Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 2005/05/10 May 10, 2005 : declare under penalty of perjury that I am employed by the City of Chula Vista in the Office of the City Clerk and that I posted this document on the bulletin board according to Brown Act requirements. ~ AGENDA d-J& Dated ~ Signed 6.88 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Castaneda, Davis, McCann, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY · INVITATION BY RODERlCK REINHART, CULTURAL ARTS AND FUND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER TO THE TASTE OF THE ARTS FESTNAL ON MAY 15,2005 · INTRODUCTION BY JOHN COGGINS, PURCHASING AGENT, OF THE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH, LUPE LUCERO · PRESENTATION BY FINANCE DIRECTOR MARlA KACHADOORIAN OF THE ACHIEVEMENT OF EXCELLENCE IN PROCUREMENT AWARD TO PURCHASING AGENT JOHN COGGINS AND THE PURCHASING DNISION STAFF · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO BRAD REMP, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING/BUILDING OFFICIAL, PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF MAY 8 THROUGH MAY 14,2005, AS BUILDING SAFETY WEEK . PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO EXALTED RULER, JOSE CffiRlAN AND YOUTH ACTNITIES CHAIRMAN, GARRY HUMMEL, OF ELKS LODGE NO. 2011, PROCLAIM:ING THE WEEK OF MAY 1 THROUGH MAY 7, 2005 AS YOUTH WEEK · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO POLICE CHIEF EMERSON PROCLAIM:ING WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2005 AS PEACE OFFICERS MEMORlAL DAY CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 through 14) The Council will enact the Consent Calendar staff recommendations by one motion, without discussion, unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or City staff requests that an item be removed 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. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Action Items. Page 1 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 1. WRlTTEN COMMUNICATIONS · Request from Councilmember Davis for an excused absence from the May 10, 2005 City Council Meeting. Staff recommendation: Council excuse the absence. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Regular Meetings of April 5, April 12, and April 19, April 26, 2005, and the Adjourned Regular Meetings of April 12, 2005 and April 19, 2005. Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes. 3. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DECREASING THE SPEED LIMIT ON MOSS STREET BETWEEN INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND BROADWAY FROM 35 MILES PER HOUR TO 30 MILES PER HOUR (SECOND READING) Based on the provisions of Division II-Chapter 7-Article 1 (Sections 22348 thru 22366) and Division 17-Chapter 3-Article 1 (Sections 40800 thru 40808) of the California Vehicle Code (CVC), and pursuant to authority under Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 10.48.020, titled "Established Speed Limits In Certain Zones", the City Engineer has determined that, in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and for the promotion of public safety, the speed limit on Moss Street between Industrial Boulevard and Broadway be reduced from 35 mph to 30 mph. This speed limit will be amended in Schedule X of the register maintained in the Office ofthe City Engineer. This ordinance was introduced at the meeting of April 26, 2005. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance. 4 A. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REPEAL SECTION 17.30 RELATING TO INTERlM COASTAL SAGE SCRUB HABITAT LOSS PERMIT PROCESS, AND IN ITS PLACE ADD THE OTAY RANCH GRAZING FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MSCP SUB-AREA PLAN (SECOND READING) B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD SECTION 17.35 RELATING TO HABITAT LOSS AND INCIDENTAL TAKE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MSCP SUB-AREA PLAN (SECOND READING) C. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING TITLE 15, CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO EXCAVATION, GRADING AND FILLS AS IT RELATES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MSCP SUB-AREA PLAN (SECOND READING) Page 2 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 The Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Sub-area Plan was prepared by the City of Chula Vista in coordination with the Federal and State Regulatory agencies in order to implement the MSCP Sub-regional Plan within the City of Chula Vista. The Council adopted the MSCP Sub-area Plan on May 13, 2003. At that time, three MSCP Implementing Ordinances were introduced to be considered for adoption upon issuance of the Take Permit by the Wildlife Agencies. On January 13, 2005, the Wildlife Agencies issued a Take Permit and signed the Implementing Agreement granting the City Take Authorization. Adoption of the MSCP Implementing Ordinances ensures successful implementation of the MSCP Sub-area Plan, which provides protection for sensitive biological resources currently supported within the City. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinances. 5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2005 LffiRARY DEPARTMENT BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING A ONE-TIME UNANTICIPATED REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,500 FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE SCORECARDS FOR RESULTS, AN INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM AND LffiRARY SERVICES GRANT PROJECT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) The Chula Vista Public Library was invited to participate in- the Scorecards for Results grant project. The one-time revenue will be used to cover expenses associated with the project, which include the production of a workbook, an independent survey of library services, and staff training. (Assistant City Manager Palmer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE PERFORMING AND VISUAL ARTS TASK FORCE'S SELECTION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2005/2006 PERFORMING AND VISUAL ARTS GRANT RECIPIENTS AND THEIR MONETARY GRANT AWARD, TOTALING $35,730 (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) In 1997, the Council approved a sublease with the House of Blues Concerts, Inc. (formerly Universal Concerts) that established a process whereby ticket sales proceeds at the Coors Amphitheater would be paid to the City and utilized for a Performing and Visual Arts Fund. This fund is to be used for arts grants to the Chula Vista community for the purpose of promoting and stimulating the growth of performing and cultural arts within the City of Chula Vista. This year the Office of Cultural Arts received $36,116.00 trom the House of Blues for their 2004 Concert Series. (Assistant City Manager Palmer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 7. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $193,770 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT FUND FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE CITY'S DATA GENERAL MINICOMPUTERS, AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASING AGENT TO ACQUIRE THE EQUIPMENT THROUGH WESTERN STATES CONTRACTING ALLIANCE (WSCA) AND CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) COOPERATNE PURCHASING AGREEMENTS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Page 3 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 The City operates two Data General Unix minicomputers to run the City's financial applications, including payroll, general ledger, purchasing, fixed assets, as well as other applications. Since these computers can no longer support the new versions of these programs and Data General is no longer supporting the operating system, the minicomputers need to be replaced. (Director of Management and Information Services) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 8. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF PUBLIC RlGHT-OF WAY WITHIN THE CUL-DE-SAC OF HAROLD PLACE LOCATED IN THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER Eastlake Business Center II has requested to vacate a portion of public right-of-way within the cul-de-sac of properties located at 820, 821 and 841 Harold Place in Eastlake Business Center. In accordance with Chapter 4, Section 8330 of the State Streets and Highways Code, this type of vacation may be performed summarily through adoption of a resolution ordering said summary vacation provided certain conditions are met. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 9 A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF PUBLIC STREET EASEMENTS FOR AUTO PARK DRNE AND EASEMENT FOR PARKING AND EMERGENCY ACCESS WITHIN THE AUTO DEALERSHIPS LOCATED EAST OF 1-805 AND SOUTH OF MAIN STREET B. RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR SETTING A PUBLIC HEARlNG FOR JUNE 7, 2005 TO CONSIDER VACATING STREET LIGHT AND PEDESTRlAN EASEMENTS AND A PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED ADJACENT TO AUTO PARK DRlVE, EAST OF 1-805, SOUTH OF MAIN STREET DGF Family Limited Partnership, owner of the property located at 520 Auto Park Drive (Fuller Ford), has requested the vacation of public street easements for Auto Park Drive and the associated street light and pedestrian easements, public drainage easement and easement for parking and emergency access in the auto dealerships located south of Main Street on either side of Brandywine Avenue. In accordance with Section 7050 of the California Government Code and Chapter 4, Section 8333 and 8334 of the California Streets and Highways Code, the street easements for Auto Park Drive and the easement for parking and emergency access may be performed summarily through adoption of a resolution ordering said vacation. In accordance with Part 3, Chapter 3 of the California Streets and Highways Code, Council must adopt a Resolution of Intention setting a public hearing in order to consider the vacation request for the street light and pedestrian easements and the public drainage easement associated with Auto Park Drive. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions. Page 4 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 10. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN EASEMENT TO PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY AS NECESSARY FOR THE COMPLETION OF STATE ROUTE 125 Adoption of the resolution authorizes granting an easement for communications facilities over a portion of city-owned land to Pacific Bell Telephone Company (SBC) as required for the Construction of State Route 125. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 11. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND A WARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE 2004/2005 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM - PHASE XN (SW-23 1); AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF AVAILABLE SEWER FACILITY REPLACEMENT FUNDS INTO THE PROJECT FROM THE 2003/2004 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM, PHASE XIII (SW-230) PROJECT; AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) On March 30, 2005, the Director of General Services received three sealed bids for the Fiscal Year 2003/2004 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XliI (SW-230) and Fiscal Year 2004/2005 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XN (SW-23 1). The project includes replacing· existing broken sewer mains and laterals, repairing cracked sewer lines, and replacing asphalt concrete pavement in various locations throughout the City. (Director of General Services) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 12. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRlATING UNANTICIPATED REIMBURSEMENT FUNDS FROM THE COMMISSION ON PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 SUPPLIES AND SERVICES BUDGET OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) The Police Department has realized unanticipated reimbursement revenue from the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) and requests to appropriate these unanticipated funds to the training budget of the Police Department. (Chief of Police) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 13. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A THREE-PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC. (CONSULTANT), AND THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC (APPLICANT), RELATED TO PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EASTLAKE liI SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT Page 5 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 The EastLake Company, LLC (Applicant) has filed an application for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project. The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed project requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The item before the Council is a request for the City Council to approve the proposed contract with Dudek & Associates, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $148,306 to provide consultant services for the preparation of the EIR for the proposed project. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 14 A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AWARDING A THREE-YEAR CONTRACT TO NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP, DBA NBS, FOR PERFORMANCE OF SPECIAL DISTRICT APPORTIONMENT, DELINQUENCY MONITORING, ADMINISTRATION, AND OTHER SERVICES FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRlCTS, COMMUNITY FACILITIES (MELLO-ROOS) DISTRlCTS, AND OPEN SPACE DISTRlCTS; AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXTENDING THE AGREEMENT FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRlCT AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRlCT JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE SERVICES TO STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT C. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY OR HER DESIGNEE TO INITIATE FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS Adoption of the resolution approves agreements with NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS, and Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth; and authorizes the City Attorney to proceed with judicial foreclosure. The services these consultants provide ensure that the City's fiduciary responsibility to the bondholders is fulfilled. (City Engineer, Director of Finance) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons speaking during Oral Communications may address the Council on any subject matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State law generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any issue not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the topic for jùture discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to three minutes. Page 6 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have been advertised as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. 15. CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT OF CERTAIN DELINQUENT SEWER SERVICE CHARGES AS LIENS UPON THE RESPECTNE OWNER-OCCUPIED PARCELS OF LAND AND PLACEMENT OF DELINQUENT CHARGES ON THE NEXT REGULAR TAX BILL FOR COLLECTION Adoption of the resolution enhances the collection process for delinquent sewer service charges by ensuring that the correct property owners are charged and that payment be received on a timelier basis. This is the identical process approved by the Council since August 1998. (Director of Finance) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSING DELINQUENT SEWER SERVICE CHARGES AS LIENS UPON THE RESPECTIVE OWNER-OCCUPIED PARCELS OF LAND AND APPROVING PLACEMENT OF DELINQUENT CHARGES ON THE NEXT REGULAR TAX BILL 16. CONSIDERATION OF AN INCREASE TO THE SEWERAGE CAPACITY CHARGE AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (Continued from April 26, 2005) The City of San Diego, as part of the Metropolitan Wastewater District ("Metro"), provides sewage treatment services to fourteen participating agencies that do not own and operate a sewage treatment facility. The City of Chula Vista, along with the other participating agencies, sends sewage generated to San Diego's Wastewater Treatment Plants for treatment. In 1985, Chula Vista established the sewerage capacity charge to fund the planning, design and construction of wastewater collection or treatment facilities needed to facilitate the development of the City. It was also intended to fund either the construction of treatment facilities or the purchase of additional treatment capacity rights in the Metro scwer system. Since then, the City has made several adj ustments to the sewerage capacity charge; however, another increase is needed to ensure that there is adequate revenue necessary to fund the acquisition of additional sewage treatment capacity rights. It is recommended that the current sewer capacity charge be increased from $3,000 to $3,478 to ensure that there is adequate capacity in the system. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing, place the following ordinance on first reading, and adopt the following urgency ordinance: Page 7 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 A. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN INCREASE OF THE SEWERAGE CAPACITY CHARGE AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (FIRST READING) B. URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN INCREASE OF THE SEWERAGE CAPACITY CHARGE AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) 17. CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 STATE CITIZENS' OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND The Police Department has been awarded $307,014 through the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF). These State funds were allocated to the Police Department for purposes stipulated by the Citizens' Option for Public Safety (COPS) Program. Acceptance and appropriation of these funds requires a public hearing per stipulations of the State COPS Program. (Chief of Police) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $307,014 FROM THE STATE CITIZENS' OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS BASED ON UNANTICIPATED REVENUE TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 PERSONNEL BUDGET OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) 18. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE AND AMENDING CHAPTER 3.54 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE The City's Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Program was established on January 12, 1988. Since its inception, the program bas been updated several times to reflect new land use approvals, proposed changes to the General Plan, and updated project cost estimates. The last TDIF Update was approved on August 13, 2002. Adoption of the resolution approves the 2005 TDIF update recommending an increase from the current fee of $8,825 to $10,050 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing, place the following ordinance on first reading, and adopt the following resolutions: Page 8 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF RECOMMENDING AN UPDATED TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM, CHAPTER 3.54 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (FIRST READING) C. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A $7 MILLION LOAN REPAYMENT, PLUS INTEREST, FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO THE INTERlM SR-125 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND D. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TRANSFERRING THE FUND BALANCE OF THE INTERlM SR-125 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND, AND FORGNING THE $3.3 MILLION, PLUS INTEREST, LOAN BETWEEN THESE FUNDS ACTION ITEMS The items listed in this section of the agenda will be considered individually by the Council, and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. If you wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. 19.. CONSIDERATION OF THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005/2006, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG); HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME); AMERlCAN DREAM DOWNPAYMENT INITIATIVE (ADD!); AND THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) PROGRAMS The City is eligible to receive $2,299,525 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), $1,027,072 in Home Investment Partnership (HOME), $34,958 in American Dream Downpayrnent (ADD!), and $87,011 in Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) entitlement funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Fiscal Year 2005/2006 upon submittal a,nd approval of the Annual Action Plan. (Director of Community Development) Staffrecommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PLAN FOR FY 2005/2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG); HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME); AMERlCAN DREAM DOWNPAYMENT INITIATIVE (ADDI); AND THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) PROGRAMS; AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PLAN TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD); AND INSTRUCTING STAFF TO INCLUDE APPROPRIATIONS TO FUND THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PLAN IN THE FY 2005/2006 PROPOSED BUDGET Page 9 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR OTHER BUSINESS 20. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS 21. MAYOR'S REPORTS 22. COUNCIL COMMENTS CLOSED SESSION Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by noon on Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Attorney's office in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code 54957.7). 23. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 54957.6 · Agency designated representatives: Sharon Marshall, Marcia Raskin, David D. Rowlands, Jr., Maria Kachadoorian, Ed Van Eenoo · Employee organizations: Police Officers Association, Chula Vista Employees Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, Westem Council of Engineers 24. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 · One case ADJOURNMENT to the Regular Meeting of May 17, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Page 10 - Council Agenda May 10, 2005 Mayor and City Council City Of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, Ca 91910 619.691.5044 - 619.476.5379 Fax MEMO CIlY Of CHUlA VISTA Monday, May 02, 2005 TO: The Honorable Mayor & City Council Natalie D. Flore~£ Request for Excused !ence FROM: RE: Councilmember Patty Davis will be in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 and has directed that I prepare a memo requesting an excused absence from the Council Meeting that evening. Cc: City Manager City Attorney City Clerk 0" S ~=4 -<-< :::0 C') 0 ~ IT1 r- 'T1 (') m(") ::<J::I: I 1'1 :Xc: N < ,ñ, 0)::- ~ f1'1 ""T"1< ~ CJ =-~t:.;::: W CY_·-e Ïn:r~ -.I / DRAFT MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA April 5, 2005 4:00 P.M. A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 4:09 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda, Davis, McCann, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla (Councilrnember McCann arrived at 4:15 p.m., and Councilmember Rindone arrived at 4:22 p.m.) ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Rowlands, City Attorney Moore, and City Clerk Bigelow PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY . INTRODUCTION BY POLICE CHIEF EMERSON OF THE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH, ROBERT CONRAD, COLD CASE FILE INVESTIGATOR Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to Robert Conrad. Police Chief Emerson stated that Mr. Conrad has sent three high-profile cases to the District Attorney's Office by using his creativity, diligence and careful analysis to solve crimes. . PRESENTATION BY LIZ PURSELL, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS, OF THEDEPARTMENT'S STRATEGIC BUSINESS PLAN Communications Director Pursell introduced the Communications Department staff and made a video presentation illustrating key points of the department's strategic business plan and vision for the future. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 through 10) Councilmember McCann stated that he would abstain from voting on Items 3, 4, and 9 due to a potential conflict of interest with regard to property he owns in the vicinity of the projects. With reference to Item 8, Councilmember Rindone stated that the Connect Crew program at Hilltop High School has been effective in preventing bullying, and he suggested that staff investigate aspects of the program that could be implemented at the elementary school level. Page 1 - Council Minutes ;¿/1 AprilS, 2005 1 '~1' , Íti . ~Y' .~"i ,J¡~' DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Adjourned Regular Meeting of February 24 and the Regular Meetings of March 1 and March 8, 2005. Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes. 2. ORDINANCE NO. 2999, ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER II SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRlCT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE DISTRlCT MAP, TO DEFINE PERMITTED LAND USES WITHIN A 36-ACRE, NEWLY CREATED DESIGN DISTRlCT OVERLAY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AND FENTON A VENUE/SHOWROOM PLACE WITHIN THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER (SECOND READING The EastLake Company, LLC submitted an application to 1) amend the land use district map in order to add a design district overlay over a 36-acre portion ofland with a BC-l land use designation and defme allowable land uses within the overlay area; and 2) amend the design guidelines to add sign criteria specific for businesses located within the design district overlay. This ordinance was introduced on March 22,2005. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-105, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE UPGRADE OF PEDESTRIAN INDICATIONS WITH LIGHT EMITTING DIODE (LED) COUNTDOWN CITYWIDE (pROJECT TF-323) TO REPUBLIC ELECTRlC, AND APPROPRIATING TRAFFIC SIGNAL FUNDS The upgrade of pedestrian indication (countdown) was approved and budgeted as part of the fiscal year 2004/2005 capital improvement program. The scope of the project includes the installation of pedestrian countdown LED signal modules and push buttons as a retrofit replacement of existing pedestrian indications and push buttons at 12 signalized intersections in the City. Adoption of the resolution awards the contract in the amount of $42,776 and appropriates $15,000 from the traffic signal fund in order to complete the project. (Director of General Services, City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-106, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF SIX GRANT APPLICATIONS TO SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SANDAG) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005/2006 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) AND TRANSNET FUNDING FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS The Transportation Development Act and the TransNet Program provide funding support for regional bicycle and pedestrian capital improvement projects. SANDAG will allocate those project funds to cities in the San Diego region based upon funding availability and project ranking. Staff has prepared funding applications for six projects. (Director of General Services, City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 2 - Council Mioutes AprilS, 2005 DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) 5. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-107, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS ON THE COUNTY TAX ROLL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRlCT 2002-1 (QUINTARD STREET) On July 22, 2003, pursuant to Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act of 1911 and Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California, the Council awarded a construction contract for the construction of sidewalk improvements on Quintard Street between Third Avenue and Orange Avenue. The Council accepted the filing of the Engineer's report on the cost of construction, approved the deferral of the payment of assessments and the rate of interest payable on the unpaid balance of the assessrnents, and ordered the recordation of a Notice of Lien for the Quintard Street Assessment District. Adoption of the resolution authorizes the collection of the assessments. (Director of General Services) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 6. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-108, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE YMCA OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY SOUTH BAY BRANCH FOR THE PROVISION OF AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM HOURS AT HILLTOP, CHULA VISTA, RANCHO DEL REY AND CASTLE PARK MIDDLE SCHOOLS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT The Recreation Department budget includes funding to contract with the YMCA of San Diego County - South Bay Branch for the provision of after-school services at four middle school sites during non-school hours. The City has contracted with the YMCA for these services on an annual basis since 1993, when the Council initially approved funding for the newly established Youth Action Program. (Director of Recreation) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 7 A. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-109, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT WITH SYSTEMS INTEGRATED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA ACQUISITION (SCADA) SYSTEM, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT B. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-110, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE AGREEMENT WITH PALOMAR COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR THE INSTALLATION OF AN ANTENNA AT OTAY MOUNTAIN, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT Systems Integrated is requesting that the completion date be extended by 90 working days for the construction of a Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system, used for controlling and monitoring sewage collection and pump stations throughout the City. The increase in contract time will not impact the contract guaranteed maximum price of $527,750. In addition, to obtain better communication and reliability for the SCADA system, an antenna needs to be installed on Otay Mountain. (public Works Operations) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions. Page 3 - Council Minutes April 5, 2005 :4 ~.' 4· DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) 8. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-111, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $18,000 FROM THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRlCT AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 SUPPLIES AND SERVICES BUDGET OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO CONDUCT A PROGRAM EVALUATION ON THE BULLYING PREVENTION PROGRAM The Police Department has received additional funding from the Chula Vista Elementary School District to support the Bullying Prevention Program funded by the School Community Policing Partnership (SCPP) grant. As stipulated in the grant project narrative, a program evaluation will be conducted on the program to create best practices in the area of bullying prevention. The Chula Vista Elementary School District has recently assigned this task to the Police Department. The Police Department will contract with two bullying prevention experts to conduct this evaluation. (Chief of Police) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-112, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING PRELIMINARY DETERMINATIONS AND DECLARING INTENTION TO ISSUE BONDS TO REFUND THE OUTSTANDING BONDS ISSUED FOR CERTAIN EXISTING ASSESSMENT DISTRlCTS AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRlCTS AND ORDERING A REPORT THEREON The City currently has six assessment districts and ten community facilities districts with outstanding debt. A preliminary review perfonned by a municipal banking finn, Stone & Youngberg, indicates that under the current low interest rate environment, the outstanding debt of two assessment districts and seven community facilities districts may be refinanced in order to achieve significant savings to the property owners on their annual assessments. (Director of Finance) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-113, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $50,000 FOR PARTICIPATING AT THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION FOR PHASE II DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION AND THE OTAY MESA TRANSMISSION PROJECT FROM THE AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND TO THE CONSERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT THEREFOR Adoption of the resolution allows staff and outside counsel to continue to participate in workshops and proceedings at the California Public Utilities Commission to support the Phase II development of Community Choice Aggregation and the City's interest in the Otay Mesa Power Purchase Agreement Transmission Project, as outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding with SDG&E. (Director of Conservation and Environmental Services) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 4 - Council Minutes April 5,2005 DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to approve staffs recommendations and offered the Consent Calendar, headings read, texts waived. The motion carried 5-0, except on Items 3, 4, and 9, which carried 4-0-1, with Councilrnember McCann abstaining due to a potential conflict of interest with regard to property he owns in the vicinity of the projects. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Laura Hunter, representing the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC), provided an update on a survey of public fishing piers located closest to the most contaminated areas in San Diego Bay and the health risks associated with the consumption of fish from those areas. Ms. Hunter also discussed the status of border fence legislation at the state level and encouraged the Council to weigh in on the issue, since border communities should be afforded the opportunity to debate on the matter. PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT OF CERTAIN DELINQUENT SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES AS RECORDED LIENS UPON THE RESPECTIVE PARCELS OF LAND AND PLACEMENT OF DELINQUENT CHARGES ON THE NEXT REGULAR TAX BILL FOR COLLECTION Adoption of the resolution enhances the collection process for delinquent solid waste service charges by reducing the amount of uncollectible losses and ensures that payment will be received on a timelier basis. This is the identical process approved by the Council on a regular basis since 2001. (Director of Finance) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Assistant Director of Finance Davis stated that of the reported 568 delinquent accounts, valued at $75,500, 175 accounts have been cleared; and he recommended that the remaining 393 delinquent accounts, valued at $56,300, be forward to the County to be placed on the next regular tax bill for collection. With no members of the public wishing to speak, Mayor Padilla closed the public hearing. ACTION: Councilmember McCann moved to adopt Resolution No. 2005-114, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-114, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSING DELINQUENT SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES AS RECORDED LIENS UPON THE RESPECTNE OWNER-OCCUPIED PARCELS OF LAND AND APPROVING PLACEMENT OF DELINQUENT CHARGES ON THE NEXT REGULAR TAX BILL The motion carried 5-0. Page 5 - Council Minutes AprilS, 2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARlNGS (Continued) 12. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONDUCT A FARMERS' MARKET ON THE CAMPUS OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE The applicant, Mr. David Larson, is requesting to conduct a weekly Certified Farmers' Market at Southwestern College, 900 Otay Lakes Road, to be held every Saturday morning in Lot "0" of the college. The market will consist of approximately 45 vendors, 25 of whom will be certified agricultural producers. (Director of Planning and Building) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements. Planning and Building Director Sandoval requested that the public hearing be continued to the meeting of April 19, 2005. ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to continue the item to April 19, 2005. Deputy Mayor Davis seconded the motion, and it carried 5-0. Item 14 was considered at this time, prior to Item 13. 13. CONSIDERATION OF A REVISED TENTATIVE SUBDNISION MAP FOR A PORTION OF OTAY RANCH VILLAGE SEVEN SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BIRCH ROAD AND LA MEDIA ROAD - OTAY PROJECT, L.P. (PCS-05-09A) Adoption of the resolution approves an amendment to tentative subdivision map (PCS- 05-09A) for a portion of Otay Ranch Village Seven Sectional Planning Area. (Director of Planning and Building) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Councilrnember Castaneda stated that he would abstain from discussion and voting on Item 13 out of an abundance caution due to a potential conflict of interest. He then left the dais. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Phelps presented the revised tentative subdivision map. With no members of the public wishing to speak, Mayor Padilla closed the public hearing. ACTION: Councilmember McCann moved to adopt Resolution No. 2005-115, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-115, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A TENTATIVE SUBDNISION MAP FOR A PORTION OF THE OTAY RANCH, VILLAGE SEVEN SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN- OTA Y PROJECT L.P., CHULA VISTA TRACT 05-09A The motion carried 3-0-1, with Deputy Mayor Davis absent and Councilrnember Castaneda abstaining out of an abundance caution due to a potential conflict of interest. Page 6 - Council Minutes April 5,2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARlNGS (Continued) 14. REVIEW OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM, THE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM (ESG), AND THE AMERlCAN DREAM DOWNPAYMENT PROGRAM, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SPENDING PLAN FOR THE 2005-2006 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL ACTION PLAN Applications for funding were received from local organizations and City departments in January of this year. The public service applicants were invited to present their formal requests to the Council on March 29, 2005. Staff has prepared funding level recommendations for each of the projects or programs. (Director of Community Development) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Community Development Specialist Davis presented the various funding recommendations. At 6:08 p.m., Deputy Mayor Davis left the meeting. ACTION: Councilmember Rindone moved to direct staff to return with the CDBG funding requests, taking into consideration the following recommendations: 1) Tab 5 - Allocate $2,500 for a one-year trial period to Chula Vista Firefighters Foundation, Random Acts of Kindness; 2) Tab 16 - Allocate full amount of $25,000 to Family Health Centers of San Diego, KidCare Express Mobile Medical Unit III; 3) Tab 21 - Allocate $5,000 for a one-year trial period to Sweetwater Education Foundation, Compact for Success. 4) Tab 26 - Allocate full amount of$12,705 to Meals-on-Wheels, South Bay Senior Collaborative; City Manager Rowlands suggested that staff return with a recommendation to reduce the City ofChula Vista-Recreation, Therapeutic Services from $35,000 to $7,795, seek other funding sources for the program and use $27,205 to re-allocate to the CDBG program. With regard to Tabs 27 (City of Chula Vista-Planning & Bldg., Community Preservation Program) and 28 (City ofChula Vista-Planning & Building, Housing Inspection Program), the Council requested a report from staff on how the funding would be utilized. Additionally, City Manager Rowlands stated that funding for the two programs could be absorbed into the General Fund on a gradual basis, which would free-up funding for other community-based projects in the future. Page 7 - Council Minutes April 5, 2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) Councilrnember Rindone spoke about the possibility that the Legislature will eliminate the entire CDBG program, and he asked staff to come back with suggestions on measures the Council could take to address the issue. Regarding Tab 29 (Chula Vista National Little League, Youth Baseball Field, Phase II), Councilmember McCann asked staff to seek ways to fund the program in the future and to work with the applicant and Recreation Director Martin to find future funding. Councilmember McCann seconded the motion and it carried 4-1, with Deputy Mayor Davis absent. OTHER BUSINESS 15. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS There were none. 16. MAYOR'S REPORTS . Consideration of a request ftom Southwestern College for support and assistance in the 2005 National Youth Sports Program. ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to refer the request to the City Manager's Office. Councilmember Rindone seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0, with Deputy Mayor Davis absent. 17. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Rindone spoke about the first University Task Force Blue Ribbon Committee meeting and expressed excitement about the project, which will raise the quality of life for the youth in the community by advancing their educational opportunities. Councilmember Castaneda described some of the activities he observed during a recent ride-a- long with the Police Department's "Tough on Crime" unit. He expressed the need for additional methods to assist law enforcement, such as by enacting legislative ordinances to prohibit further check-cashing establishments, limit alcohol licenses, and enforce curfews. He also stated that overtime Police Officers should be placed on permanent status. He congratulated the Council, City Manager Rowlands, and Police Chief Emerson for tackling the various problems head-on. Councilmember Castaneda spoke regarding e-mails he has received from constituents regarding the Espanada Project, stating that there appears to be a misunderstanding or misconception regarding the project's disposition and development agreement (DDA). He explained that the DDA is merely a review of the business deal between the City and the developer and does not concern project design. Considerations with respect to building design and environmental matters would be discussed at a later time in open meetings with the public. Page 8 - Council Minutes April 5, 2005 'DRAFT COUNCIL COMMENTS (Continued) Councilmember McCann also spoke regarding the University Task Force Blue Ribbon Committee meeting, and he thanked Councilmember Rindone for laying the foundation and bringing the project forward. He encouraged members of the community to attend future meetings. Councilmember McCann poke about his recent attendance at the Chula Vista American Little League opening day event, statiitg that youth sports provides the opportunity for children to learn sportsmanship, teamwork, and community pride. With respect to the General Plan Update, Councilmember McCann requested that staff facilitate additional meetings among the various community groups, which actually have many common goals for the community. CLOSED SESSION Closed Session was cancelled, and the following items were not discussed: 18. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) A. Wert v. City ofChula Vista [USDC Case No. 03 CVl156J (BLM)] B. Sanchez v. City ofChula Vista [USDC Case No. 04 CV 0084 (DMS)] 19. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(c) . One Case ADJOURNMENT At 6:28 p.m., Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of April 12, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ~.Ó-J.- '-[:;;?;;;:r:~ Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk Page 9 - Council Mioutes April 5,2005 DRAFT MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA April 12, 2005 5:00 P.M. An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 5:13 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 and 3 of the Public Services Building, located at 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLLCALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda (arrived at 5:17 p.m.), Davis, McCann, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla ABSENT: Councilmembers: None 1. INTERVIEWS TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION The Council interviewed the following applicants to fill one vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Commission: Brett Davis Israel Garza Robert Santos Mike German Chris Searles Tiffany Vinson Lisa Johnson ACTION: Deputy Mayor Davis moved to appoint Dr. (Robert) Christopher Searles to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Councilmember McCann seconded the motion, and it carried 5-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. ADJOURNMENT At 6:38 p.m., Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of April 12, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ----. =:¿U ~ ~'<i?J.(2. -> Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk ;(3 , DRAFT MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA April 12, 2005 6:00 P.M. A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:46 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda, Davis, McCann, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Rowlands, City Attorney Moore, and City Clerk Bigelow PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO CHRISTINE SHAW, FIRE DISPATCHER SUPERVISOR, PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF APRlL 10 THROUGH APRIL 16, 2005, AS NATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATORS APPRECIATION WEEK Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to Fire Dispatch Supervisor Shaw and staff. · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO PATTI HOLIAN, POLICE DISPATCH SUPERVISOR, PROCLAIM:ING THE WEEK OF APRlL 10 THROUGH APRIL 16, 2005, AS NATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATORS APPRECIATION WEEK Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to Police Dispatch Supervisor Holian and staff. · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO IRENE STILLINGS, SAN DIEGO REGIONAL ENERGY OFFICE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PROCLAIMING APRIL 12,2005, AS CELEBRATION OF ARBOR DAY IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Page 1 - Council Minutes X-- April 12, 2005 DRAFT SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to Ms. Stillings, who spoke about the shade tree program and the availability of up to five trees per property if the trees would provide shade to a home. Councilmember Rindone asked that the program and telephone number (888.831.8620) be publicized and available on-screen when the meeting is televised. Willie Gaters spoke about the Proposition 12 grant, which will provide trees for planting in public rights-of-way, and stated that the City hopes to plant 2,000 trees this year. He acknowledged staff for supporting the grant application. Also present was Thom Porter, from the California Department of Forestry Fire Protection Service, who spoke about the $50,000 grant. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 through 4) 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of March 22 and March 29,2005. Staffrecommendation: Council approve the minutes. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-116, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FILING OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE HAZARD ELIMINATION SAFETY (HES) PROGRAM FOR FUNDS TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AT FOURTH AVENUE AND K STREET, AND CERTIFYING THE COMMITMENT OF MATCHING FUNDS The intersection at Fourth Avenue and K Street, near Chula Vista High School, has been reviewed for improvements. Adoption of the resolution approves the filing of an application for grant funding from the Hazard Elimination Safety (RES) Grant Program, matched with Traffic Signal Fees, to fund a project that will improve safety and traffic flow. The proposed project upgrades the traffic signal system and reconstructs sidewalks and cross gutters at the intersection to comply with current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. (Director of General Services, City Engineer) Staffrecornrnendation: Council adopt the resolution. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-117, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH ERlCKSON HALL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO INCORPORATE THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (GMP) FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF MOUNTAIN HAWK PARK (CIP PR257) LOCATED IN THE EASTLAKE VISTAS NEIGHBORHOOD OF EASTERN CHULA VISTA, APPROPRIATING FUNDS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AMENDMENT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Page 2 - Council Mioutes April 12, 2005 DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) On July 13, 2004, the Council approved a design build agreement with Erickson-Hall Construction Company for the construction of Mountain Hawk Park and for a not-to- exceed price of $3,377,458, with the guaranteed maximum price to be set upon receipt of 90 percent construction drawings. The project is nearing the end of the design phase and is ready to begin the construction phase this month. Adoption of the resolution approves the first amendment of the design build agreement that will set the guaranteed maximum price at $4,040,330. (Director of General Services) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 4 A. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-118, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CLOSURE OF THIRD AVENUE FROM E STREET TO G STREET FOR THE CINCO DE MAYO CELEBRATION ON MAY 1, 2005 FROM 4:00 AM. TO 9:00 P.M.; WANING PROHffiITION ON SIDEWALK SALES; AND WANING BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES FOR DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION AND VENDORS PARTICIPATING IN THE EVENT B. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-119, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CLOSURE OF THIRD AVENUE FROM E STREET TO H STREET FOR THE LEMON FESTN AL ON AUGUST 14, 2005 FROM 4:00 AM. TO 9:00 P.M.; WANING PROHffiITION ON SIDEWALK SALES AND WANING BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES FOR DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION AND VENDORS PARTICIPATING IN THE EVENT C. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-120, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CLOSURE OF THIRD AVENUE FROM D STREET TO I STREET, H STREET BETWEEN SECOND AND FOURTH AVENUES, AND PORTIONS OF INTERSECTING STREETS FOR THE ANNUAL STARLIGHT PARADE ON DECEMBER 3, 2005 FROM 1:00 P.M. TO 10:00 P.M.; WANING PROHIBITION ON SIDEWALK SALES; AND WANING BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES FOR DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION AND VENDORS PARTICIPATING IN THE EVENT D. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-121, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND CHULA VISTA DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION FOR SPECIAL EVENTS FOR 2005, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT The Chula Vista Downtown Business Association has requested the closure of Third Avenue and other various streets for annual special events in 2005. (Director of Communications) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions. ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to approve staffs recommendations and offered the Consent Calendar, headings read, texts waived. The motion carried 5-0. Page 3 - Council Minutes April 12, 2005 DRAFT ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Taide Pereyra, speaking on behalf of neighbors and family members, expressed objection to the formation of an assessment district to fund improvements in the Castle Park area. She stated that the 1985 annexation position paper indicated that the area would be brought up to City standards; no improvements have been made in 20 years, although the residents have been paying taxes; and seniors on fixed incomes were being forced to take on additional debt for improvements for which she believed residents had already paid. Mr. Pemberton supported Ms. Pereyra's comments, stating that nothing more should be done in the eastern area before the Castle Park area has been fixed. PUBLIC HEARlNGS 5. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONDUCT A FARMERS' MARKET IN THE WAL-MART PARKING LOT AT 1360 EASTLAKE PARKWAY The applicant has requested to establish a farmers' market at 1360 Eastlake Parkway consisting of approximately 37 vendors, 21 of which would be certified agricultural producers. The market would take place on Friday afternoons from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in spring and summer, and until 6:00 p.m. in fall and winter. (Director of Planning and Building) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the day and at the time specified in the notice. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Pease presented the staff report and recommended that the Council approve the application for one year, subject to the conditions contained in the proposed resolution, with future extensions to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. There being no one from the audience wishing to speak, Mayor Padilla closed the hearing. ACTION: Councilmember McCann offered the following resolution, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-122, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS ON A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-05-033 TO CONDUCT A FARMERS' MARKET IN THE IN THE PARKING LOT OF WAL-MART AT 1360 EASTLAKE PARKWAY, CHULA VISTA The motion carried 5-0. Page 4 - COlillCil Mioutes April 12, 2005 DRAFT ACTION ITEMS 6. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF THE ADDITION OF ONE UNCLASSIFIED SENIOR DEPUTY CITY CLERK POSITION TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Adoption of the resolution authorizes the addition of a Senior Deputy City Clerk position in order to allow the City Clerk's Office to assume major responsibilities on behalf of other departments and successfully carry out current and long-term City Clerk work programs and goals. (City Clerk) City Clerk Bigelow presented a brief staff report. Councilmember McCann asked that the position be opened for recruitment and that the City Clerk provide a cost/benefit report on the establishment of a passport acceptance facility. ACTION: Councilmember McCann offered the following resolution, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-123, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ADDITION OF ONE UNCLASSIFIED SENIOR DEPUTY CITY CLERK POSITION TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE The motion carried 5-0. 7. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED COMMENTS REGARDING THE DRAFT SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATffiILITY PLAN As required by state law, the San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission is proposing a new San Diego County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for 16 public- use and military airports, including Brown Field. The purpose of the plan is to promote compatibility between airports and the land uses that surround them. Staff has reviewed the draft plan and is prepared to forward comments by the April 15 deadline. (Director of Planning and Building) Principal Planner Bazzel provided an overview and identified issues surrounding the draft plan, such as the expansion potential for existing uses that would become non-conforming under the plan; structural height limits; suburban versus urban plan criteria; economic impacts; the plan adoption timeframe; and the plan's consistency with the updated General Plan. Daniel Brunton, representing House of Blues, supported staffs recommendation to write a letter to the Airport Authority expressing the City's concerns. He confirmed that a non-conforming status would make it difficult to expand or develop supporting uses, and he also mentioned that Brown Field should have been treated as an urban airport site in the plan. Marty Keithley, representing Knotts Soak City, agreed that the water park's growth potential would be limited as a non-conforming use and that economic viability could be difficult. He stated that a building is currently under construction that would meet the proposed height limit. He supported the proposed comment letter to be sent by the City Manager and also suggested that the comment period be extended so that businesses in the area have the opportunity to review the plan and comment on it. Page 5 - Council Minutes April 12,2005 DRAFT ACTION ITEMS (Continued) Councilmembers expressed concerns regarding the draft plan, some of which were: Chula Vista, at its own expense, would need to continually amend its General Plan over the next 20 years; cities around Brown Field were being asked to put economic development on hold until it is determined whether or not Brown Field could ever be economically viable; Brown Field does not serve 99% of those who live in the region; the Airport Authority should not dictate what can and cannot be done within Chula Vista; and the plan will have significant impacts to the economic health of the community, affecting businesses that bring significant revenues to the City. Councilmember Castaneda suggested that the Mayor meet with other mayors and Authority members to explain the kinds of impacts the plan will have on the cities. Councilmember McCann suggested that the Chamber of Commerce be included in discussions, as well, and he encouraged the Mayor to start building a coalition of cities. He also asked staff to continue to be diligent in monitoring the plan's progress. Councilmember Rindone mentioned that the plan would also be harmful to plans for the university. He stated that he wanted the South Bay Airport Authority representative to articulate the Council's comments on the plan to the other Authority members. Mayor Padilla commented that the plan did not clarify potential impacts, and he expressed disappointment in the process and in the failure of the South County representative to inform the Council of policy decisions being made. ACTION: Deputy Mayor Davis offered the following resolution, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-124, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A REPORT FROM STAFF CONCERNING THE DRAFT AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATffiILITY PLAN AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SEND A COMMENT LETTER ON SAID PLAN TO THE AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION The motion carried 5-0. ACTION: It was the consensus of the Council to formally request that Airport Commissioner Nieto be present at the next Council meeting to discuss policy issues and Council concerns. OTHER BUSINESS 8. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS City Manager Rowlands suggested that the meeting of May 3, 2005 be cancelled due to the absence of two Councilmembers. It was the consensus of the Council to cancel the meeting. Page 6 - Council Minutes April 12, 2005 DRAFT OTHER BUSINESS (Continued) 9. MAYOR'S REPORTS Mayor Padilla said it was a tremendous honor to participate in the dedication of the San Diego County law enforcement memorial wall, which honors all of the region's fallen going back over a century. He extended his appreciation to Chief Emerson and the Police Department for a well- attended, tremendous service. He also expressed regret that he was unable to attend Tom Layman's retirement event. 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Rindone concurred with Mayor Padilla's comments. Councilmember McCann reported that he had represented the Council at the dedication of Salt Creek Elementary School last Wednesday. He said he also attended (1) the CAST graduation, and he congratulated the new graduates; and (2) a retirement for Tom Layman, who served the City for 36 years, and whom he wished well. Finally, he congratulated Parks & Recreation Director Martin and staff for the very successful track meet held last Saturday and stated that an upcoming countywide track meet will be held at Otay Ranch High School. At 8: 14 p.m., the Council recessed to Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION 11. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 · Assistant City Manager · Director of Community Development This item was not discussed. 12. