ ]f!!!.g(!gSõ ;1 -B'o,,," " "a ~ §'P1[ªg,g,s '" ~ ¡r¡ ~ õ'" " ë 8 ~ S a P1 ~"g ¡¡ B' ~ S S ~ 0 ~ ~ .:c ~ - ., " ~ ¡; ceo .... 0.0. a '< " "8 0" ~ ", e; a. g 0 " n - ¡; î " ;¡ ß' g 020a--:<' ---~~-~---~-_._._. - - ,-.--- --- -,._-----"'~~._-----.