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) · Application of SDG&E for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Otay Mesa Power Purchase Agreement Transmission Project (A-04-03-008) No reportable action was taken. ADJOURNMENT At 8:40 p.m., Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on April 19,2005, at 5:00 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 and 3 in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, and thence to the Regular Meeting of April 19, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ~ ~~r~ið'4- Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk Page 7 - Council Mioutes April 12, 2005 DRAFT MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA April 19, 2005 5:00 p.m. An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of ChuIa Vista was called to order at 5:09 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 and 3 of the Public Services Building, located at 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda, Davis, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla ABSENT: Councilmembers: McCann (excused) 1. INTERVIEWS TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION The City Council interviewed the following candidates for the vacancy on the Planning Commission: Gary Nordstrom Bob Crane Scott Vinson William Tripp Jesse Navarro David Krogh ACTION: CounciImember Castaneda moved to appoint William Tripp to the Planning Commission. Mayor Padilla seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. ADJOURNMENT At 6:48 p.m., Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of April 19, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. . é- _""t' 1 ~t(..J A~ Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk ~ Jj) DRAFT MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA April 19, 2005 6:00 P.M. A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:56 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda, Davis, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla ABSENT: Councilmernbers: McCann (excused) ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Rowlands, City Attorney Moore, and Deputy City Clerk Bennett PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE Mayor Padilla announced the birth of Councilmember McCann's daughter, Kennedy Elizabeth, born on April 19, 2005, and extended congratulations to the McCann family on behalf of the Council and community. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO MIKE SOLE, SENIOR VOLUNTEER PATROL TRAINING COORDINATOR, PROCLAIMING APRlL 19, 2005 AS SENIOR VOLUNTEER PATROL APPRECIATION DAY Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to Mike Sole, Senior Volunteer Patrol Training Coordinator. · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA OF A PROCLAMATION TO MARGE HALE, PRESIDENT OF ALTRUSA INTERNATIONAL, INC. OF CHULA VISTA, PROCLAIM:ING APRIL 19, 2005 AS ALTRUSA DAY Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to Marge Hale, President of Altrusa International, Inc. · PRESENTATION BY PAUL NIETO, AIRPORT COMMISSIONER, REGARDING REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY LAND USE PLAN Paul Nieto provided an update on the San Diego County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Mayor Padilla strongly encouraged Mr. Nieto to provide quarterly updates on the plan to all the governing bodies in the South County. · PRESENTATION BY l.C. THOMAS, PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER, SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC, REGARDING LONG RANGE PLANNING This item was not presented. 2£ DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 through 2) 1. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-125, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE ARROYO GROUP FOR THE CITY'S ARTS MASTER PLAN On November 16, 2004, the Council approved funding for the creation of a Cultural Arts Master Plan, and in January 2005, a formal selection process began. At the conclusion of that process, The Arroyo Group of Pasadena, California, was the choice of the selection committee. (Assistant City Manager Palmer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-126, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2005 RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $5,286 IN UNANTICIPATED REVENUES FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS TO THE RECREATION DEPARTMENT FOR SENIOR SERVICES The Recreation Department's Senior Information and Referral Services Section was awarded $11,517 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for fiscal year 2005 as part of the South Bay Senior Collaborative, comprised of six local agencies. The amount of $5,286 represents new funding and was not included in the Council-adopted budget due to the uncertainty of the actual award amount, the timing of CDBG awards and allocation of the awarded funds by the Senior Collaborative. The funds need to be appropriated to supplement funding for three senior service programs, Project CARE, Life Options, and Senior Outreach. (Director of Recreation) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to approve staffs recommendations and offered the Consent Calendar, headings read, texts waived. The motion carried 4-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS William Roe spoke regarding a petition he submitted to the Council addressing health and safety issues in his neighborhood, including loud music, firecrackers, graffiti, public urination, and 10itering on private property. He requestcd increased policing in the neighborhood and stated that the residents would bc willing to work with the City to remove blight and bring back hope to the community. Mayor Padilla referred the issues to the Police Department. Robert Fidrych reported that a ditch passing through his back yard is filled with high weeds nad overflows during the rainy season, causing flooding on his property. Mr. Fidrych stated that although the City has cleared out the ditch in the past, he was informed by staff that he would need to contact the Army Corps of Engineers to perform the current clean-up. Mayor Padilla asked staff contact to Mr. Fidrych and provide a report to the Council on the steps taken to address his concerns. Page 2 - Council Mioutes April 19,2005 PUBLIC HEARlNGS DRAFT 3. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONDUCT A FARMERS' MARKET ON THE CAMPUS OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE (APPLICANT: DAVID LARSON) The applicant is requesting permission to conduct a weekly Certified Farmers' Market at Southwestern College, 900 Otay Lakes Road, to be held every Saturday morning in Lot "0" of the college. The market will consist of approximately 45 vendors, 25 of whom will be certified agricultural producers. Also proposed are the installation of portable toilets with hand washing facilities, live music and children's activities, such as pony rides and face painting. (Director of Planning and Building) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Pease presented the proposed conditional use permit. Mayor Padilla noted for the record a letter dated April 17, 2005, from Jack Bennett, who opposed the proposed farmer's market, stating concerns regarding traffic congestion, noise pollution, trash, and parking problems in his neighborhood. Pat Aguilar, representing Crossroads II, spoke in support of the proposed farmer's market. She suggested that a condition be added to the Conditional Use Permit to require the operator of the market to post a small bond to ensure thorough clean up of the site. Dawn Perez, representing Southwestern College responded that clean up of the site has been addressed and included in the agreement. With no further members of the public wishing to speak, Mayor Padilla closed the public hearing. ACTION: Mayor Padilla offered Resolution No. 2005-127, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-127, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-05-022 TO CONDUCT A FARMERS' MARKET ON THE CAMPUS OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE AT 900 OTAY LAKES ROAD, CHULA VISTA (APPLICANT: DAVID LARSON) The motion carried 4-0. Page 3 - Council Mioutes April 19 , 2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) 4. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A TENTATNE SUBDNISION MAP KNOWN AS SYCAMORE ESTATES, CHULA VISTA TRACT 04-09, LOCATED AT 1655 SYCAMORE DRlVE (APPLICANT: NORTON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY) The Norton Construction Company submitted an application requesting approval of a tentative subdivision map to subdivide 2.04 acres into 10 single-family residential lots ranging in size from 7,010 to 10,367 square feet. The proposed subdivision is located at 1655 Sycamore Drive. (Director of Planning and Building) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Associate Planner Zumwalt presented the proposed tentative map. Councilmember Castaneda expressed concern regarding potential impacts of water run-off from the proposed project onto surrounding properties. City Engineer Al-Agha replied that the project is required to fully mitigate the impact of the proposed development. Councilmember Castaneda suggested that the Stonn Water Master Plan be brought forward prior to the General Plan Update in order to begin implementing some of the policies and fees to alleviate the burden on affected taxpayers. There being no members of the public who wished to speak, Mayor Padilla closed the public hearing. Deputy Mayor Davis moved to adopt Resolution No. 2005-128, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-128, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF A TENTATNE MAP TO DNIDE 2.04 ACRES LOCATED AT 1655 SYCAMORE DRNE INTO 10 SINGLE-F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL LOTS The motion carried 4-0. ACTION ITEMS 5. CONSIDERATION OF REORGANIZATION OF THE GENERAL SERVICES AND ENGINEERlNG DEPARTMENTS With the adoption of the General Services Department's Strategic Plan and the development of the Police Department's Strategic Plan, a number of functions were identified for reorganization within the City's organizational structure. These changes reflect the practical, operational and long-tenn issues facing the City in a variety of areas and should enable the affected departments to provide services to the public in a more efficient manner. (Director of General Services) General Services Director Griffin presented the department's Strategic Plan and proposed reorganization. Page 4 - Council Minutes April 19,2005 DRAFT ACTION ITEMS (Continued) ACTION: Deputy Mayor Davis moved to adopt Resolutions No. 2005-129, 2005-130, and 2005-131 and to place the Ordinance on first reading, headings read, texts waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-129, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT STRATEGIC PLAN RESOLUTION NO. 2005-130, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE REORGANIZATION OF THE GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND RECLASSIFYING POSITIONS THEREIN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.05.010 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS TO ADD THE POSITION OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF GENERAL SERVICES (FIRST READING) RESOLUTION NO. 2005-131, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE REORGANIZATION OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND RECLASSIFYING POSITIONS THEREIN The motion carried 4-0. OTHER BUSINESS 6. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS City Manager Rowlands announced that the Council would be polled on meeting dates to discuss long-range planning for the Police Department and a tour of the City's capital improvement projects. 7. MAYOR'S REPORTS There were none. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Rindone stated that he was pleased to report that the State Superintendent of Public Instruction recently recognized Eastlake and Hilltop High Schools as California Distinguished High Schools. Page 5 - Council Minutes April 19, 2005 DRAFT CLOSED SESSION 9. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 54957.6 · Agency designated representatives: Sharon Marshall, Marcia Raskin, David D. Rowlands, Jr., Maria Kachadoorian, Ed Van Eenoo This item was not discussed, and no action was taken. · Employee organizations: Police Officers Association, Chula Vista Employees Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, Western Council of Engineers This item was not discussed, and no action was taken. 10. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) · Application of SDG&E for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Otay Mesa Power Purchase Agreement Transmission Project (A-04-03-008) No reportable action was taken on this item. ADJOURNMENT At 10:20 p.m., Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of April 26, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ~ ~~i~ P Lorraine Bennett Deputy City Clerk Page 6 - Council Mioutes April 19, 2005 DRAFT MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA April 26, 2005 6:00P.M. A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:08 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, ChuIa Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda, Davis, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla ABSENT: Councilmembers: McCann (excused) ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Rowlands, City Attorney Moore, and Assistant City Clerk Norris PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY · OATHS OF OFFICE: - Dr. Robert Christopher Searles, Parks and Recreation Commission William Tripp, Planning Commission Deputy City Clerk Bennett administered oaths to Commissioners Searles and Tripp, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented them each with a certificate of appointment. · PRESENTATION OF A PROCLAMATION BY MAYOR PADILLA TO GEORGE KREMPL UPON HIS RETIREMENT FROM THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AFTER 21 YEARS OF SERVICE Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to George Krempl. Mr. Krempl acknowledged the City's "first-class" staff and spoke of the shared vision and stability of past and present elected officials who have empowered staff to implement policies. The City Council and City Manager Rowlands expressed their thanks, appreciation, and best wishes to Mr. Krempl upon his retirement. · PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PADILLA TO EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, DONNA TOLEDO, OF A PROCLAMATION DECLARlNG THE WEEK OF APRlL 24 THROUGH APRIL 30, 2005 AS ADMINISTRATNE PROFESSIONALS WEEK IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Mayor Padilla read the proclamation, and Deputy Mayor Davis presented it to Executive Secretary Donna Toledo, who accepted it on behalf of all the City's Administrative Professionals. Page 1 - Council Minutes April 26, 2005 ;¡F DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 through 7) Regarding Item 6, Councilmember Castaneda asked if traffic improvement impact fees could also be utilized for road improvements at certain intersections within western Chula Vista. City Engineer Al-Agha responded affirmatively, stating that the capital improvement projects would be forthcoming to Council during the budget process. 1. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter of resignation from Arthur Triplette, Jr., member of the Civil Service Commission. Staff recommendation: Council accept the resignation and direct the City Clerk to post the vacancy in accordance with Maddy Act requirements. B. Request from Councilmember McCann for an excused absence from the April 19, 2005 Council meeting due to family medical reasons; and from the meeting of April 26, 2005, due to active military duty. Staff recommendation: Council excuse the absences. 2. ORDINANCE NO. 3000, ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.05.010 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS TO ADD THE POSITION OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF GENERAL SERVICES (SECOND READING With the adoption of the General Services Department's Strategic Plan and the development of the Police Department's Strategic Plan, a number of functions have been identified for reorganization within the City's organizational structure. These changes reflect the practical, operational and long-term issues facing the City in a variety of areas and should enable the affected departments to provide services to the public in a more efficient manner. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-134, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TRANSFERRlNG UNCLAIMED MONIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $78,673 FROM THE CASH BOND DEPOSIT FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND Currently, the City has unclaimed monies in the amount of $78,673 in the cash bond deposit fund. This money was deposited by the Police Department in accordance with Article 3, Section 50050 of the Government Code. According to Government Code provisions, money that remains unclaimed for three years may become the property of the City after certain advertising requirements are met. This money is now eligible for transfer to the General Fund. (Chief of Police) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 2 - Council Mioutes April 26, 2005 DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) 4. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DECREASING THE SPEED LIMIT ON MOSS STREET BETWEEN INDUSTRlAL BOULEVARD AND BROADWAY FROM 35 MILES PER HOUR TO 30 MILES PER HOUR (FIRST READING) Based on the provisions of Division II-Chapter 7 -Article 1 (Sections 22348 thru 22366) and Division 17-Chapter 3-Artic1e 1 (Sections 40800 thru 40808) of the California Vehicle Code (CVC), and pursuant to authority under Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 10.48.020, titled "Established Speed Limits In Certain Zones", the City Engineer has determined that, in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and for the promotion of public safety, the speed limit on Moss Street between Industrial Boulevard and Broadway be reduced from 35 mph to 30 mph. This speed limit will be amended in Schedule X of the register maintained in the Office of the City Engineer. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council place the ordinance on first reading. 5. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-135, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2005 LffiRARY DEPARTMENT BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING A ONE-TIME UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,500 FOR THE EVEN START FAMILY LITERACY GRANT The California State Department of Education has advised the Chula Vista Literacy Team that the fiscal year 2005 Even Start Family Literac~ grant has been augmented by $4,500 to cover expenses incurred for the purchase of chIldren's books and materials for Even Start parents to use at home. The Library partners with the Chula Vista Elementary School District, which is the primary agency providing Even Start family literacy services. The Library intends to pass $4,500 in grant augmentation funds through to the District to pay for the purchases. (Assistant City Manager Palmer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 6. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-136, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE EMERGENCY VEHICLE PRE-EMPTION INSTALLATION PROGRAM - CITYWIDE (TF-31O) PROJECT TO HMS CONSTRUCTION, INC. The Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption Installation Program was approved and budgeted as part of the fiscal year 2004/2005 capital improvement programs. The scope of the project Includes the installation of Emergency Vehic1e Pre-emption Equipment and minor traffic signal modifications/repairs at 17 signalized intersections in the City. Adoption of the resolution awards the contract to HMS Construction, Inc. in the amount of $204,959. (City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-137, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A FOUR-PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, DUDEK AND ASSOCIATES (CONSULTANT), K. HOVNANIAN AT BELLA LAGO, LLC, AND BELLA LAGO, LLC (APPLICANT), FOR BIOLOGICAL MITIGATION MONITORING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES TO BE RENDERED FOR THE BELLA LAGO TENTATNE TRACT MAP AND PRECISE PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT Page 3 - Council Minutes April 26, 2005 DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) In compliance with state law, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was adopted by the City Council for the Bella Lago tentative tract map and precise plan. Adoption of the resolution approves the proposed contract with Dudek, for a total of $46,585, to provide consulting services as the Environmental Monitor Specialist (biological) for the Bella Lago Final Environmental Impact Report for a period of five years. Dudek will have contracts with a combined total exceeding $50,000 within the upcoming 12 months; therefore, Council approval is necessary. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to approve staff s recommendations and offered the Consent Calendar, headings read, texts waived. The motion carried 4-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Lupita Jiminez urged the Council to seek qualified women when reviewing the City's Board/Commission/Committee applications and to keep in mind the need for careful and equitable consideration to provide a balanced membership. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8. CONSIDERATION OF AN INCREASE TO THE SEWERAGE CAPACITY CHARGE AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE The City of San Diego, as part of the Metropolitan Wastewater District ("Metro"), provides sewage treatment services to 14 participating agencies that do not own and operate a sewage treatment facility. The City of Chula Vista, along with the other participating agencies, sends sewage generated to San Diego's Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant for treatment. In 1985, Chula Vista established the sewerage capacity charge to fund the planning, design and construction of wastewater collection or treatment facilities needed to facilitate the development of the City. It was also intended to fund either the construction of treatment facilities or the purchase of additional treatment capacity rights in the Metro sewer system. Since then, the City has made several adjustments to the sewerage capacity charge; however, another increase is needed to ensure that there is adequate revenue necessary to fund the acquisition of additional sewage treatment capacity rights. Therefore, it is recommended that the current sewer capacity charge be increased from $3,000 to $3,478 to ensure that there is adequate capacity in the system. (City Engineer) ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to continue the hearing to May 10, 2005. Deputy Mayor Davis seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. Page 4 - Council Mioutes April 26, 2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) 9. CONSIDERATION OF AN URGENCY INTERlM ZONING ORDINANCE PROHffiITING THE PERMITTING OR APPROVAL OF ANY NEW OR EXPANDED FEE-BASED CHECK CASHING AND DEFERRED DEPOSIT USES FOR AN INTERlM PERlOD OF FORTY-FIVE (45) DAYS On February 1, 2005, the Council requested that staff examine the need for an urgency ordinance to prevent further check cashing and deferred deposit establishments in the Chula Vista. Concems associated with these types of businesses include: the lack of minimum security standards; a decrease in neighboring property values; and the displacement/discouragement of other desirable businesses, including full-service financial institutions. Accordingly, a temporary moratorium on check cashing and deferred deposit business is proposed so that the matter can be thoroughly studied and new regulations brought forth. (Director of Planning and Building) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Assistant Planning Director Lytle gave a report regarding new or expanded fee-based check cashing and deferred deposit uses. Associate Planner Miller presented the highlights of the staff analysis regarding fee-based check cashing and deferred deposit uses. The following members ofthe public spoke in support of the proposed ordinance: Moria Aceves, representing Supportive Parents and Information Network (SPIN) Patricia Aguilar, representing Crossroads II Bill Oswald, representing Fair Banking Coalition Donald Davis, representing Fair Banking Coalition and the Caring Council of San Diego County Jim Bliesner, representing the City/County Reinvestment Task Force Martina Peinado, representing the students at Southwestern College Maria Orozco, representing Supportive Parents and Information Network (SPIN) There being no further members of the public who wished to speak, Mayor Padilla closed the hearing. Deputy City Attorney Hanson recommended that no action be taken on Item 9B due to adequate language provided in the Urgency Ordinance, Item No. 9A. Deputy Mayor Davis expressed concern that by limiting the nurnber of check cashing and deferred deposit businesses allowed in the City, those establishments may increase their fees. To that end, she recommended that the City propose to the Legislature the need to review the regulations on the types of fees that could be charged by these businesses. Counciimember Rindone supported the recommendation by Deputy Mayor Davis. Page 5 - Council Mioutes April 26, 2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARlNGS (Continued) Councilmember Castaneda explained that the goal of the proposed ordinance is to prevent a proliferation of such businesses and better safeguard the neighborhoods. ACTION: Councilmember Castaneda moved to adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 3001-A, heading read, text waived: A. URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 3001-A, URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PROHffiITING THE PERMITTING OR APPROVAL OF ANY NEW OR EXPANDED FEE-BASED CHECK CASHING AND DEFERRED DEPOSIT USES FOR AN INTERlM PERlOD OF FORTY-FNE (45) DAYS Councilmember Rindone seconded the motion and it carried 4-0. B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PROHffiITING THE PERMITTING OR APPROVAL OF ANY NEW OR EXPANDED FEE-BASED CHECK CASHING AND DEFERRED DESPOSIT USES (FIRST READING) (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)\ No action was taken on Item 9B. ACTION ITEMS 10. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF THE TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY BETWEEN MILLER DRNE AND RIDGEW ATER DRNE, FROM JUNE 6, 2005 TO JUNE 20, 2005 San Diego Expressway Limited Partnership, L.P. by California Transportation Ventures, Inc., its General Partner, has requested temporary closure of Eastlake Parkway between Miller Drive and Ridgewater Drive. The temporary road closure is needed in order to construct a temporary on-site detour for the construction of a new bridge over the SR-125 Toll Road. (City Engineer) Brian Freund, representing Otay River Constructors, provided an overview of the construction phases for the project. ACTION: Councilmember Davis offered Resolution No. 2005-138, heading read, text waived: RESOLUTION NO. 2005-138, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY FROM JUNE 6, 2005 TO JUNE 20, 2005 BETWEEN MILLER DRlVE AND RIDGEW ATER DRNE, AND AUTHORlZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A TEMPORARY ENCROACHMENT PERMIT TO SAN DIEGO EXPRESSWAY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, L.P. BY CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION VENTURES, INC., ITS GENERAL PARTNER FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TEMPORARY ON-SITE DETOUR The motion carried 4-0. Page 6 - Council Minutes April 26, 2005 DRAFT OTHER BUSINESS 11. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS There were none. 12. MAYOR'S REPORTS A. Ratification of appointment to the Housing Advisory Commission: Steve Zasueta (At large member). ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to appoint Steve Zasueta to the Housing Advisory Commission. Deputy Mayor Davis seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Castaneda expressed concern regarding traffic safety at St. John's Episcopal School, located at First Avenue and Kearny Street, and asked for additional traffic enforcement. He also asked staff to look at the possibility of installing crosswalks and making other improvements to increase safety in this area, as well as in other school areas. Councilmember Rindone encouraged the community to attend the annual Cinco de Mayo celebration on May 1, 2005, from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., on Third Avenue in downtown Chula Vista. CLOSED SESSION 14. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 54957.6 . Agency designated representatives: Sharon Marshall, Marcia Raskin, David D. Rowlands, Jr., Maria Kachadoorian, Ed Van Eenoo No reportable action was taken on this item. . Employee organizations: Police Officers Association, Chula Vista Employees Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, Western Council of Engineers No reportable action was taken on this item. ADJOURNMENT At 9:30 p.m., Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of May 10, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, and noted that the Regular71eting of May 3, 2005 has been cancelled. j Jt0~ Donn~ CMC Assistant City Clerk Page 7 - Council Mioutes April 26, 2005 DR~r ORDINANCE NO. ~f\O~'\O . ~~I"'" ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THB~~<? ~HULA VISTA DECREASING THE SPEED ~~MOSS STREET FROM 35 MPH TO 30 MPH BÈ'I'WEEN INDUSTRlAL BOULEVARD AND BROADWAY WHEREAS, based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code and pursuant to authority under the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the City Engineer has determined that the speed limit on Moss St. between Industrial Blvd. and Broadway be decreased to 30 mph; and WHEREAS, this recommendation and other information in the City Engineer's report has been fully considered by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Safety Commission of the City ofChula Vista, at its meeting of March 10, 2005, voted (6-0-1, Commissioner Gove absent) to concur with staffs recommendation to decrease the existing speed limit on Moss Street. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The speed limit on Moss St. between Industrial Blvd. and Broadway is hereby decreased from 35 mph to 30 mph. SECTION II: Schedule X of a Register of Schedules maintained by the City Engineer as provided in Section 10.48.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, "Established Speed Limits in Certain Zones- Designated," is hereby amended to include the following info'rmation: Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 10.48.020 - Schedule X Estahlished Sneed Limits in Certain Zones Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed Limit Moss St. Industrial Blvd. Broadway 30 mph SECTION ill: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by ::i)O-A- ì , H- c.----.. Alex Al-Agha City Engineer Ann Moore City Attorney .i3~/ J:\Engineer\AGENDA\Ordinances\Ord2005\rv1oss St Speed limit Industria177to Bdwy Ordinance.sm.doc COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: 'I Meeting Date :';/1 0/0:'; ITEM TITLE: Adoption of the following MSCP Implementing Ordinances: a. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista repealing Section 17.30 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relative to the Interim Habitat Loss Permit Ordinance and Otay Grazing Ordinance; b. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista establishing the Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Ordinance as Section 17.35 of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code; and c. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista amending Section 15.04 of the City ofChula Vista Municipal Code (Excavation, Grading and Fills Ordinance). Director ofPlanmng and BUildinf / tv Ii· d City Manager I" 0' (4/5ths Vote: Yes~o~) The Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan was prepared by the City of Chula Vista in coordination with the Federal and State Regulatory agencies in order to implement the MSCP Subregional Plan within the City of Chula Vista. The City Council adopted the MSCP Subarea Plan on May 13, 2003. At that time, three MSCP Implementing Ordinances were introduced to Council to be considered for adoption upon issuance of the Take Permit by the Wildlife Agencies. On January 13, 2005, the Wildlife Agencies issued the City a Take Permit and signed the Implementing Agreement granting the City Take Authorization. Therefore, adoption of the MSCP Implementing Ordinances will ensure successful implementation ofthe MSCP Subarea Plan, which will provide protection for sensitive biological resources currently supported within the City of Chula Vista. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council of the City of Chula Vista take the following action: a) Adopt Ordinance repealing Section 17.30 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relative to the Interim Habitat Loss Permit Ordinance and Otay Grazing Ordinance; b) Adopt Ordinance establishing the Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Ordinance as Section 17.35 of the City ofChula Vista Municipal Code; and 4-1 d Page 2, Item No.: I Meeting Date: 5/10/05 c) Adopt Ordinance amending Section 15.04 of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code (Excavation, Grading and Fills Ordinance). BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: NI A DISCUSSION: R~r.kgr()llnr1 The City Council adopted the MSCP Subarea Plan on May 13, 2003 and at that time, the MSCP Implementing Ordinances were introduced to the City Council. The City committed to final adoption of the MSCP Implementing Ordinances once the Take Permit had been issued. On January 13, 2005, the Implementing Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the Wildlife Agencies granting Take Authorization was signed and a Take Permit was issued to the City. As discussed in the Staff Report at the time the Ordinances were originally introduced, the City's Excavation, Grading and Fills Ordinance ("Grading" Ordinance) would be revised to: 1) include regulations for the clearing and grubbing of sensitive biological resources, 2) require federal and state permits for wetland impacts prior to issuance of a grading permit, 3) provide exemptions for projects less than one-acre in size. The Habitat Loss and Incidental Take (HLIT) Ordinance and the Otay Ranch Grazing Ordinance were introduced to City Council as part of the MSCP as implementing tools for the Subarea Plan. The HLIT Ordinance will establish mitigation standards and regulate development proj ects, located outside of Covered Projects, which may have an impact on Covered Species and sensitive habitat. The Otay Ranch Grazing Ordinance will implement the Otay Ranch Range Management Plan and ensure that grazing activities are consistent with the adopted policies. Since the approval of the MSCP, the Wildlife Agencies were required to resolve issues associated with the "No Surprises" rule identified in the federal permitting process. In further discussions with the Wildlife Agencies, it was determined that this issue would not affect the City's permit; therefore, no modifications were made to the originally drafted Implementing Agreement and Take Permit. Staff considers the MSCP to be a necessary program that will provide for the protection of sensitive species both locally and regionally. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the MSCP Implementing Ordinances to ensure successful implementation of the MSCP. FISCAL IMPACT; Upon adoption of the MSCP Implementing Ordinances, the City will be obligated to implement the various components of the MSCP Subarea Plan. The Planning and Building Department is staffed to begin enforcement of these ordinances and implementation of the MSCP, therefore, there is no net impact to the General Fund. 4-2 Page 3, Item No.: Meeting Date: "/1010" 4 ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista repealing Section 17.30 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relative to the Interim Habitat Loss Permit Ordinance and Otay Grazing Ordinance; 2. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista establishing the Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Ordinance as Section 17.35 of the City ofChula Vista Municipal Code; and 3. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista amending Section 15.04 of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code (Excavation, Grading and Fills Ordinance). 4-3 DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. ~O~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA~ST r- ~~ þSiJ AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CHULA /oóI MUNICIPAL CODE TO REPEAL SEC1J..~ RELATING TO INTERIM CÒAST~~1r SCRUB HABITAT LOSS PERMIT PRO,CES~ÃND IN ITS PLACE ADD THE OT A Y RANèH GRAzING F9R IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MSCP SUBAREA PLAN WHEREAS, as lead agencies for the Multiple Species Conservation PrograrI) ("MSCP") Subregional PIan, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Diego prepared and certified a Final Environmental Impact ReportlEnvironmental Impact Statement for the Issuance of Take Authorizations for Threatened and Endangered Species due to urban growth within the Multiple Species Conservation Program ("MSCP") planning area ("Final EIRÆIS") in January, 1997 and adopted the Final MSCP Subregional Plan in August, 1998; and . WHEREAS, as a responsible agency, the City of Chuia Vista ("City") participated in the preparation of the Final EIR/EIS through consultation and comment; and WHEREAS, the MSCP Subregional Plan contemplated that local jurisdictions including the City of Chula Vista wou1d participate in the MSCP Subregional Plan and seek federal and state take authorization by adopting a subarea plan consistent with the conservation strategies contained in the MSCP Subregional P1an; and WHEREAS, the City prepared and submitted a Draft MSCP Subarea Plan to the' U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Piego in August, 1996, for inclusion in the Draft MSCP Subregional Plan and for consideration by the lead agencies in their environrnenta1 review of the Draft MSCP Subregional Plan; and . WHEREAS, after the adoption of the MSCP ,Subregional Plan, the City, and the. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game (hereinafter referred to as the "WildIife Agencies") further negotiated a number of aspects of the 1996 Draft Subarea Plan, including but not limited to, the refinement of the conditions of coverage for covered projects, the type and extent of protection for narrow endemic species, the amount and type of public facilities and infrastructure to be allowed in the Preserve, and an acceptable configuration for the university site adjacent to the Preserve; and \VHEREAS, following a review by the WildJife Agencies and public comment period, the City issued a draft MSCP Subarea P1an dated September 11, 2000, and a Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20, 2000, to the Wildlife Agencies and the general public; and WHEREAS, on September 22, 2000, the City submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service an application for a Section 10(a)(l)(B) permit for incidental take pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game an application for a take authorization permit pursuant to Section 2835 of the California Endangered Species Act, with both applications including the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan' dated September 1 I, 2000, and a Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20, 2000; and 4-4 DRAFT ,~. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council set the time and place for a joint hearing on said project 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on October 17,2000, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, approval of the MSCP Subregional Plan and adoption of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated Septernber 11, 2000 were discretionary actions covered by the Final EIR/EIS, and therefore, as a responsible agency, the City had a more limited role than does a lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA''); and . WHEREAS, the City prepared an Addendum dated September 1.1,2000, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section IS 1 64 to fulfill the City's obligations as a responsible agency; and WHEREAS, the City issued Findings of Faêt for each of the significant environmental effects of implementing the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated . September I I, 2000, in conformance with the CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, which enabled the City to make full use of the Final EIRIEIS and the Addendum (CEQA Guidelines, sections 15 1 01, 15093 and 15096, subd. (h)); and WHEREAS, the City considered the Fina] EIR/EISprepared by the lead agency together with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11, 2000 and the Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20, 2000, and reached its own conclusion about whether and how to approve the MSCP Subregional Plan and the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11,2000; and WHEREAS, the City also. prepared an MSCP Mitigation and Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program For Biological Resources dated October 12, 2000, in compliance with Public Resources Code section 2] 081.6, subd. (a)(l); and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the Final EIR!EIS prepared and certified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Diego in January, 1997, the Addendum to the Final EIRfEIS (October 2000), the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the MSCP Mitigation anel Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program for Biological Resources (October 2000) and found that the documents were prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the. Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and also found that the Final EIRIEIS (January ] 997) and Addendum to the Final EIR!EIS adequately addressed the environmental impacts of the MSCP Subregional Plan and the Draft Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 11,2000; and WHEREAS, on October 17, 2000, the City Council approved the MSCP Subregional Plan dated August, ]998, as the framework plan for the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan; conditionally adopted the J\.1SCP Subarea Plan, dated September] I, 2000, and the Mitigation and ImpIementing Agreement Monitoring Program for Biological Resources dated October, 2000; and 4-5 DRAFT WHEREAS, subsequent to the City Council conditional approval on October 17, 2000, the City decided to 'make further changes to the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 11, 2000, based on additional information not previously available about the Quino checkerspot butterfly, a federaIly listed endangered species. The City believed it was prudent to add coverage for the Quino checkerspot butterfly into the draft MSCP Subarea Plan prior to the Subarea Plan and associated implementing documents being published in the Federal Register; and WHEREAS, since October 2000, changes to the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan have been made as necessary to complete a final Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, including I) measures to provide coverage for the Quino checkerspot butterfly; 2) the preparation of three implementing ordinances; 3) final revisions to the Implementing Agreement, 4) conservation of additional lands not previously anticipated to be preserved, including lands within the approved Rolling Hills Ranch subdivision; and 4) other revisions to address unresolved issues related to changed circumstances, wetlands, and funding for long term management; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Assessment (No. 03-01) to address all of the changes to the revised final Draft MSCP Subarea Plan; and WHEREAS, on October 8, 2002, the City submitted a revised application to the Wildlife Agencies for a Section lO(a)(I)(B) permit for incidental take pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and submitted to the Ca]jfomia Department of Fish and Game an application for a take authorization permit pursuant to Section 2835 of the CaJifomia Endangered Species Act, with all of the required application materials including the Draft Supplemental EIR and EA, Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, and the revised Draft Implementing Agreement, and Draft Implementing Ordinances (referred to herein collectively as "implementing documents"). WHEREAS, on October 10, 2002 a Federal Register notice was published commencing a 60-day public comment period on the Incidental Take Applications, Public Review Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated October 2002, impJementing agreement and implementing ordinances and associated environiTIental documents. A public notice was also published on October II, 2002 announcing the availability of the Draft SEIR and EA to meet the requirements ofthe California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, public review of the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan and implementing documents closed on December 9, 2002. The City received 12 letters of comment from the public and has prepared responses to the comments and made changes to the Public Review Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated October 2002 and implementing documents, and has prepared a final City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003, and Draft Implementing Agreement, dated February 2003; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a public hearing on said project 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and 4-6 DRAFT '.'-.'. WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on April 23, 2003 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended. to the City Council the approval of the MSCP Subarea Plan and associated implementing documents; and WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a public hearing on said project 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on May 13, 2003 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council; and WHEREAS, the conditional adoption of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003 and associated implementing ordinances will not constitute a binding set of obligations on any public or private entity within the City of Chula Vista unless and unti¡l) the U.S. Fish and WiJdlife Service issues a biological opinion which affirms and is consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003 and the Draft Implementing Agreement, dated February 2003, 2) take permits and its conditions are issued by both Wildlife Agencies that are consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and Draft ImplemenÜng Agreement dated February 2003, and 3) the City and Wildlife Agencies approves and executes the Implementing Agreement substantial1yin the form of the Implementing Agreement dated February 2003; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the SuppJeinental EIR and EA at its hearing of may 13,2003 and adopted the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan (dated February 2003) with said condiÜons; and WHEREAS, implementation of the MSCP Subarea Plan adoption of three MSCP Implementing Ordinances, including the Otay Ranch Grazing Ordinance. This ordinance wil1 only take effect after issuance of the take permits and the necessary Ümelines for ordinances pursuant to the City Charter have passed_ NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista does hereby ordain as foJiows: Section I. That Chapter 17 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended by repealing Section 17.30 Interim Coastal Sage Scrub Habtat Loss Permit Process and in its place add Section 17.30 to Tead as fo]]ows: Sec. 17.30 OT A Y RANCH GRAZING Sections: 17.30.010 17.30.020 17.30.030 17.30.040 17.30.050 17.30.060 Purpose and Intent General Authorization Definitions General Application of Chapter General Regulations Violations 4-7 DRAFT 17.30.010 Purpose ~nd Intent The purpose of these regulations is to impJement the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Resource Management Plan within the City of Chula Vista. Specifically, these regulations implement the preserve management goals and recommendations for the Otay River Valley Management Area of the Range Management Plan (Appendix F7 of the Otay Ranch Phase 2 Resource Management Plan). 17.30.020 Genera] Authorization As a participating jurisdiction in the M,SCP Subregional PJanning effort, the City of Chu1a Vista is promulgating these regulations to implement the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan as a condition of receiving an incidentaJ take pennit to be issued to the City pursuant to Section lO(a)(l)(B) of the Feder~1 Endangered Species Act and take authorization to be issued to the City pursuant to Section 2835 of the California Fish and Game Code. 17.30.ü30 Definitions 100% Conservation Area - Lands within the City of Chûla Vista for which hard-Jine' Preserve boundaries have been established and where the conserved portion will be managed for its biological resources. These areas are shown on Figure 1-2 of the ChuJa Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. . Otay Ranch Preserve - The land mapped as "resource preserve" in the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and the 1l,375-acre habitat conservation area established by the Otay Ranch Phase I Resource Management Plan. Pasture - Defined areas used for grazing, demarcated by fences and gates that allow for control of grazing patterns. Preserve - Areas within the City of Chula Vista incorporated limits which have been dedicated and accepted by the City for penn anent MSCP conservation and which will be managed for their bioJogical resources. 17.30.040 Genera! Application of Chapter , 1t is unlawful to conduct grazing activities in the City of Chula Vista on land design;¡ted by the Otay Ranch General Development Plan as Otay Ranch Preserve, except as provided for by this chapter. ¡ 7.30.Q50 GeneraI Regulations The following General Regulations shall apply to all land designated by the Otay Ranch General Development Plan as Otay Ranch Preserve and as 100% Conservation Area in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time: 4-8 DRAFT A. Existing grazing uses shall be permitted to continue in compliance with all applicable regulations, only where the uses have occurred continuously within previous years; and B. No increase in irrigation shall be allowed, except for temporary irrigation that may be installed as part of restoration plans; and C. Grazing by sheep and goats shall not be aU owed; and D. Any existing or future fencing and gating installed for range management purposes shall be maintained and kept in good repair; and E. Grazing of cattle in pastures 6 (Horse), 10:1, lOb, 10c (River V alley West), 11 a, I I b, lie (River Valley East), 12a, 12b, and l2c (O'Neal), as set forth in Exhibit 4 of the Otay Ranch Range Management Plan, shall be prohibited from January I through August 31, annually; and F. Grazing of cattle in pastures 12 (O'Neal) and 15 (Salt Creek), as set forth in Exhibit 4 of the Otay Ranch Range Management Plan, shall be prohibited during the breeding season of the California gnatcatcher from February 15 through August IS, aru1UaUy; and G. In areas designated for restoration, grazing shaU be removed for a period of time prior to initiation of restoration activities to facilitate soil preparation and exotic plant controL 17.30.060 Violations' The provisions of this chapter shall be enforced pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 1.20 through 1.41 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Section II. Adoption of this ordinance (second reading) is conditioned upon and shall not occur unless and until the issuance of Take Authorizations from the USFWS and CDFG to the City of Chula Vista has occurred in a form acceptable to the City. Section III. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day nom and after the adoption of the ordinance (second reading) which shall occur as stated abovc. Presented by Approved as to form by James D. Sandoval Planning and Building Director 0- ("\;\ fu~ Ann Moore City Attorney 4-9 DRAFT .. "¡)O?'\\o\;:\ ~\) F>I ORDINANCE NO. ~t>-\)\\;:\G F>I . . ~\) . AN ORDJNANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA ~ AMENDJNG CHAPTER 17 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUmCIPAL CODE TO ADD SECTION 17.35 RELATING TO HABITAT LOSS AND JNCIDENTAL TAKE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MSCP SUBAREA PLAN . - WHEREAS, as lead agencies for the Multiple Species Conservation Program ("MSCP") Subregional Plan, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Diego prepared and certified a Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the Issuance of Take Authorizations for Threatened and Endangered Species due to urban growth within the Multiple Species Conservation Program ("MSCP'') planning area ("Final ElRÆIS") in January, 1997 and adopted the Final MSCP Subregional Plan in August, 1998; and WHEREAS, as a responsible agency, the City of Chula Vista ("City") participated in the preparation of the Fina] ElRÆIS through consultation and comment; and WHEREAS, the MSCP Subregional Plan contemplated that local jurisdictions including the City of Chula Vista would participate in the MSCP Subregional Plan and seek federal and state take authorization by adopting a subarea plan consistent with the conservation strategies contained in the MSCP Subregional Plan; and WHEREAS, the City prepared and submitted a Draft MSCP Subarea Plan to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Diego in August, 1996, for inclusion in the Draft MSCP Subregional Plan and for consideration by the lead agencies in their environmental review of the Draft MSCP Subregional Plan; and WHEREAS, after the adoptjon of the MSCP Subregional Plan, the City, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game (hereinafter referred to as the "Wildlife Agencies") further negotiated a number of aspects of the 1996 Draft Subarea Plan, including but not limited to, the refinement of the conditions of coverage for covered projects, the type and extent of protection for narrow endemic species, the amount and type of public facilities and infrastructure to be allowed in the Preserve, and an acceptable configuration for the university site adjacent to the Preserve; and WHEREAS, following a review· by the Wildlife Agencies and public comment period, the City issued a draft MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11,2000, and a Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20, 2000, to the WjJdlifc Agencies and the general public; and WHEREAS, on September 22, 2000, the City submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service an application for a Section 10(a)(I)(B) pennit for incidental take pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game an application for a take authorization pennit pursuant to Section 2835 of the California Endangered Species Act, with both applications including the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11, 2000, and a Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20,2000; and 4-10 DRAFT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council set the time and place for a joint hearing on said project 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and . . WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on October 17,2000, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, approval of the MSCP Subregional Plan and adoption of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11, 2000 were discretionary actions covered by the Final EIRIEIS, and therefore, as a responsible agency, the City had a more limited role than does a lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Addendum dated September 11, 2000, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164 to fulfij] the City's obligations as a responsible agency; and WHEREAS, the City issued Findings of Fact for each of the signjficant environmental effects of implementing the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 11, 2000, in confonnance with the CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, which enabled the City to make full use of the Final EIRJEIS and the Addendum (CEQA Guidelines, sections 15]01, 15093 and 15096, subd. (h)); and WHEREAS, the City considered the Final EIR/EIS prepared by the lead agency together with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September]], 2000 and the Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20, 2000, and reached its own conclusion about whether and how to approve the MSCP Subregional Plan and the Chu]a Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September] 1,2000; and WHEREAS, the City also prepared an MSCP Mitigation and Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program For Biological Resources dated October 12, 2000, in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6, subd. (a)(l); and WHERÈAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the Final EIR/EIS prepared and certified by theU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Diego in January, 1997, the Addendum to the Final EIRIEIS (October 2000), the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the MSCP Mitigation and Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program for Biological Resources (Octobcr 2000) and found that the documents were prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and also found that the Final EIRIEIS (January 1997) and Addendum to the Final EIRIEIS adequately addressed the environmental impacts of the MSCP Subregional Plan and the Draft Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 11,2000; and WHEREAS, on October ]7, 2000, the City Council approved the MSCP Subregional Plan dated August, ]998, as the framework plan for the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan; conditionally adopted the MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 11,2000, and the Mitigation and Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program for Biological Resources dated October, 2000; and . 4-11 DRAFT . WHEREAS, subsequent to· the City Council conditional approval on October 17, 2000, the City decided to make further changes to the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 11, 2000, based on additional information not previously available about the Quino checkerspot butterfly, a federally listed endangered species. The City believed it was prudent to add coverage for the Quino checkerspot butterfly into the draft MSCP Subarea Plan prior to the Subarea Plan and associated implementing documents being published in the Federal Register; and WHEREAS, since October 2000, changes to the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan have been made as necessary to complete a final Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, including I) measures to provide coverage for the Quino checkerspot butterfly; 2) the preparation of three implementing ordinances; 3) final revisions to the Implementing Agreement, 4) conservation of additional lands not previously anticipated to be preserved, including lands within the approved Rolling Bills Ranch subdivision; and 4) other revisions to address unresolved issues related to changed circumstances, wetlands, and funding for long term management; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Assessment (No. 03-01) to address al1 of the changes to the revised final Draft MSCP Subarea Plan; and WHEREAS, on October 8, 2002, the City submitted a revised application to the Wildlife Agencies for a Section 10(a)(I)(B) permit for incidental take pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and submitted to the California Department of Fish and Garnean application for a take authorization permit pursuant to Section 2835 of the California Endangered Species Act, with all of the required application materials including the Draft Supplemental EIR and EA, Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, and the revised Draft Implementing Agreement, and Draft Implementing Ordinances (referred to herein col1ectively as uimplementing documents"); and WHEREAS, on October 10, 2002 a Federal Register notice was published commencing a 60-day public comment period on the Incidental Take Applications, Public Review Draft MSCP Subarea PIan, dated October 2002, implementing agreement and implementing ordinances and associated environmental documents. A public notice was also pubIished on October 11, 2002 armouncing the availability of the Draft SEIR and EA to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, public review of the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan and implementing documents closed on December 9, 2002. The City received] 2 letters of corrunent from the public and has prepared responses to the comments and made changes to the Public Review Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated October2002 and implementing documents, and has prepared a final City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003, and Draft Implementing Agreement, dated February 2003; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a public hearing on said project 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and 4-12 DRAFT WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on April 23, 2003 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planrùng Commission; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council the approval of the MSCP Subarea Plan and associated implementing documents; and WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a public hearing on said project 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on May 13, 2003 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council; and WHEREAS, the conditional adoption of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, . dated February 2003 and associated implementing ordinances. will not constitute a binding set of obligations on any public or private entity within the City of Chula Vista unless and until 1) the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issues a biological opinion which affirms and is consistent with the in the ChuJa Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003 and the Draft Implementing Agreement, dated February 2003, 2) take permits and its conditions are issued by both Wildlife Agencies that are consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Suba¡;ea Plan and Draft Implementing Agreement dated February 2003, and 3) the City and Wildlife Agencies approves and executes the Implementing Agreement substantially in the form of the Implementing Agreement dated February 2003; and WHEREAS, the City. Council considered the Supplemental EIR and EA at its hearing of May 13, 2003 and adopted the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan (dated February 2003) with said conditions; and WHEREAS, implementation of the MSCP Subarea Plan requires adoption of three MSCP Implementing Ordinances, including the Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Ordinance. This ordinance will only take effect after issuance of the take permits and the necessary timelines for ordinances pursuant to the City Charter have passed. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: Section L That Chapter 17 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended by adding Section] 7.35 to read as follows: Sec. 17.35 HABITAT LOSS A1'm INCIDENTAL TAKE Sections: 17.35.010 17 .35.020 17.35.030 17 .35.040 17.35.050 17.35.060 17.35.070 17.35.080 17.35.090 17.35.100 Purpose and Intent General Authorization Definitions ' General Application of Chapter Exemptions Application for HLIT Permit Permit Process Required Findings for Issuance of HLIT Permit General MSCP Development Regulations Specific MSCP Development Regulations 4-13 17.35.110 Mitigation 17.35.120 Biological and Open Space Easement 17.35.130 Deviation from Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Regnlations 17.35.140 Emergencies 17.35.150 City Responsibility to fublish Guidelines 17.35.160 Violations and Remedies 17.35.170 Conflicts. 17.35.180 Local Coastal Program 4-14 DRAFT DRAFT 17.35.010 Pnrpose and Intent .. The purpose of the Habitat Loss and Incidental Take (HLIT) regulations is to protect and conserve native habitat within the City of Chula Vista and the viability of the species supported by those habitats. These regulations are intended to implement the City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan by placing priority on the preservation of biological resources within the pJanned and protected Preserve. These regulations are intended to assure that development OCCurs in a manner that protects the overaU quality of the habitat resources, encourages a sensitive form of deveJopment, and retains biodiversity and interconnected habitats. The habitat-based level of protection achieved through implementation of the MSCP, is intended to meet the conservation obligations of the Covered Species identified therein. These regulations are also intended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare while being consistent with sound resource conservation principles and the rights 'ofprivate property owners. 17.35.020 General Authorization As a participating jurisdiction in the MSCP Subregional Planning effort, the City of Chula Vista is promulgating these regulations to implement the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan as a condition of receiving an incidental take permit to be issued to the City pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Endangered Species Act and take authorization to be issued to the City pursuant to Section 2835 of the California Fish and Game Code. 17.35.030 Definitions The foUowin'g words and phrases, when used in this Chapter, shaU be construed as defined in this section: . 75-100% Conservation Area - Lands for which hard-line Preserve boundaries have not yet been established, but where development or impact is limited to 25% or less of the mapped area and Preserve wiU total between 75% and 100% of the mapped area and where the conserved portion wi11 be managed for its biological resources. These mapped areas are shown on Figure] -2 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may"be amended from time to time. 100% Conservation Area - Lands within the City of ChuJa Vista for which hard· line Preserve boundaries have been established and where the conserved portion wiU be managed for its biological resources. These areas are shown on Figure 1-2 of the ChuJa Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted On ~_~) and as may be amended from time to time. Ag¡-jcultural Operations - Soil disturbance activity for the preparation or maintenance of a site for the cultivation of crops or other agricultural purposes where the activity has occurred continuously within previous years, in compliance with aU applicable regulations, and involves no intensification of the use. Appropriate Mana~in~ Entity - The entity that manages any portion of the Preserve, including but not limited to, the City, a third-party under the direct control of the City, or the Otay Ranch Preserve Owner/Manager. 4-15 DRAFT ....-- BiologicaJ and ()Pen Space Easement - A permanent Jegal encumbrance to protect biological resources and dedicate Jand to the Preserve. The biological and open space easement is also referred to as a conservation easement. Biological Functional EQuivalencv - A modification to a Preserve boundary which resu]ts in a Preserve configuration with a biological value that is equal to or higher than the original Preserve configuration. The comparison of biological value is based on the "like or equivalent" exchange concept for biological factors identified in Section 5.4.2 of the MSCP Subregional PJan. BiololZist - A person meeting the quaJifications as established by the Director of Planning and Building and approved by the same. At a minimum, the person shaU have at least a four-year co1Jege degree in biology, zoology; botany, wildlife management, or other closely reJated field, with at least two years experience conducting field investigations in San Diego County. Candidate Species - Those native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptilè, or plant that the California Fish and Game Commission has forma1Jy noticed as being under review by CDFG for addition to either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species, or a species for which the Fish and Game Commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to either list, pursuant to Section 2068 of the California Fish and Game Code. CDFG - California Department ofFish and Game, a subdivision of the State of California charged with administering the California Endangered Species Act and the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act. CEOA - The CaIifornia Environmenta] Quality Act (CaL Public Resources Code Section 2100 et seq.), including aU regulations promu]gated pursuant to that Act. Chula Vista Covered Species - Those Covered Species which are adequately conserved by the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, together with other Subarea P]ans within the MSCP Subregional Plan Area in effect during the duration of the City's Section I O(a)(1 )(B) permit issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Take Authorization issued by CDFG, and including Species Adequately Conserved. Adequate conservation for certain ChuIa Vista Covered Species shaU include the measures contained in the findings for those species in Table 3-5 of the MSCP SubregionaI Plan. ClearinlZ - The cutting of Natura] Vegetation by any means, without disturbance to the soil and root system. Clearing and Grubbing PeU1Ú1 -- A pfJ1Ilit issued pursuant to this chapter that a]jows clearing and grubbing that is not in association with other Land Development Work. Covered Proiect - Those projects within the City of Chula Vista or annexed into the City in which hard-line Preserve boundaries have been estabJished pursuant to the approved Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and where conservation in those designated areas shaU be consistent with the MSCP Subregional Plan and Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and have or wi]] be specified as binding conditions of approval in such projects' plans and approvals. Covered projects are identified on Table 5-1 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. 4-16 DRAFT Covered Species - Those species within the MSCP Subregional Plan which win be adequately conserved by the MSCP when the MSCP is implemented through the Subarea Plans, and includes Species Adequately Conserved and ChuJa Vista Covered Species. Development - The uses to which land shan be put, including construction of buildings and structures and aU alterations of the land incidental thereto, excluding Agricultural Operations. Development Areas - Mapped areas planned for development pursuant to the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and within which the take of Chula Vista Covered Species is authorized by the Section 10(a)(1)(B) Incidental Take Permit and Section 2835 Permit. These mapped areas are shown on Figure 1-2 of the ChuJa Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended ITom time to time. Endan~ered Species - A species listed as "endangered" under the Federal Endangered Species Act or the California Endangered Species Act. Future Facilities - Facilities that are necessary to support City services or planned development in the future and are not specificaIJy listed in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan as a Planned Facility. Gradin~ - Any excavating or fiIJing or combination thereof and shaH include the land in its excavated or fiHed condition. Grubbin~ - The removal of Natural Vegetatjon by any means, including removal of the root system. Land Development Permit - A permit issued pursuant to the Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 15.04. Listed Non-Covered Species - A species listed as threatened or endangered under the Federal E.S.A or California Endangered Species Act, but for which a Section 10(a)(l)(B) Incidental Take Permit or a Section 2835 Take Authorization has not been granted pursuant to the Chula Vista. MSCP Subarea PIan. MSCP Implemèntation Guidelines - Guidelines formulated by the City of Chula Vista to aid in the interpretation and faciJitate impJementation of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and HUT Ordinance. These Guidelines are complementary to the ChuJa Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and HUT Ordinance and do not include new substantive information or requiremen1s. M~ÇP Subregi.Qn.all'Jan - The Multiple Species Conservation Program Plan, dated August 1998, which addresses multiple species habitat needs and the preservation of native vegetation for a 900- square mile area in southwestern San Diego County, California. MSCP Subre~ional PIan Area - Consists of approximately 900 square miles in Southwestern San Diego County, CaJifornia, referred to in the MSCP Subregional Plan as the "MSCP Subregional Plan Study Area." Narrow Endemic Species - Species that are highly restricted by their habitat affinities or other ecological factors. These species are listed in Table 5-4 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea PIan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. 4-17 DRAFT NaturaI Ve~etation - Vegetation identified as Tier I, II or ill on Table 5-3 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. NCCP Act - The CaIifornia Natura] Community Conservation Planning Act of 1991, as amended (California Fish and Game Code Section 2800 et seq.), including all regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act. Amendments to the NCCP Act enacted effective January 1,2003 (Chapter 4, sections 1 and 2 of California statutes 2002 (S.R 107» expressIy provide that the ChuIa Vista Subarea Plan wi]] be soleIy governed in accordance with the NCCP Act as it read on December 31, 2001, and not by the substantive provisions ofS.B. 107. Participatin~ LocaI Jurisdiction - Any of the 12 Iocal governments within the MSCP Study Area that may prepare a MSCP Subarea Plan and receive a Section I O(a)(1)(B) permit from the USFWS and Section 2835 Permit from the CDFG. PIanned Facilities - FaciIities that have been specifical1y identified by the City of ChuIa Vista to serve development approved by the City and specified in Table 6-1 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea PIan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. Preserve - Areas within the City of ChuIa Vista incorporated Jimits which have been dedicated and accepted by the City for penn anent MSCP conservation and which wilI be managed for their biological resources. Proiect Area - An area considered for development and shaH include the entire contiguous Iand under the same ownership or like property interest, or in the case of deveIopment proposed by a public agency, the area required for development as determined by the Director of Planning and Building. Section 10(a)(])(B) Permit - The permit issued by the USFWS to the City of Chula Vista under Section lO(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C 1539 (a)(I)(B») to aHow the Incidental Take of Species Adequately Conserved andior Chula Vista Covered Species, as identified in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted On , and as may be amended from time to time, to the extent Take of such species is otherwise prohibited under Section 9 of the Act. The Take of listed plant species is not prohibited under the ESA or authorized under the Section 10(a)(I)(B) permit. However, plant species adequately conserved by , the Chula Vista Subarea Plan, or by the Chula Vista Subarea PIan in conjunction with other approved MSCP Subarea Plans, are listed in the IO(a)(I)(B) permit in recognition of ,the conservation measures and benefits provided for them under the approved Subarea PIans. Such plant species receive assurances pursuant to the USFWS "No Surprises" Rule. .S_<¿ç1iQ[L2835 PenI1it ~- A permit issued by the CDFG to the City of Chula Vista under Section 2835 of the Ca]jfomia NCCP Act to authorize the Take of Species Adequately Conserved andior Chu]a Vista Covered Species, as identified in the' ChuIa Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. Sensitive BioIöl!ical Resources - Lands that contain Natural Vegetation andior WetIands; andior habitat occupied by Covered Species, other Listed Non-Covered Species, andior Narrow Endemic Species. Species AdequateIv Conserved - Those species for which the ChuIa Vista MSCP Subarea PIan provides substantial conservation and for whích the City of ChuIa Vista shaH receive Take 4-18 DRAFT Authorization regardless of the participation or continued participation of any other Participating Local Jurisdiction. Take Authorization - Pennit authority granted through a Section 10(a)(I)(B) permit pUTsuant to the ESA and/or the Section 2835 permit pursuant to the NCCP Act. Temporary Impacts - Anticipated impacts that result during the COUTse of construction but are not part of the permanent developed condition of a Project Area. Threatened Species - A species listed as "threatened" under the ESA or CESA. USFWS - United States Fish and Wildlife Service, an agency of the United States Department of Interior, charged with administering the Federal Endangered Species Act. Wetlands - Wetlands are generally defined as those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface Or ground water at a frequency or duration sufficient tosupport a prevalence of vegetation !ypicaI1y adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. For pUrposes of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, Wetlands are those lands which contain naturally occurring weiland communities 1isted on Table 5-6 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea PIan and further described in Appendix B of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. Wetlands also include areas lacIGng wetland communities due to non-permitted filling of previously existing Wellands. Wildlife Agencies - The USFWS and the CDFG. 17.35.040 General AppJication of Chapter A. In conjunction with the ear1iest decision on any entitlement related to a Project Area after (the effective date of the ordinance), such as Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan approval, Design Review approval, conditional use permit, variance, parcel map approval, tentative map approval, Land Development Permit, or Clearing or Grubbing pennit the applicant shall obtain a HUT Pennit in the following mapped areas identified in the Chula . Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, unless exempt pursuant to Section 17.35.050 of this Chapter: I. 100% Conservation Areas; 2. 75- 100% Conservation Areas; and 3. Development Areas ollts;cle ,,[Covered Projects . B. 11 is unlawful to begin development on lands in mapped 100% Conservation Areas, 75-100% Conservation Areas, and Development Areas outside of Covered Projects without submitting required documentation and obtaining a HUT pennit (including CEQA compliance), or obtaining an exemption as required pursuant to this Chapter. If unlawful development occurs on such lands and an enforcement action has been commenced by the City, no development pennit application may be .processed until the enforcement action has been concluded. Enforcement action may include penalties assessed for unpermitted cJearing and grubbing and could include increased replacement mitigation ratios. 4-19 DRAFT 17.35.050 Exemptions A. The following are exempt ITom the requÌrements of this Chapter: I. Development of a Project Area that is one acre or Jess in size and located entirely in a mapped Development Area outside of Covered Projects. 2. Development of a Project Area which is located entirely within the mapped Development Area outside Covered Projects, and where it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building, or hislher designee, that no. Sensitive Biological Resources exist on the Project Area. 3. Development that is Jimited to interior modifications or repairs and any exterior repairs, alterations or maintenance that does not increase the footprint of an existing buiIding or accessory Structure, that will not encroach into identified Sensitive Biological Resources during or after construction. 4. Any project within the Development Area of a Covered Project. 5. Any project that has an effective incidental take permit ITom the Wildlife Agencies. 6. Continuance of Agricultural Operations. 17.35.060 Application for HLIT Permit The following are submittal requirements for projects that are not exempt from this Chapter: A. General Submittal Requirements The following are general submittal requirements for all HLIT Permits: 1. Submit a completed appJication form to the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department - Planning Division; 2. Provide copies of a biological survey for the entire Project Area ·that is consistent with the MSCP Implementation Guidelines and prepared by a Biologist. If the biological surveys are conducted outside the acceptable time of year for identifying covered Narrow Endemic Species, but the Bio]ogist identifies indicators that N~IroW Endemic Species could be present in the Project Area, then surveys for Narrow Endemic Species must be conducted during the acceptable time of year in accordance with the MSCP Implementation Guidelines and must be conducted prior to consideration of issuance of an HUT Pemrit by the City. The HUT Permit application will be held in abeyance until the applicant submits subsequent surveys for Narrow Endemic Species conducted during the acceptable time of year. 3. For Project Areas located in 100% Conservation Areas, 75-100% Conservation Areas, Development Areas outside of Covered Projects with indicators or the presence of Narrow Endemic Species or Wetlands, or as otherwise deemed necessary by the biological survey as determined by the Director of Planning and Building, or hisfher designee, the applicant 4-20 DRAFT shaU prepare and submit an Opportunities and Constramts Analysis to evaluate the proposed deve]opment and its relatioçship to the Sensitive Biological Resources. The opportunities and constramts identified shall be used to detennine the portions of the . Project AIea that are most suitable for deve]opment and those that should be conserved for biological purposes. The Opportunities and Constraints Analysis shall include: a. Written evaluation of such factors as bioIogical resources, Sensitive Bio]ogical Resources, historical resources, visual resources, public facilities needs, public safety issues, conserved Sensitive BioJogica] Resources on adjacent Iands, and adjacent land uses; b. For Project AIeas in 75-100% Conservation AIeas, written description of how the proposed project has been limited to the Ieast environmentally sensitive portions of the mapped 75-]00% Conservation AIea within the Project AIea in accordance with the MSCP Implementation Guidelines; c. For Project AIeas containing the siting of proposed Planned or Future Facilities in 100% Conservation AIeas and 75-]00% Conservation Areas, a written analysis that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the decision maker that the facilities siting critèria in Section 17.35.100.AA.c have been met. d. Map of the Project AIea at a suitable scale, which includes and clearly delineates, to the satisfaction of the Director ofPlanning and Building, the following information: (1) Identification of Sensitive Biological Resources; (2) Limits of proposed development, including areas to be impacted on a temporary basis, if Sensitive Biological Resources are avoided; (3) Limits of the proposed development, including areas to be impacted on a temporary basis, if Sensitive Biological Resources are impacted; and (4) Limits of any mitigation area(s) proposed within the Project AIea. e. Written description of proposed mitigation, including: (1) How biological values of the mitigation area are equaI to or greater than the impacted area; (2) Biologica] and Opcn Space Easement or other 1ega] method proposed to ensure permanent conservation of the land for biologicaJ purposes; (3) Long-term methods to ensure protection and management of the habitats and Covered Species, which may incIude but not be limited to funding; and (4) Long-term biological viability of the proposed mitigation if it is not within or immediately adjacent to a 100% Conservation AIea. 4. Any other requirements deemed necessary by the Director of PIanning and BuiJding for consideration of the proposed HUT Permit application. 4-21 DRAFT 5. Payment of applicable fees and/or deposits In accordance with the City's Master Fee Schedule. B. Additional Submittal Requirements for Project Areas that Contain any Covered Narrow Endemic -Species 1. . In addition to the submittal requirements listed in Section 17.35.060 (A), the foIlowing written information shaIl be provided by the applicant when the biological survey identifies any Narrow Endemic Species within the Project Area: a. A graphic depiction of all covered Narrow Endemic Species located in the Project Area; b. A written biological description of the status of the covered Narrow Endemic Species; c. Quantification of both preservation of Narrow Endemic Species and impacts to Narrow Endemic Species associated with the project including direct and indirect effects on an area and individual plant basis; d. Written report of the feasibility or infeasibility of total avoidance of Narrow Endemic Species' population(s); e. Written description of project design features that reduce indirect effects such as edge treatments, landscaping, elevation differences, minimization and/or compensation through restoration Or enhancement; f. Any other requirements deemed necessary by the Director of Planning and Building for consideration of the proposed HUT Pennit application. 2. When the applicant proposes to impact any Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area in excess of the 5% threshold in 100% Conservation Areas, as identified in Section5.2.3.4 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, and the 20% threshold in 75- 100% Conservation Areas and Development Areas outside of Covered Projects, as identified in Section 5.2.3.5 ánd 5.2.3.3, respectively, of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, the applicant shaIl submit a written analysis that demonstrates the project would resuJl in an overaIl Preserve design and configuration biologically superior to that which would occur under a project alternative within the 5% or 20% ihreshold. The applicant shall submit to the City a written analysis addressing. thef01l0wing factors that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City the proposed project is the biologicaIly superior alternative: a. Effects on conserve.d habitats; b. Effects on Covered Species; c. Effects on habitat linkages and function of Preserve areas; d. Effects on Preserve configuration and management; e. Effects on ecotones or other conditions affecting species diversity; and 4-22 DRAFT ....-.. f. Effects on Listed Non-Covered Species or other species òf concern not covered by the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. C. Additional Submittal Requirements for Project Areas that Contain WetJands I. In addition to the submittal requirements listed in Section 17-35.060 (A) and (B), as appEcable, the fonowing written information shaU be provided by the applicant when the biological survey identifies WetJands within the Project Area: a. A graphic depiction of an Wetlands located in the Project Area; b. A written biological description of the status of the Wetlands; c. Quantification of proposed impacts to Wetlands associated with the project; d. Written analysis ofthe inability to avoid impacts to Wetlands; e. Written description of project design features that minimize impacts to WetJands; f. Any other requirements deemed necessary by the Director of Planning and Building for consideration of the proposed HUT Permit application. 17.35.070 Permit Process The HUT Pennit shan be acted upon in one of the following manners: A. When an appEcant applies for more than One permit, map, or other approval for a single deveJopment, the applications shan be consolidated for processing and shan be reviewed by a single decision maker. The decision maker shan act on the consolidated application at the highest level of authority for that development. The findings required for approval of each permit shan be considered individually, consistent with Section 17-35.080 of this Chapter. B. The HUT Permit may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Director of Planning and Building, or hislher designee without a public hearing in accordance with Section 19.14.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, in the fonowing circumstances: I. Any Planned Facility project listed in Table 6-] of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan that unly impacts Natura] Vegetation and does not impact habitat occupied by Covered Species, Listed Non-Covered Species, Narrow Endemic Species, or Wetlands. 2. Any Future FaciEty project listed in Table 6-2 of the Chula Vista'MSCP Subarea Plan associated with a Covered Project that only impacts Natural Vegetation and does not impact habitat occupied by Covered Species, Listed Non-Covered Species, Narrow Endemic Species or Wet!ands. C. For a1l other HUT Permit applications, the Director of Planning and Building, and or his/her designee, may approve, conditiona]]y approve, or deny such permit at a public hearing noticed in accordance with Section 19.14.]80 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. The 4-23 DRAFT Director of Planning and Building' decision may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with Sections 19.14.110 and 19.14.130 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 17.35.080 Required Findings for Issuance of an BUT Permit A. In order to approve or conditionally approve a HLIT Permit, all of the f01lowing written findings shall be made by the decision-maker: I. The proposed developmenJ in the Project Area and associated mitigation is consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time, the MSCP Implementation Guidelines, and the development standards set forth in Section 17.35.100 of this Chapter. 2. The Project Area is physically suitable for the design and s1tmg of the proposed development and the development resuHs in minimum disturbance to Sensitive Biological Resources, except impacts to Natural Vegetation in mapped Development Areas. 3. The nature and extent of mitigation required as a condition of the permit is reasonably related to and calculated to a1leviate negative impacts created in the Project Area. B. In order to approve or conditiona1ly approve an HUT Permit where the Project Area contains Narrow Endemic Species, a1l of the fo1l0wing additional written findings shall be made by the decision maker: 1. Narrow Endemic Species'· populations within the Project Area have been avoided or total avoidance is infeasible. 2. If impacts to Narrow Endemic Speci,s have not been avoided, one of the f01l0wing findings shall be made: a.· In cases where impacts to covered Narrow Endemic Species' populations within the Project Area have been limited to 5% in 100% Conservation Areas, and. 20% in 75-100% Conservation Areas and Development Areas outside of Covered Projects, the proposed project design, including mitigation, will result in conservation of the species that is functiona1ly equivaJent to its status without the project, including species numbers and area, and must ensure adequate Preserve design to protect the species in the long-term; or b. In cases where the 5% or 20% Narrow Endemic Species impact threshold has been exceeòed, the proposed project design, inc1uding mitigation, results in a Preserve design for the Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area that is biologica1ly superior to the Preserve design that would occur if the impact had been limited to 5% in 100% Conservation Areas or 20% in 75-100% Conservation Areas and Development Areas outside of Covered Projects. C. In order to approve or conditionally approve an HUT Permit where the Project Area contains Wetlands, a1l of the following additional written findings sha1l be made by the decision maker: I. Prior to issuance of a Land Development Pennit or Clearing and Grubbing Permit, the project proponent wiJl be required to obtain any appIicable state and federal permits, with copies provided to the Director of Planning and Building, or hislher designee. 4-24 DRAFT 2. Where impacts are proposed to Wetlands the folIowing findings shan be made: a. Impacts to Wetlands have been avoided andlor minimized to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea P]an Section 5.2.4; and b. Unavoidable impacts to WetJands have been mitigated pursuant to Section 17.35.1]0 of this Chapter. 17.35.090 General MSCP Development Regulations The fonowing development regulations apply to an development proposals in a Project Area that do not qualify for an exemption from this Chapter and are proposed in 100% Conservatjon Areas, 75-100% Conservation Areas, or DeveJopment Areas outside of Covered Projects: . A. AII development proposals regulated by this Chapter shan be consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and MSCP Implementation Guidelines. ]. Overan development within the Project Area, including public facilities and circulation, shan be 10cated to minimize impacts to Sensitive Biological Resources, in accordance with this Chapter, the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. 2. Pursuant to Chapter ]5.04 of the Chula Vista MunicipaJ Code, no Land Development or Clearing and Grubbing Permit which anows clearing, grubbing, or grading of Natural Vegetation shan be issued for any portion of a Project Area where impacts are proposed to Wetlands or Listed Non-covered Species until alI applicab]e federal and state permits have been issued. 3. Impacts to Wetlands shalI be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Where impacts to Wetlands are not avoided, impacts shan be minimized and mitigated pursuant to Section ]7.35.110 of this Chapter. 4. No temporary disturbance or storage of material or equipment is permitted in Sensitive Biological Resources, unless the disturbance or storage occurs within an area approved by the City for development or unless it can be demonstrated that the disturbance or storage will not cause perrlJancnt habitat Joss and the land wi]] be rcvegetated and restorcd in accordance with the MSCP ]mpJementation Guidelines. 5. Grading during wiJdlife breeding seasons shan be avoided or modified consistent with the requirements of the Chula Vista MSCP Subatea Plan and in accordance with the MSCP Implementation GuideJínes. 6. All fuel modification (brush management) zones required as a resuJt of new development, and as required by the City of Chula Vista Fire Marshal, shan be located outside the Preserve. 4-25 DRAFT 17.35.100 Specific MSCP Land Use and Development Regulations In addition to the General MSCP Development Regulations listed in Section 17.35.090 of this Chapter, the following specific land use and development regulations shall apply to an land uses and to development proposals in a Project Area that do not qualify for an exemption from this Chapter: A. Land uses and development are permitted within the 100% Conservation Areas consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and this Section. If any portion of the Project Area is located within a 100% Conservation Area, the following regulations sha]] apply to that portion of the Project Area located within the 100% Conservation Area: 1. . Uses Permitted The fo!Jowing uses are permitted in 100% Conservation Areas: a. Access for litter and trash removal, maintenance, repair, and refurbishment; b. Replacement of structures in existing locations; c. Passive recreation such as hiking and bird watching; d. Other recreation such as mountain biking, horse back riding, boating, sun bathing, fishing, and swimming as in accordance with an approved project, an approved .area- specific management directive or as determined by the appropriate managing entity; e. Fencing that does not significantly, adversely effect the fu]] functioning of the Preserve, including wildlife movement as approved by the appropriate managing entity; f. Scientific research related to habitat conservation, monitoring and habitat restoration and enhancement activities, subject to appro va] by the appropriate managing entity; and g. Access for Jaw enforcement agencies, fire control agencies, the Nationa] Guard, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and Border Patrol; h. Existing uses operating lega!Jy at the time take authorization is granted to the City by the WiJdlife Agencies until the land has been provided to the City or other entity by an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication or conveyed by easement pr fee title to the Preserve, whichever comes first, incJuding: (1) Existing, pennitted uses a!Jowed by right m Chapter 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance); (2) Uses deemed to be legal, non-conforming uses pursuant to Chapter 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance); (3) Accessory and conditionally permitted uses pursuant to Chapter 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance); 4-26 DRAFT (4) Existing agricultural and grazing uses outside of Otay Ranch; (5) Existing agricultural and grazing uses within Otay Ranch in accordance with Chapter 17 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Otay Ranch Grazing Ordinance); and (6) Existing mining, extraction and processing facilities consistent with the Chula VistaMSCP Subarea Plan. 2. Conditional1y Compatible Uses The fOllowing uses are conditionalJy pennitted in 100% Conservation Areas, consistent with the Chula Vista Subarea Plan: a. New Mining Extraction and Processing Facilities; and b. Flood control; and c. Roads and iniTastructure; and d. Other Planned Facilities not covered under c above; and e. Other Future Facilities not covered under c above; and f. Otay Valley Regional Park Plan Uses. 3. The following uses are not pennitted: a. The fol1owing uses shaH not be permitted without prior issuance of the appropriate permit iTom the City: L Clearing and/or grubbing of Natural Vegetation, for purposes unrelated to biological enhancement, prior to issuance of a Clearing and Grubbing Permit; 2. Clearing and/or grubbing of Natural Vegetation, for purposes unrelated to biological enhancement, grading, excavation, or placement of soil, rock, sand, gravel or other material prior to issuance of a Land Development Permit; 3. Construction OT placement of ,my bUilding or structure prior to tlJC issuance of 2 Building Pennit; b. Recreational off-highway vehicle use; and c. Storage of materials such as chemicals and equipment; and d. Dispersal ofbiosolids. 4. Development Standards a. Development shal1 be limited to the maximum extent practicable to achieve project objectives and shall be located On the least environmentaHy sensitive portions of the 4-27 DRAFT Pròject Area in accordance with the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. Such development shall be designed to avoid impacts to covered species to the maximum extent practicable. Encroachment into more environmentally sensitive areas shan only be authorized to achieve project objectives. b. Development must avoid impacts to covered Narrow Endemic Species to the maximum extent practicable. A Ust of the covered Narrow Endemic Species is. incJuded in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and MSCP Implementation GuideJines. Measures for protection of Narrow Endemic Species shan be required such as management, enhancement, restoration and/or transplantation in accordance with the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. (1) Where impacts to a covered Narrow Endemic Species population are demonstrated to be unavoidable, impacts shaH be limited to 5% of the total Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area, except as provided by Section 17.35.100.A.4.b(2) of this Chapter. Written findings of equivalency must be made by the City in accordance with Section 17.35.080.B of this Chapter. The City win forward its written findings of equivalency to the WildEfe Agencies. The Wildlife Agencies may submit to the City, within 30 days of a receipt of mailed notice of written findings from the City, a written finding of non- concurrence on the facts of the City's findings. If such written finding of non- concurrence is made within 30 days of receipt of mailed notice of findings from the City, the City must confer with the Wildlife Agencies to resolve Narrow Endemic Species issues with the proposed development. If the Wildli:Îe Agencies do not respond within 30 days after receipt of maiJed notice, the City shall deem the written findings accepted. (2) If, after comprehensive consideration of avoidance and minimization measures, impacts exceed 5% of the covered Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area, a detennination of biologically superior preservation, must be made in accordance with Section 17.35.080.B of this Chapter. The City wiH forward its written detennination of biologicaHy superior preservation to the WildEfe Agencies for review. The Wildlife Agencies may submit to the City, within 30 days of receipt of mailed notice of findings from the City, a written finding of non-concurrence on the facts of the City's findings. If such written finding of non-concurrence is made within 30 days of receipt of mailed notice of findings from the City, the City must confer with the Wildlife Agencies to resolve Narrow Endemic Species issues with the proposed development. If the WildEfe Agencies do not respond within 30 days after receipt of mailed notice, the City shan deem the written findings accepted. c. Development of Planned and Future Facilities shan be In accordance with the fonowing siting criteria: (I) Planned and Future Facilities shan be located through developed or developing areas where feasible and shall use eX1sting roads, trails, and disturbed areas to the maximum extent practicable. (2) Planned and Future FacjUties shaH avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, impacts to Sensitive Biological Resources and Covered Species. Where avoidance of Sensitive Biological Resources and Covered Species has been demonstrated by 4-28 DRAFT the applicant to be infeasible, impacts to Sensitive Bio]ogical Resources and Covered Species resulting from Planned and Future Faci]jties shaU be minimized and Iocated in the least environmentany sensitive portion of the Project Area in accordance with the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. (3) PIanned and Future Facilities shan avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, impacts to Wetlands. If avoidance of Wetlands is' not possible, any impacts to Wetlands shaH require mitigation in accordance with Section 5.2,4 and Table 5-6 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea PIan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. (4) Where roads traverse the Preserve, they shaH, to the maximum extent practicable, provide for wi]d]jfe movement in areas that are graphicany depicted on and listed in the MSCP Subregional Plan Generalized Core BiologicaI Resource Areas and Linkages map (see Figure] - 4 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea PIan) as a core biologicaI area or a regional linkage between core biological areas. (5) At wildlife crossings, road bridges for vehicular traffic sha]] be preferred over box culverts and pipe culverts. Box culverts shaH onIy be used when they can achieve the wildlife movement goals for the specific location. To the maximum extent practicable, wild]jfe crossings shall be designed as foUows: (a) The substrate shaU be left in a natural condition and planted with native vegetation if appropriate; (b) A line-of-sight from one end to the other shan be provided; and (c) Low-level inumination shan be insta]]ed. (6) To minimize habitat disruption, habitat tragmentation, impediments to wildlife movement, and impacts to breeding areas, roads and/or right-of-way widths shaH be narrowed trom existing City design and engineering standards to the maximum extent practicable. d. No ·single Future Facility project sha]] permanently impact mOre than two acres of covered habitat without concurrenceiÌom the Wild]jfe Agencies. Temporary Impacts associated with Future Facilities shan not be included in the limitations for permanent impacts to Natural Vegetation, however, an areas of Temporary bnpacts shaH be revegetated pursuant to the MSCP Implementation GuideIines. If the two-acre single project thrcshoJd is to bc exceeded, the City sha]] notify in writing and provide appIicabJe project information to the WiIdlife Agencies. The WildIife Agencies may submit to the City, within 30 days of a receipt of mailed notice and information from the City, a written response of non-concurrence. If such written finding of non- concurrence is made within 30 days of receipt ofmaiJed notice from the City, the City shan confer with the WildJife Agencies to resolve the Future Facility issue. If the WildJife Agencies do not respond within 30 days after receipt of mailed notice, the City shaU deem the written findings accepted. e. The cumuIative permanent impacts to covered habitats trom all Future FaciJities for an projects shall not exceed a total 'of 50 acres without concurrence trom the Wildlife Agencies. If the 50-acre threshoJd is to be exceeded, the City shall notify in writing 4-29 DRAFT and provide applkable project infQrmation tQ the WildJife Agencies. The Wildlife Agencies may submit to the City, within 30 days Qf a receipt Qf maiJed notice and infQrmatiQn ITom the City, a written- response of nQn-concurrence. If such written finding of non-concurrence is made within 30 days of receipt Qf mailed notice from the City, the City shall confer with the Wi]dJife Agencies to resolve the Future Faci]ity issue. If the Wildlife Agencies do not respcnd within 30 days after receipt of maiJed notice, the City shan deem the written findings accepted. f. Mitigation shan be provided pursuant tQ Section] 7.35.] 10 ofthis Chapter. g. FQr constructiQn areas adjacent to occupied Quino checkerspot butterfly habitat, dust control measures (e.g. watering) will be applied during grading activities. B. Land uses and development are permitted within 75-100% Conservation Areas consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and this Section. If any portiQn Qf the Project Area is located within a 75-100% Conservation Area, the foJJowing shaJJ apply to that portion of the Project Area located within the 75-]00% Conservation Area: 1.. Land Uses Permitted a. Permitted land uses include those uses permitted in the underlying zone. 2. Development Standards a. Development shaJJ be permitted in 25% of the 75-100% Conservation Area within the Project Area. Projects shall be designed to aVQid impacts to Covered Species to the maximum extent practicable -and the 25% Development Area shaJl be located on the least environmentaJly sensitive portiQns of the 75-100% Conservation Area within the Project Area. The foJJowing_ list, in order of increasing sensitivity, shall be used to determine the least environmentaJly sensitive PQrtions of the 75-100% ConservatiQn Area within the Project Area. This Jist shan be used in combination with site-specific biological information rubmitted pursuant to Section 1735.060 of this Chapter, and with other considerations such as but not limited to, potential edge-effects from existing and proposed development, Preserve configuration, habitat quality, wi]dJife movement, and topography. (1) Areas devoid of vegetation, including previously graded areas and agricultural fields; (2) Areas of non-native vegetation, ddurbcd habitats anù eucaJyptus woodlanùs; (3) Areas of chamise or mixed chaparral, and non-native grasslands; (4) Areas containing coastal scrub cQmmunities; (5) Al] other upland habitat cQmmunities; (6) Occupied habitat of Jisted species, Narrow Endemic Species, and all Wetlands; and (7) AJJ areas necessary to maintain the viability of wildlife corridors. 4-30 DRAFT b. Deve]opment shan avoid impacts to covered Narrow Endenric Species to the maximum extent practicable. A list of the covered Narrow Endemic Species is included in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and MSCP Jmp]ementation GuideEnes. Measures for protection of Narrow Endemic Species shal1 be required such as management, enhancement, restoration and/or transp]antation in accordance wÌth the MSCP ImpJementation Guidelines. (1) Where impacts to a covered Narrow Endemic Species popu]ation are demonstrated to be unavoidable, impacts shall be limited to 20% of the total Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area, except as provided by Section 17.35.100.B.2.b(2) of this Chapter. Written findings of equiva]ency wiJI be made by the City in accordance with Section 17.35.080.B of this Chapter. (2) If, after comprehensive consideration of avoidance and minimization measures, impacts exceed 20% of the covered Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area, a written detennination of bioJogical1y superior preservation, must be made by the City in accordance with Section 17.35.080.B of this Chapter. The City wil1 forward its written detennination of biological1y superior preservation to the Wi1dlife Agencies for review. The Wildlife Agencies may submit to the City, within 30 days of receipt of mailed notice of findings from the City, a written finding of non-concurrence on the facts of the City's findings. If such written finding of non-concurrence is made within 30 days of receipt of mailed notice ·of find'ings from the City, the City must confer with the Wi1dIife Agencies to resolve Narrow Endemic Species issues with the proposed development. If the WildJife Agencies do not respond within 30 days after receipt of mailed notice, the City shal1 deem the written findings accepted. c. Mitigation shall be provided pursuant to Section 17.35.110 of this Chapter. c. "Land uses and development are permitted within Development Areas outside of Covered Projects consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and this Section. If any portion of the Project Area is located within a Development Area, the following regulations shal1 apply to that portion of the Project Area ]ocated within the Development Area outside of Covered Projects: 1. Land Uses Permitted a. Pennitted land uses include those uses permitted in the underlying zone. 2. Development Standards a. Encroachment into Natural Vegetation is not ]imited except as may be provided by Section 17.35;090 (A)(2) and/or (A)(3) of this Chapter. b. Development shan avoid impacts to covered Narrow Endemic Species to the maximum extent practicable. A Est of the covered Narrow Endemic Species is included in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and the MSCP ImpJementation Guidelines. Measures for proteçtion of Narrow Endemic Species shal1 be required such as management, enhancement, restoration and/or transplantation in accordance with the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. 4-31 DRAFT "0.' (I) Where impacts to a covered Narrow Endemic Species population are demonstrated to be unavoidable, impacts shaIl be limited to 20% of the total Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area, except as provided in Section 17.35.100.C.2.b(2) of this Chapter. Written findings of equivalency wiIl be made by the City in accordance with Section 17.35.080.B of this Chapter. (2) If, after comprehensive consideration of avoidance and minimization measures, impacts exceed 20% of the covered Narrow Endemic Species population within the Project Area, a written detennination ofbioJogicaIly superior preservation, will be made by the City in accordance with Section l7.35.080.B. of .this Chapter. The City wiIl forward its written detennination of biologically superior preservation to· the Wild1ife Agencies for review. The Wildlife Agencies may submit to the City, within 30 days of receipt of mailed notice of findings from the City, a written finding of non-concurrence on the facts of the City's findings. If such written finding of non-concurrence is made within 30 days of receipt of mailed notice of findings from the City, the City must confer with the Wildlife Agencies to resolve Narrow Endemic Species issues with the proposed development. If the Wildlife Agencies do not respond within 30 days after receipt of mailed notice, the City shaIl deem the Written findings accepted. c. Mitigation shall be provided pursuant to Section 17.35.]]0 of this Chapter. 17.35.110 Mitigation ·Where mitigation for project impacts is required pursuant to this Section, the level and type of mitigation shall be consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time and the MSCP Implementation Guide1ines. The foIl owing mitigation standards shaIl be applied to impacts within 100% Conservation Areas, 75·100% Conservation Areas and Development Areas outside of Covered Projects: A. The fOHowing mitigation standards shall he app1ied to 100% ·Conservation Areas: 1. Pennanent impacts to Natural Vegetation resulting from construction of Planned Facilities associated with Covered Projects shaH not require mitigation. These impacts have already been considered in the project-specific conditions of coverage and/or mitigation for each Covered Proj ect. 2. Permanent impacts to Natural Vegetation resulting from construction of Future Facilities associated with Covered Projects where the impact to Sensitive Biological Resources is less than or equal to two acres and the 50-acre threshold identified in Section 17.35.l00.A..4.d of this Chapter has not been exceeded shaH not require mitigation. 3. Pennanent impacts to Natural Vegetation resulting from construction of Future Faci]ities not associated with Covered Projects shall be. mitigated pursuant to the mitigation standards contained in Table 5·3 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea PJan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. 4-32 DRAFT 4. Mitigation for permanent impacts to Narrow EndJ=mic Species populations shaJ] be determined On a case-by-case basis by the Director of Planning and Building, or his/her designee, and may include such measures as management, enhancement, restoration and/or transplantation. Mitigation shaJ] be in-kind and mitigation ratios for such measures shaJ] be required at a 1:1 to 3: 1 ratio depending on the sensitivity of the species and population size ·and in accordance with Section 5.2.3 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time and the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. 5. Impacts to Wetlands shall be mitigated pursuant Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on time to time. to Section 5.2.4 and Table 5-6 of the , and as may be amended from 6. Temporary Impacts to Sensitive BioIogical Resources resulting from construction of Planned and Future Faci]jties shall be revegetated pursuant to the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. B. The foJlowing mitigation standards shall be applied to 75-100% Conservation Areas: 1. Impacts to Natural Vegetation shaJ] not require mitigation. As a condition of permit issuance, Natural Vegetation outside the Deve]opment Area as determined by the HUT Permit, shaJl be left in a natural state and uses shaJ] be consistent with Section 17.35.100AI-3. 2. Mitigation for impacts to Narrow Endemic Species populations shaJl be determined on a case-by-case basis by the Director of Planning and Building, or hislher designee, and may include such measures as management, enhancement, restoration and/or transplantatJon. Mitigation shall be in-kind and mitigation ratios for such measures shaJl be at a 1: 1 to 3: 1 ratio depending on the sensitivity of the species and population size and in accordance with Section 5.2.3 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time and the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. 3. Impacts to Wetlands shaJl be mitigated pursuant Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on time to time. to Section 5.2.4 and Table 5-6 of the , and as may be amended from C. The foJlowing mitigation standards shall be applied to Development Areas outside of Covered Proj ects: 1. 1'erTIlenent impacts to Natural Vegetation s]¡all be mitigated pursuant to the mitigation standards contained in TabJe 5-3 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. 2. Mitigation for permanent impacts to Narrow Endemic Species populations shaJ] be determined on a case-by-case basis by the Director of Planning and BuiIding, or hislher designee, and may include such measures as management, enhancement, restoration and/or transplantation. Mitigation shaJ] be in-kind and mitigation ratios for such measures shall be at a l:1 to 3:1 ratio depending on the sensitivity of the species and population size and in accordance with Section 5.2.3 of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time and the MSCP Implementation Guidelines. 4-33 DRAFT 3. Impacts to WetJands shan be mitigated pursuant to Section 5.2.4 and Table 5-6 of the Chu]a Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended from time to time. 1735.120 Biological and Open Space Easement A. When required, the applicant shall draft and submit a Biological and Open Space Easement (Conservation Easement) that includes the fonowing: L A Jegal description' of the premises affected by the permit with a description of the mitigation area and the Sensitive Bi<)logical Resources that wi ] be preserved; 2. To impart notice to a ] persons to the extent afforded by the recording Jaws of the state regarding the restrictions affecting use of the Sensitive Biological Resources covered by the permit; 3. To ensure that the burdens of the easement shan be binding upon, and the benefits of the easement shan ensure to, all successors an interest to the affected ¡and; 4. To ensure enforceability of the bioJogical and open space easement by the City, or jointly and severany by the City, the U.S. Fish and WiJdlife Service, and the California Department of Fish and Game in those instances when the bioJogical and open space easement affects land containing Sensitive Bio]ogical Resources or other lands that have been accepted as mitigation, and 5. Uses consistent with those listed inSection 17.35.100.A.1-2 of this Chapter. B. A pubJic hearing shan be held to consider a formal, written request directed to the City by any person requesting the re]ease of a biological and open space easement recorded pursuant to this Chapter. A re]ease of any biological and open space easement recorded pursuant to this Chapter shall be recorded by the City onJy when it is determined by the City that restriction of . the property is no longer necessary to achieve the land use goals of the City. A detennination by the City to reJease said easement may be made only with the written concurrence of the U.S. Fish and WiJdlife Service and the CaJifornia Department of Fish and Game. 17.~5.130 Deviation from Habitat Loss and Incidental Tal>e Regulations A. When a deviat]on is requested from this Chapter because the applicant contends that strict application of this Chapter would result in denia! of all economical1y viable use, the HUT Permit shall include a determination of economicany 'viable Use. Where a deviation is requested from this Chapter, it may be approved or conditiona ]y approved only if the decision-maker makes al1 of the following supplementaJ findings in addition to the applicable findings in Section 17.35.080 of this Chapter: J. Based On the economic information provided by the appJicant, as well as any other relevant evidence, each use provided for in this Chapter wouJd not provide any economically viable use of the applicant's property; 2. The use proposed by the applicant is consistent with the applicable zoning; 4-34 DRAFT 3. The use and project design, siting, and size are the minimum necessary to provide the applicant with an economicaHy viable use of the Project Area; and 4. The development proposal is the least enviroIU11entalJy damaging alternative and is consistent with aH provisions of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as adopted on , and as may be amended iTom time to time and this Chapter, with the exception of the provisions for which the deviation is requested. B. The process for a deviation shaH be in accordance with Section 17.35.070 of this Chapter. 17.35.140 Emergencies Whenever development activity within Sensitive Biological Resources, as identified in the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, is deemed necessary by order of the City Manager to protect the public health or safety, the City Manager may authorize, without a public hearing, the minimum amount of impact necessary t6 protect the public health or safety, subject to the folIowing: A. If the emergency work involves only temporary impacts to. Sensitive Biological Resources, a HLIT Permit is not required, provided the Sensitive Biological Resources are restored to their natural state in accordance with a revegetation plan approved by the Director of Planning and Building, or hislher designee. The revegetation plan shaH be submitted to the City within 60 days of completion of the emergency work. B. If the emergency work results in permanent impacts to Sensitive Biologica] Resources, a subsequent HLIT Permit is required in accordance with aH regu]ations of this Chapter. The application for the HUT Permit shaH be submitted within 60 days of completion of the emergency work. 17.35.150 City Responsibility to Publish Guidelines The City Manager is authorized to promulgate and publish MSCP Implementation. Guidelines and other support documents as necessary to implement this Chapter. These administrative guidelines shaH serve as baseline standards for processing SPA Plans, Design Review applications, conditional use pennits, variances,. parcel maps, tentati~e maps, Land Development Pennits or Clearing and Grubbing Pennits pursuant 10 thIs Chapter. Any revisions to the MSCP Implementation Guidelines wiH require review and approval by the City Manager. 17.35.160 Violations and Remedies The provisions of this Chapter shaH be enforced pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 1.20 through 1.41 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 17.35.170 ConDicts Except for exempt projects, if a conflict occurs between this Chapter and Chapter 15.04 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the stricter regulation shaH apply. 4-35 DRAFT 17.35.180 Local Coastal Program Prior to issuance of an HLIT Permit for any project located within the Chula Vista Local Coastal Plan (LCP) area, the applicant shall obtain a detemrination of project consistency with the Chula Vista LCP ITorn the Director of Planning and Building. If the project cannot be deemed consistent with the LCP, an LCP amendment must be completed prior to issuance of the HLIT Permit. Section II. Adoption of this ordinance (Second Reading) is conditioned upon the issuance of Take Authorizations ITom the USFWS and CDFG to the City of Chula Vista has occurred in a form acceptable to the City. .-- -..-. Section III. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day ITom and after the adoption of the ordinance (Second Reading) which shall OCC\lT as stated above. Presented by Approved as to form by James D. Sandoval Planning and Building Director o-~ Ann Moore City Attorney J:Anom~y\OrdÎnance\HLlT.l doc 4-36 DRAFT p...'OO'?í.\O"A ORDINANCE NO. D\"AG p..."A'O ,,\-.\\) R't.¡>¡ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA ~\pft., AMENDING TiTlE 15, CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO EXCAVATION, GRADING AND FILLS AS IT RELATES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MSCP SUBAREA PLAN WHEREAS, the Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subregional Plan was developed as a comprehensive, long-tenn habitat conservation plan which addressed multiple species and the preservation of natural habitat within a 900 square mile study area in south San Diego County; and WHEREAS, MSCP Subregional Plan contempJated that local jurisdictions, including the City of Chula Vista ("City"), would participate in the MSCP Subregional Plan and seek federal and state take authorization by adopting a subarea plan consistent with the conservation strategies contained in the MSCP Subregional Plan; and WHEREAS, the City prepared and submitted a Draft MSCP Subarea Plan to the U.S. Fish and Wi1dlife Service and the City of San Diego in August, 1996, for inclusion in the Draft MSCP Subregional Plan and for consideration by the lead agencies in their environmental review of the Draft MSCP Subregional Plan; and . WHEREAS, as lead agencies for the Multiple Species Conservation Program ("MSCP") Subregional Plan, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Diego prepared and certified a Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental lmpact Statement for the Issuance of Take Authorizations for Threatened and Endangered Species due to urban growth within the Multiple Species Conservation Program ("MSCP") planning area ("Final E1RÆIS") in January, 1997 and adopted the Final MSCP Subregional Plan in August, 1998; and WHEREAS, as a responsib1e agency, the City of Chula Vista ("City") participated in the preparation of the Final EIRÆIS through consultation and comment; and WHEREAS, after the adoption of the MSCP Subregional Plan, the City, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game (hereinafter referred to as the "Wildlife Agencies") further negotiated a number of aspects of the 1996 Draft Subarea Plan, including but not 1imited to, the refinement of the conditions of coverage for covered projects, the type and extent of protection for narrow endemic species, the amount and type of public faciEties and inrrastructure to be allowed in the Preserve, and an acceptable configuration for the university sité adjacent to the Preserve; and WHEREAS, following a review by the Wildlife Agencies and public comment period, the City issued a draft MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11, 2000, and a Draft lmplementing Agreement dated September 20, 2000, to the Wildlife Agencies and the general public; and WHEREAS, on September 22, 2000, the City submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service an application for a Section 1 O(a)(1 )(B) permit for incidental take pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game an application for a take authorization permit pursuant to Section 2835 of the California Endangered Species Act, with both applications 4-37 DRAFT including the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11, 2000, and a Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20,2000; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council set the time and place for a joint hearing on said project 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on October 17, 2000, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, approval of the MSCP Subregional Plan and adoption of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11, 2000 were discretionary actions covered by the Final EIRJEIS, and therefore, as a responsible agency, the City had a more limited role than does a lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA"); and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Addendum dated September II, 2000, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164 to fulfiIl the City's obligations as a responsible agency; and WHEREAS, the City issued Findings of Fact for each of the significant environmental effects of implementing the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September II, 2000, in conformance with the CEQA and the CEQA "Guidelines, which enabled the City to make fuIl use of the Final EIRIEIS and the Addendum (CEQA Guidelines, sections 15101, 15093 and 15096, subd. (h)); and WHEREAS, the City considered the Final EIR/EIS prepared by the lead agency together with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11, 2000 and the Draft Implementing Agreement dated September 20, 2000, and reached its own conclusion about whether and how to approve the MSCP Subregional Plan and the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan dated September 11,2000; and WHEREAS, the City also prepared an MSCP Mitigation and Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program For Biological Resources dated October ]2, 2000, in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6, subd. (a)(l); and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the Fina] EIR/EIS prepared and certified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of San Diego in January, 1997, the Addendum to the Final EIRfErS (October 2000), the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the MSCP Mitigation and Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program for Biological Resources (October 2000) and found that the documents were prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and also found that the Final EIRJEIS (January 1997) and Addendum to the Final EIR/EIS adequately addressed the environmental impacts of the MSCP Subregional Plan and the Draft Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September I 1,2000; and WHEREAS, on October 17, 2000, the City Council approved the MSCP Subregional Plan dated August, 1998, as the framework plan for the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan; conditionaIly adopted the MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 1 J, 2000, 4-38 DRAFT and the Mitigation and Implementing Agreement Monitoring Program for Biological Resources dated October, 2000; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the City Council conditional approval on October 17, 2000, the City decided to make further changes to the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated September 11, 2000, including but not limited to additional information not previously available about the Quino checkerspot butterfly, a federally listed endangered species. The City believed it was prudent to add coverage for the Quino checkerspot butterfly into the draft MSCP Subarea Plan prior to the Subarea Plan and associated imp]ementing documents being published in the Federal Register; and WHEREAS, since October 2000, changes to the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan have been made as necessary to complete a final Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, including 1) measures to provide coverage for the Quino checkerspot butterfly; 2) the preparation of three implementing ordinances; 3) final revisions to the Implementing Agreement, 4) conservation of additional lands not previously anticipated to be preserved; and 4) other revisions to address unresolved issues including, but not limited to, changed circumstances, wetlands, and funding for long term management; and WHEREAS, the City determined that as part of the implementation of the MSCP Subarea Plan, the City of Chula Vista General Plan would be amended to incorporate the MSCP Subarea Plan as a separate element of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Supplemental Environmenta] Impact Report and Environmental Assessment (No. 03-01) to address all of the changes to the revised final Draft MSCP Subarea Plan; and WHEREAS, on October 8, 2002, the City sUbmitted a revised application to the Wildlife Agencies for a Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for incidental take pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game an application for a take authorization permit pursuant to Section 2835 of the California Endangered Species Act, with all of the required application materials including the Draft Supplemental EIR and EA, the revised Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, the revised Draft Implementing Agreement, and Draft Implementing Ordinances (referred to herein collectively as "implementing documents"); and . .WHEREAS, on October 10, 2002 a Federal Register notice was published commencing a 60-day public comment period on the Incidental Take Applications, Public Review Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated October 2002, implemënting documents and associated environmental documents. A public notice was also published on October] 1, 2002 announcing the availability of the Draft SEIR and EA to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, public review of the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan and imp]ementing documents closed on December 9, 2002. The City received 12 letters of comment ITom the public and has prepared responses to the comments and made changes to the Public Review Draft MSCP Subarea Plan, dated October 2002 and implementing documents, and has prepared a final City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003, Draft lmplementing Agreement, dated February 2003; and final draft implementing ordinances; and 4-39 DRAFT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a public hearing on said project and notice of said hearing, together with its pUrpose, was gÍven by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on April 23, 2003 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the PlalUJing Commission; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recOmmended to the City Council the approval of the MSCP Subarea Plan and associated implementing documents; and WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a public hearing on said project and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was gÍven by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on May 13, 2003 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council; and WHEREAS, the conditional adoption of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003 and associated implementing ordiQances wilJ not constitute a binding set of obligations on any public or private entity within the City of Chula Vista unless and until I) the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issues a bioJogical opinion which affinns and is consistent with the conservation strategies in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003 and the Draft Implementing Agreement, dated February 2003, 2) take pennits and its conditions are issued by both Wildlife Agencies that are consistent with the ChuIa Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, dated February 2003, and Draft Implementing Agreement, dated February 2003, and 3) the City and Wildlife Agencies approves and executes the Implementing Agreement sUbstantially in the fonn of the Implementing Agreement, dated February 2003; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Supplemental EIR and EA at its hearing of May 13, 2003 and adopted the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan (dated February 2003) with said conditions; and . WHEREAS, implementation of the MSCP Subarea Plan adoption of three Mi;>CP Implementing Ordinances, including the Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Ordinance, the Otay Ranch Grazing Ordinance and revisions to the Excavation, Grading and Fills Ordinance. These ordinances will only take effect after issuance of the take pennits and the necess<lry timelines for ordinances pursuant to the City Charter have passed. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as fo]]ows: Section L That Chapter ]5.04 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code be and the,same is hereby amended to read as fo]]ows: EXCA VA nON, GRADING, CLEARlNG, GRUBBING AND Fll.LS' Sections: ] 5.04.005 Purpose and intent of provisions. 15.04.0] 0 Definitions. 4-40 15.04.015 15.04.017 15.04.020 15.04.025 15.04.030 15.04.035 15.04.040 15.04.045 15.04.050 15.04.055 15.04.060 15.04.065 15.04.070 15.04.075 15.04.080 15.04.085 15.04.090 15.Q4.095 15.04.100 15.04.105 15.04.110 15.04.115 15.04.120 15.04.125 15.04.130 15.04.135 15.04.140 15.04.145 15.04.150 15.04.155 15.04.160 15.Q4.165 15.04.170 15.04.175 15.04.180 15.04.185 15.04.190 15.04.195 15.04.200 15.04.205 15.04.210 15.04.215 15.04.220 15.04.225 15.04.230 DRAFT Permit required for all land development work and soil investigations. Other Required Permits. Compliance with conditions and specifications required-Deviations from standards permitted when. Provisions not to affect other code requirements. Facilities within public rights-of-way-Assignment of costs. Commencement and completion of work-Extension oftirhe. Slopes-Design requirements generally. Building pads-Design requirements. Embankment requirements-SoiI engineer may be required. Expansive soil grading requirements. Landscaping and irrigation system. Slopes-Tops and toes to be rounded. SJopes-BJending into exisUng terrain. Slopes-Horizontal slope rounding. Preservation of existing monuments. Work in conjunction with subdivision of property-Requirements generally. Work in conjunction with subdivision of property-Standard land deveJopment permit-Req~irements. Work in conjunction with subdivision of property-Contract for completion of i mprovemen ts-Req uireme nts- Bonds. Building construction-Land development permit required- Prerequisite to building permit. Damaged or disused public improvements-Notification- Corrective action required. Public to be protected from hazards during construction-Fences and barricades required when. Safety precautions. Fence specifications-Modification permitted when. Noncompliance. Modification of approved plans. Responsibility of permittee-Compliance with plans and requirements. Completion of work· Final reports. Notification of completiôn. Exemptions from applicability designated. Contractor-Qualifications required. Work to be performed by licensed contractor. Inspection of land development work -Responsibility therefore. Transfer of responsibility for approval. Plans and reports to be prepared by engineers. Private contract performance bond-Required when-Issuance conditions generally. Private contract performance bond-Conditions-Notice of default-Con tents-Effect. Private contr2ct pe:rformance bond~Prìncìp2] or surety liable for cost of completing work when. Private contract performance bond-Li~bility of City for performance of certain work. Private contract performance bond-Cash deposit accepted in lieu when-Default correction procedure. Private contract performance bond-Not required when. Private contract performance bond-Required from certain contractors when-Exception. Private contract performance bond-Conditions-Compliance with certain terms and provisions required. Private contract performance bond-Method of estimating amount-Schedule. Release of bonds/security. . City Engineer-Enforcement responsibiJity and permit issuance authority. 4-41 15.04.235 15.04.240 15.04.245 15.04.250 15.04.255 15.04.260 15.04.265 15.04.270 15.04.275 15.04.280 15.04.285 15.D4.290 15.04.295 15.04305 15.04310 15.04315 15.04.320 15.04325 15.04326 DRAFT City Engineer-Powers and duties generalJy. City Engineer-Authority to determine applicable fees. City Engineer-Duty to consider certain recommendations and deny certain applications. City Engineer-Grounds for canceJling permit or amending plans. Appeals-Authorized when-Determination authority. Appeals-Time limit for filing-Form. Permits-Application-Procedure generally-Detail plan required. Permits-Application-Detail plans and specifications required. Pernùts-!ssuance-Prerequisites and contents: Investigations authorized and required when-Fee. Agreement required for uncontrolled embankments-Additional specificafions. Fees·Collection-Method of estimation- Verification-Payment required-Exemptions. Fees-Schedule for computation. Fees-To be doubled in certain cases-Effecf of imposition. Violations-Declared unlawful and public nuisance-Ab~tement authority. Abatement of dangerous conditions. Emergency abatement by City-Liability for costs. Costs of abatement-Special assessment procedure-Statutory authority. Conflicts. 15.04.005 Purpose and intent of provisions. The purpose afthis chapter is to establish minimum requirements for ]and development work to provide for the issuance of permits and for the enforcement of the requirements. These provisions are supplementary and additional to the subdivision and zoning regulations of this code and shaH be read and construed as an integral part of said regulations and the land· development patterns and controls established thereby. It is the intent of the City Council to protect life and property and promote the general welfare; enhance and improve the physical environment of the community; and preserve. subject to economic feasibility. the natural scenic character of the: city. In administering these provisions, the following goals should be respected: A. Ensuring that future development ofIands, particularly in the hilly areas of the city, occurs in the manner. most compatible wÎth surrounding areas and so as to have the least adverse effect upon other persons or lands, or upon the general public; B. Ensuring that soil will not be stripped and removed from lands in the more scenic parts of the city, leaving the same baITe~ unsightly, Wlproductive, and subject to erosion and the hazards of subsidence and faulty drainage; c. Encouraging the planning, 'design and deveJopment of bui]dìng sitcs in such fashion as to provicle thc maximum in safcîy and human enjoymcnt, whiJe adClptmg dt;vclopment to and taking advantage of the best use of tbe natural terrain; D. Encouraging and directing special attention toward· the retaining, insofar as practical. the natural planting and a maximum number of existing trees. E. Ensuring any impact to sensitive biological resources, as dermed by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, is consistent with the goals and.pqlicies of the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. (Ord. 1797 . ] (part), 1978). 15.04.010 Definitions. 4-42 DRAFT The following words and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall be construed as defined in this section: "Appurtenant Structures' means man-made structures related to and necessitated by the proposed grading and includes paved drainage ditches, inlet structures, lined channels, culverts, outlet structures and retaining walls. "Building pad" means that portion of an embankment and/or excavation contained within an area bounded by a . line five feet outside the foundation footing. "Building site" means that portion of an embankment and/or excavation containing the building pad(s) and lying within an area bounded by the top of slopes and/or toe of slopes within the lot or parcel. "Certify" or "certification" means a signed written statement that the specific inspection and tests which we.re required have been perfonned and that the works comply wjth the applicable requirements of this chapter, the plans, and the permil "Clearing" means the cuning of natural vegetation by any means, without disturbance to the soil and root system. "Clearing and Grubbing Penn it" means a permit issued pursuant to this chapter that allows cJearing and grubbing that is not in associa60n wÜh other Land Development Work. "Compaction" means densification of a soB or rock fin by mechanical or other acceptable procedures. "Contractor" means a contractor licensed by the state to do work covered by this.chapter. A contractor may be authorized to act for a property owner in doing such work. "Contract, private" means an agreement between a property O\VI1er and a quaJified contractor to do land deveJoprnent work. "Embankment" or "fiIl" means any act by which earth, sand, gravel, rock or any other material is deposited, placed, pushed, dumped, pulled, transported or moved to a new location and the condition resulting therefrom. "Embankment, uncontroUed" means any embankment constructed as land development on which no soil testing was perfonned or no compaction reports or other soB reports were prepared or submitted. "Engineer, private" means a civil engineer registered by the state. A private engineer may be authorized to act for a property ovroer in doing work covered by this chapter. "Engineering Geologist" means a certified engineering geologist, registered by the state, who is engaged in the practice of applying geological principles and data to engÎ1¡cering problems dealing \vith D2tllIally occurring róck and soils for the purpose of assuring that geological factors are recognized and adequately interpreted in engineering practice. "Erosion" means the process by which the ground surface is worn away by the action of water or wind. "Excavation or cut" means any earth, sand, gravel, rock or any similar material which is cut into, dug, quanied, uncovered, removed, displaced, reJocated or bul1dozed by man, and the conditions resuJti.ng therefrom. "Grade" means the elevation and cross-sections established for the fInished surface. An grades shan be based upon the official datum of the city. 4-43 DRAFT "Grading" means any excavating or filling 'or combination thereof and shall inc1lJde Ibo land in its excavated or filled conditions. "Grubbing" means the removal of natural ve£etation bv any means including removal of tho root system. "Land development pemùt" moans a pen:rnt, issued pursuant to this chaptor, to conduct Land Development Wark.. "Land Development Wark" means making of excavations and embankments on private property and the construction of slopes, drainage structures, fences and other facilities incidental thc:reto, where it is necessary to safeguard life, limb, health., proporty and plJblic wolfare hy reguJatmg and controlling the dosign, construction and quality of materials. Land development work also includes other associated grading, and cJearing and/or grubbing conducted in preparation for such dovelopmont "Landscape architect" means a landscape architect. registered by the state, who performs professional work in physical land planning and integnited land development, incJuding the design ofJandscape planting programs. "Landscape maDlJal" means the current "City ofChlJla Vista Landscape Manual" approvod by resolution of the City Council. "Minor slope" means a slope four feet or less in vertical dimension in either cut or fill, betvreen single family Jots and not parallel to any roadway. "Natural terrain" means the origina] contour of a site prior to any grading. "Permittee" means any person to whom a permit is issued pursuant to this chapter. "Property owner" means the o\Vner, subdivider or developer of real property which will be benefited by the proposed land development work. "Property, public" means property owned in fee by the City, or dedicated for pubhc use. "Pub]ic improvement" means publicly owned construction~ struchIres or facilities in the public right-of-way designed for the public use, safety or general welfare. "Public rights-of-way" means public easements or dedications for streets. alleys and/or other use. "Rough grading" is the condition where the ground surface approximately conforms to the design grade, generally within 0.5 feet "Slope" means the inclined exposed surfac.e ofa fiB. excavation or natural terrain. "Slope, natura]" means the predominant s]ope or slopes ofIand in its original condition prior to any grading. "Soil engineer" means a civil engineer registered by the state who submits evidence to the satisfaction of the Çity Engineer that: L He is engagod in the practico of civiJ engineering and spends a majority of his time in the field of app1ied soil mechanics· and foundations engineering; 2. He has at least four years of responsible practical experience in tho field ofapphed soil mechanics; 3. He is qualified to make the investigations and detenninations, render the reports an~ opinions and perform the duties of a soil engineer as required by this chapter. AJJ persons meeting the qlJaIifications set forth above shaJJ be recognized by the City Engineer as qualified to perform soil ongineering under the provisions of this chapter. 4-44 DRAFT '-', "Soil, expansive" means any soil which swens more than three percent wben prepared and. tested by a metbod approved by the Ci ty Engineer. "Subdivider" means a person, fIrm, corporation, partnership or association who causes Jand to be divided into one Dr more subdivisions for himself or others as defined by those sections of the Government Code known as the Subdivision Map Act. (Ord.2128 .1 (part), 1985; Ord. 1877 .1,1979; Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.015 Permit required for ail land development work and soil investigations. No person, either as property O\VD.cr, contractor, private engineer or otbeIVlise. shan do or shall cause to be done any land development work witbout flIst having obtained ejtber a land development permit or clearing and grubbing permit to do such work and having held a pre-grading or pre-clearing meeting if required by the City Engineer, except as provided in Section 15.04.] 50 of this Chapter. Soil investigations by a soils engineer or engineering geologist which involves trenching or scarifying of the natural terrain shall require a permit. A special investigation fee shall be paid prior to issuance of such permit. (Ord. ] 797 .] (part), ] 978). 15.04.0] 7 Other Required Permits Prior to the City's issuance of a land development permit or clearing and grubbing permit, the applicant shan show compliance with a Habitat Loss and ]ncidental Take (HUT) Permit issued p\JIsuant to Chapter 17.35 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, for areas that contain sensitive biological resources, .as defmed by Section] 7.35.030 of the Chula Vista Mun.icipal Code, and are within: 1) development areas outside of Covered Projects, as defmed by Section 17.35.030 of the Chul. Vista Municipal Code; 2) 75%-100% Conservation Areas, as defIned by Section 17.35.030 of the ChuJa Vista Municipal Code; or . 3) 100% Conservation Areas, as defIned by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Mun.icipal Code. Prior to the City's issuance of a land development permit or clearing and grubbing pennit for areas that. contain sensitive biological resources, as defined by Section 17.35,030 of the Chub Vista Murucipal Code. and are within the development areas of Covered Projects, as defilled by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the applicant shall show compJiance with all applicable proyjsions of previous project entitJements issued by the Cit)' and with any applicable conditions of coverage listed in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, as determined by the Director of Planning and Building or designee. Prior to the City's issuance of a land development permit or clearing and grubbing permit for areas that will resuJt in impacts to wetlands or to listed non-covered species, as defmed by Section 17.35.030 of tbe Chula Vista Mtu:Ucipal Code, the applicant shall obtain, and show compliance witb, all applicabJe federal and/or state permits. 15.04.020 Compliance with conditions and specificatio:ps required-Deviations from standards permitted when. Excopt as herein provided, all land development work shall be done in accordance with the conditions of the required permit, and shall conform to the approved plans, standard drawings, specifIcations, landscape manual, subdivision manual, and general conditions as may be determined by tbe City Engineer to be 4-45 DRAFT applicable to the work. Such documents are on file in the office of the City Engineèr and shall be kept for public distnòution in accordance with fee schedules in said office. In connection with land development work, deviations fj-om the requirements of these standards may be permitted by the City Engineer based upon written reports and recommendations by qualified and recognized authorities subject to reyjew by the City. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). 15.04.025 Provisions not to affect other code requirements. TIlls chapter shall not affect the requirements of any other.chapter of tllls code requiring permits, fees or other charges, including those for sewer and services, or affect any proyjs;ons concerning the granting of fj-ancruses. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). 15.04.030 Facilities within puhlic rights-of-way-Assignment of costs. The following provisions of tllls section shall apply unJess provision is made by an agyeement pursuant to Sections 15.04.085 through 15.04.095 oftllls chapter: A. Tbe property owner shall pay the City for all the cost of placing, repairing, replacing or maintaining a city-owned facility witrun a public right-of-way when the City's facility has been damaged Or has failed as a result of the construction or existence of the owner's land development work during the process of such work. B_ The costs of placing, replacing 'Or maintaining the city-o\V11ed facility shan include the cost of obtaining a necessary alternate easement. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.035 Commencement and completion of work-Extension of time. All land development work shall be executed in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and the terms of the permit issued by the City Engineer. Once commenced, work shall be carried out diligently until completed. UnJess otherwise specified upon the permit, all work shall be completed within one hundred eighty days ÍÌom the date of issuance of the permit. The City Engineer may grant one extension of time for the completion of the work. Such extension shall not exceed the original length of time designated on the permit. (Ord. 1797 .] (part), 1978). 15.04.040 Slopes-Design requirements generally. The inclination of each cut or fiJI surface resulÜng in a slope shall not be steeper than two horizontal to one vertical except for IJ?inor slopes as herein defmed. AIl constructed rninor slopes shaIl be designed for proper stability considering both geological and soil properties. A minor slope may be constructed no steeper than one and one-half horizontal to one vertical (1.5: I) contingent upon: A. Submission of reports by both a soils engineer and a certified engineering geologist containing the results of surface and subsurface exploration and analysis. These results should be sufficient for the soils engineer and engineering geologist to certify that in their professional opinion the underlying bedrock and soil Supporting the slope have strength characteristics sufficient to provide a stable slope and wj]j not pose a danger to persons or property, and 4-46 DRAFT B. The installation of an approved spocial slopo plaDting program and irrigatioD system. (Ord.2128 .2, ]985; Ord. ]797 .1 (part), 1978). 15.04.045 . Building pads-Design requirements. All bui]dmg pads and building sites shall dram to an approvod dramage facility unless othorwise approved by the City Engineor. (Ord. ] 877 . 2 (part), 1979; Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). 15.04.050 Embankment requirements - Soil engineer may be required. A Unless otherwise specified on the pemrit., all embankment for Jand development work shall be compacted m conformance with the provisions of the standard specifications. The permit may require that an engineering geologist andlor soils engineer, as appropriate, be responsible for the inspection and testmg of the embankment wörk· and mspection of excavations. Thê soils engineer and engmeering geologist, if one or both are required by the permit, shall file with the City Engineer reports as required by Sections 15.04.] 40 and] 5.04.270B. B. Where, in the opinion of the City Engineer, the construction of an uncontrolled embankment would not be contrary to the public interest or welfare, a permit for such land development work may be issued in accordance with Section 15.04.285. Plans for uncontrolled embankment shall be complete in all respects except for soil analysis and compaction requirements. Uncontrolled embankment slopes shall not be steeper than three horizontal to one vertical. (Ord. 1877 .2 (part), ]979; Ord. 1797 . I (part), ]978). 15.04.055 Expansive soH grading requirements. If, during the land development work, expansive soil is found within two feet in cut or three feet in fin of the finished grade of any area intended or designed as the location for a buildmg, the permittee shall cause such expansive soil to be removed from such building area to a minimum depth of two feet in cut or three feet. in fill and replaced with non-expansive soil properly compacted; provided, however. the City Engineer may, upon receipt of a report by a soils engineer certifYing that he has investigated the property and recommending a design or footings or floor slab or other procedure that in his opinion will alleviate any problem created by such expansive soil, wai~e the requirement that such expansive soil be removed and replaced with non-expansÍve soil. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). ]5.04.060 Landscaping and irrigation system. AU cut and fill slopes shall be planted and irrigated in accordance with an approved plan. Said plan shall be prepared in accordance with the city landscape manual and shall be approved by the City Landscape Architect., and the Director of Planning and Building or designee, as necessary. (Ord 2678 .2, J 996; Ord 2128 .3,1985; Ord 1797 .1 (part), ]978). 15.04.065 Slopes-Tops and toes to be rounded. The tops and toes of all major slopes in public view shall be rounded in accordance with the city standard drawings. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978): 4-47 DRAFT 15.04.070 Slòpes-Blending into existing'terrain. All man-made slopes shall be blended into eJÙsting terrain to produce a natural-appearing transition ftom the face of man-made slopes into natural ground. 'This blending shall be accomplished in accordance with City of Chula Vista Standard Drawings. Undulating top and toe of slopes and variable slope ratios should be used to achieve natural-appearing slopes. (Oni 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.075 Slopes-Horizontal slope rounding. Rounding shall be accomplished in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Standard Drawings. (Ord. 1797 , I (part), 1978). 15.04.080 Preservation of existing monuments. All existing survey monuments shall be shown on the grading plan. Evidence indicating that arrangements have been made for the preservation and/or relocation of existing monuments shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of a land development permÜ. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978.) 15.04.085 Work in conjunction with subdivision of property-Requirements generally. A subdivider of land required to do land development work as t~e result or condition of the approvaJ of the tentative map shall perfonn such work under one of the fOllowing procedures, as set forth in Sections 15.04.090 and 15.04.095. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978; Ord. 1596 . I (part), 1974; Ord, 1455 .1 (part), 1973; prior code. 29.2.6 (part)). 15.04.090 Work in conjunction with subdivision of property-Standard !and development permit-Requirements. Should the subdivider desire to do certain land déVeJopment work prior to entering into contract with the City to install and complete all subdivision and land development work, he may make app1ication to do so under a standard land development pennit or clearing and grubbing pennir, if the land development work is limited to clearing and grubbing oruy. 'This application shall be accompanied by detailed plans and specifications based Upon the approved tentative map and in conformity with the provisions of Sections 15.04.017 and 15.04,040 through 15.04.075 of this chapter. A schedule and estimate based upon such plans and specifications shalI accompany the application. (Ord, 1797 .1 (part), 1978). 15.04.095 Work in conjunction with subdivision of property-Contract for completion of ì I np rove ITl C II t s-· Reg ui remen ts- Bonds. A. Should the subdivider desire to do certain land development work in conjunction and concurrently with instaIJation and construction of required public improvements, he may enter into a contract with the City to make, instaIJ and complete aIJ improvements and land developments in accordance with approved plans and specifications. B. Prior to any construction of improvements and/or land development work, the subdivider shaIJ have complied with and perfom1ed the foIJowing requirements: I. Subdivider shall file with the City Clerk detailed plans and specifications (or statement that work wiIJ be accomplished in accordance with standards and specifications of the city) approved by the City Engineer for alI public improvements and land development together with a detailed cost 4-48 DRAFT estimate approved by the City Engineer and an estimate of time reasonably necessary to complete the same. 2. Subdivider shall enter into a conttact with the City to make, instan and complete withiD the time fixed by the City Engin~r but in no case more than two years from the date of execution of said contract, all improvements and land development in accordance with the approved plans, and shan callse to be filed with the City Clerk a faithful performance bond payable to the City which shan insure the perfonnance of the contract and the completion of the improvements and land development work. The sllbdivider shan additionally file with the City Clerk a labor and material bond to inure to the benefit of those persons entitled to the protection of Part III, Title IV, Chapter U of the Code of Civil Procedure. A cash deposit or letter of credit may be submitted in lieu of bonds herein before descnòed. Bonds and other forms of guarantee shan be in fun conformity with the requirements for subdivision guarantees as set forth in the subdivision ordinance codìfied at Title] 8 of this code. 3. The bond or other guarantee shan be based on the City Engineer's estimate of the cost of the work and in accordance with the following schedule: a. Faithful perfonnance bond: Public improvements. . . . . . . . . . . .50% of cost estimate~ Land development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50% of cost estimate; b. Labor and material bond: Public improvements. . . . . . . . . . . . 500/0 of cost estimate, Land development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50% of cost estimate. (Ord. 1797 . ] (part), ] 978). 15.04.100 Building construction-Land development permit required-Prerequisite to building permit. A. An owner of land desiring to do land development work incidental to and in connection with the construction of a building or structure shall present an application and obtain a land deve]opment pennit or clearing and grubbing pennit. The City Engineer may require an on-site field inspection of the rough grading phase of the work between representatives of the City's Engineering, Planning and Building Departments and the pennittee. civil engineer. soils engineer. biologist. as defmed by Section 17.35.030 of the ChuIa Vista Municipal Code, and engineering geologist, as appropriate. before the issuance of a building pennit: The pennittee shall request a field inspection of the rough grading phase, if required, five working days prior to the inspection. The rough grading phase of the land development" work described on fonn PW-E-]06B shall be completed prior to the issuance of a building pennit except as provided below. The City may suspend any building pen'nit where it is found that land development work is being done or has been done without a land development pennit or clearing and grubbing permit untiJ a land development perrn:it or clearing and grubbing permit is issued. The city may not certify .to the completion of the building where land development work has been done until a land development pennit is obtained and certified as complete. . B. Notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in Subsection A, walls which are designed and constructed to retain earth and are also integral portions of buildings may be constructed under building pennits concurrently with land development work within the project site. (Ord. 2128 .4,1985; Ord. ]877 .2 (part), 1979; Ord. ]797 .1 (part), 1978). ]5.04.105 Damaged or disused public improvements-Notification-Corrective action required. 4-49 DRAFT '-". The City Engineer shan notifY the ·property owner of such damage or failure as set forth in Section 15.04.030. The City may withhold certification of the completion ofa building or other permitted work where a notice has been issued. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (pan), 1978). 15.04.110 Public to be protected from hazards during construction-Fences and barricades reqnired when. During the land development work. the contractor and owner shall take all necessary measures to eliminate any hazard resulting from the work to the public in its nonnal use of public property or right-of-way. Any fences or barricades instaned shall be substantiany constructed and shall be properly maintained as long as the hazard resulting ÍÌom the work exists. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.115 Safety precautions. If at any stage of the work the City Engineer deterrnines that further land development work as authorized is likely to endanger any public or private property or result in the deposition of debris on any public way or interfere with any existing drainage course, the City Engineer may require, as a condition to allowing the work to be continued, that such reasonable safety precautions be taken as he considers advisable to avoid such likelihood of danger. The permittee will he responsible for removing any silt and debris, deposited upon adjacent and downstream public or private property, resulting fi:om his grading operations. Silt and debris shan be removed and damage to adjacent and downstream property repaired, as directed by the City Engineer. Erosion and siltation control may require temporary or permanent siltation basins, energy dissipators, or other measures as field conditions warrant, whether or not slJch measures are a part of approved pJans. (Ord. 1877 .2 (part), 1979; Ord. 1797 .1 (part), 1978). ]5.04.120 Fence specifications-Modification perrnitt-e~ when. A. Where a slope is created adjacent to a public right-of-way·or other publicly used property, and the top of slope is within ten feet of the property line and the height of the slope is three feet or greater and steeper than 4:1, a forty-eight inch high fence shan be erected between property line and the top of slope. The design of said fence shall be approved by the City Engineer. Publicly used property is that property used &equently by persons other than the residents. B. The City Engineer may modifY or delete the above requirements where it is evident that the rand development work will present no hazard to the adjacent property or public right-of-way. (Ord. ] 797 . 1 (part), 1978). 15.04.125 NoncompJi:ancc. A. If, in the course of fullining his responsibility under th.is chapter, the private engineer, soils engineer or biologist, as defined in Section] 7.35.030 of the Chula Vista Murucipal Code, fmds that the work is not being done in substantial confonnance with this chapter or the plans approved by the City Engineer or in accordance with accepted practices, be shall immediately notifY the permittee, the person in charge of the land development work, and the City Engineer, in writing, on the nonconformity and of the corrective measures which should be taken. B. In the eVent the work does not conform to the permit or the plans or specifications or any instructions of the City Engineer, notice to comply shaJJ be given in writing by the City Engineer to the permittee. As soon as practical after a notice to comply is given, the permittee Or his contractor shaH begin to make the corrections. 4-50 DRAFT C. If the City Engineer fmds any existing conditions not as stated in the application, land development pemút, cJearing and grubbing permit, or approved plans, be may refuse to approve work Ulltil approval is obtained for a revised grading or clearing and grubbing plan wmch will conform to the existing conditions. .(Ord. 1797 .1 (part), 1978). 15.04.130 Modification of approved plans. A. Modifications of the approved grading or cJearing and grubbing plan must be in. writing and be approved by the City Engineer and/or his designated representative. AJJ necessary soils and geological reports shaH be submitted wÜh any substantial proposal to modify the approved grading plan. B. No land development work in connection with any proposed modifications shaJJ be pemútted without the approval of.the City Engineer and/or"his designated representative. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). 15.04.135 Responsibility of permittee-Compliance with plans and requirements. AJJ permits issued hereunder shaJJ be presumed to include the provision that the pemúttee, his agent, contractors and employees. shall carry out the propose-d work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and in compljance with all the requirements of the permit and this chapter. The civil engineer shaH file a report as specified in Section I5.04.J40. (Ord. 1797 .1 (part), 1978). 15.04.140 Completion of work-Final reports. Upon completion of the work the foJJowing reports shaJJ be filed with the City Engineer unless waived by him: A. A written statement by the private engineer that aJJland development work and/or associated drainage facilities have been compJeted in conformance with Sections 15.04.165 and 15.04.225. B. An as-buiJt plan of the completed work prepared by a civil engineer. C. A final as-built soi] engineer's report which shan iTIcJude a written statement that inspections and tests were made during the grading, and that in his opinion all embankments and excavations are in accordance vrith the provisions of this chapter and the permit and are acceptable for their intended use. SoiJ bearing capacity (except where the City Engineer detennines such is inapplicable), sum.maries of field and laboratory tests and locations of tests if not previously submitted, and the limits of compacted fin on an "as-bui1t" plan shan be included in the report. The report shall include reference to the presence of any expansive soils or other soil problems wmch, if not corrected, would lead to structural defects in buildings constructed on the site. If such report discloses the presence of such expansive soiJs or such other soil problems, it shan incJude recommended corrective action designed to prevent structural damage to each building proposed to be constructed upon the site. The final "as-bui1t" report shall also contain a seepage: statement or study as appropriate. D. A fmal "as-built" engineering geology report by an engineering geologist based ·on the "as-built" plan including specific approval of the grading as affected by geoJogical factors. Where required by the City Engineer, the report shall include a revis~d geoJogic map and cross-sections and recorrunendations regarding building restrictions or fOWldation setbacks. 4-51 DRAFT E. A final biology report, jf determined necessary by the Director of Planning and Building or designee, which includes an assessment of the impacts on sensitive biological resomces affected by the land development work. (Ord. 1877 .2 (part), ]979: Ord. 1797 . I (part), ]978). 15.04.145 Notification of completion. The permittee shall notify the City Engineer when the land development work is ready for final inspection. He shall also notify the City Landscape Architect and the Director of Planning and Building, or designee, when planting and irrigation are completed. Final approval shall not be given IJI tij all work, including ·ïnstallation of all drainage structures and facilities, sprinkler irrigation systems, planting and all protective devices have been completed and any required planting established aDd all as-built plans and reports have been submitted. The City Engineer may accept in writing the completion of all work, or any portion of the work, required by the permit issued in accordance with this chapter and thereupon accept said work or portion thereof (Ord 2678 .3, 1996: Ord 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.150 Exemptions rrom applicability designated. No pe¡;on shall do any land development work witbout first having obtained a Land Development Permit or Clearing and Grubbing Permit except for the following: A. The depositing of materials in any disposal area operated or licensed by the City; B. The making of excavation on any site or contiguous sites held under one ovroership. in which all of the foHowing are characteristic of the work: 1. A cut slope having a maximum steepness of three horizontal to one vertical. 2. A cut having a maximum vertical depth of three feet at any point and a maximum average depth of eighteen inches. 3. No adverse effect upon an existing drainage pattern. 4. A top of slope no closer than one foot from an exterior boundary line, and 5. The movement of less than two hundred fifty cubic yards of material;. C. The making of embankment on any site or contiguous sites held under one ownersrup, in wruch all of the folJowing are characteristic ofthe work: 1. None of Ù1C embankment exceeds three feet in vertical depth or has an average maximum depth in excess of eighteen inches, 2. None of the embankment is placed on existing ground having a slope steeper than five horizontal to one vertical, 3. Proposed fill slopes are no steeper than three horizontal to one vertical, 4. The embankment does not change or adversely affect the existing drainage pattern, 5. Adequate provisions are proposed to protect the embankment from erosion, 6. The toe of the embankment is no closer tban one and one-half feet to an exterior property line, and 4-52 DRAFT 7. The total volume of embankment does not exceed two hundred fifty cubic yards of material; D. Excavation for foundations of buildings, structures, basements, cenars, swimming pools or basins which are authorized by appropriate pernrits obtained from the Planning and BuiJding Department; E. Excavation or embankment performed by a governmental agency, ftanchise holder, or their contractor incidental to the construction of roadways, pipelines, or utility lines within their rights of way: F. Foundations, as referred to herein, shan not be construed to include foundations for re~in.ing walls, drainage structures, or other structures appurtenant to the land development; G. Routine maintenance of ornamental landscaping; H. Agricultural operations, as defined pursuant to the ChuIa Vista Munjcipal Code Section 17.35.030; 1. Maintenance of vegetation in accordance with "an approved habitat management plan, or other such simlar plan, if consistent with such plan., and prepared pursuant to the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan; J. Maintenance of vegetation in a designated fuel modification zone, consistent with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan; K. Clearing and grubbing in an area located entirely within a mapped DeveJoprnent Atea, as defmed by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista MW1icipaI Code, where it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building, or designee, that no sensitive biological resources, as defIned by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, exist; L Clearing and grubbing entirely located in a deveJopment area outside of a Covered Project, as defined by Section ]7.35.030 of lhe Chula Vista Municipal Code, in an area that is one acre or less in size, is not part of a larger contiguous clearing and grubbìng project, and does not impact sensitive biological resources, wetlands or listed non-covered species, as defined by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista MW1icipal Code. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.155 Contractor-Qualifications required. Every person doing Jand development work shaH meet such qualifications as may be d,termined by the City Engineer and/or Direcior of Planning and Building to be necessary to protect the public interest The City Engineer and/or Director of Plaruring and Building may require an application for qualification which shall contain all information necessary to detennine the person's qualifications to do the ]and development work. (Ord.1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.160 Work to be performed by licensed contractor. All land development work shall be performed by a contractor licensed by the state. (Ord. 1797 (part), 1978). . 15.04.165 Inspection of land development work -Responsibility therefor. A. City Engineer. The City Engineer shaH be responsible for aU inspections of work not otherwise delegated to some other person. These inspections include, but are not limited to: drainage facilities, fencing, and compliance with state and city regulations in regard to the health and safety of the general public. 4-53 DRAFT B. Private Engjneer. The private engineer shaH be responsible for all surveying work necessary for proper cOllStruction of the grading and drainage facilities. He shaH inspect the site to insure that the embankment and cut slopes are placed at their proper line and grade. He shal~ prior to the release of bonds and surety, provide a written statement that in his professional opinion, all work incoIporated in the grading and drainage plans, authorized under the grading pemrit to inc1ude grading, drainage, and construction of appurtenant Structures, have been constructed to the lines and grades in substantial . confonnance with the approved plans, and any approved revisions thereto. C. Soil Engineer. The soil engineer shaH be responsible for the testing of compaction and determination of stability of the various slopes. He shall, prior to release of the bond and surety, provide a written statement that inspections and tests were made by him, or under his supervision, and that in his professional opinion, aH embankments have been compacted to city standards and in accordance with the earthwork specifications for the project. D. Landscape AIchitect. All landscaping work shaH be designed under the supervision of . a .Iandscape architect; however, a registered civil engineer or registered architect may be responsible for the inspection of all landscaping and irrigation required in accordance with the grading permit and plans ¡fit is in conjunction with a project he has been contracted to do. He shall, prior to the release of the bond and surety, provide a written statement that in his professional opinion all work incorpor'ated in the landscape and irrigation plans authorized under the permit have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and revisions thereto. K Biolog;st. A biologist, as defined by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code; shan be required to inspoot an land development or clearing and grubbing sites prior to work occurring in areas of sensitive biological resources, as defined by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, to insure compliance with the pennit issued pursuant to this Chapter. The biologist shan identify areas to be protected with appropriate staking and fencing, insure that these sensitive biological resources, as defined by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,. are correctly identified On the grading or cJearing and grubbing plan, and inspect the staking and fencing after "instaUation to insure installation according to plan. In addition, the biologist shall conduct an inspection after the work is completed. Prior to the release of the bond and surety, the biologist shall provide a written statement that in hisll1er professional opinion all work was conducte'd as authorized under the permit in accordance with approved plans and revisions thereto. F. Prior to the release of buiJding permits for any given lot or lots, the private engineer shall submit a statement (Form PW-E-l06B) as evidence that rough grading for land development has been completed within standard tolerance in accordance with the approved plans, and that all embankments and cut slopes and pad sizing are as shown on the approved plans: The soils engineer will submit a statement that all· embankments, under hi's direction, have been completed to an indicated ninety percent relative compaction of dry density. (Ord. 1877 .2 (part), 1979; Ord. )797 . 1 (part), 1978) 15.04.170 Transfer of responsibility for approval. If the private engineer, soil engineer, landscape architect, 6i' engineering geologist, or biologist, as defined by Sectjon 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, of record are changed during the course of the work, the work shall be stopped untjl the replacement has agreed to accept the responsibility within the area of their techrucal competence for approval upon completion of the work. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.175 Plans and reports to be prepared by eagineers. 4-54 DRAFT A. Plans for public improvements and land development work autborized under tbis chapter sball be prepared by a civil engineer. Where soil or geologic reports or soils and geologic investigations are required, tbe repons and investigations shall be prepared and conducted by an engineering geologist and/or Soils engineer as appropriate. B. A seepage statemeDt or study is required as a pan of all soils reports. All soils engineering, geologic, and geologic engineering reports shall consist of a preliminary and a fmal "as-built" repon. Whenever blasting is to be performed or bedrock is to be exposed, a seepage study must be performed to determine method of handling excess water infiltration. C. Plans prepared for land development work which includes clearing and grubbing only, shall be prepared with input from a biologist. (Ord. 1877 .2 (parr), 1979; Ord. 1797 .1 (Pan), ] 978). 15.04.180 Private contract performance bond-Required when-Issuance conditions generaJly. Persons perfomilng private contract work under a pennit issued in accordance with this chapter shall furnish a bondibonds or cash deposit or instrument of credit executed by the O\VIler or his agent. or both, as principal in accordance with the provisions codified in Sections 15,04.180 through 15.04.215. The performance bondlbonds shall be issued by a surety company authorized,to do business in the state and shall be approved as to form by the City Anorney. The bondlbands shall be in favor oftbe City and shall be conclitioned upon the completion, fiee of liens, of the work authorized by the pennit in accordance with the . requirements of this chapter and the condjtions prescribed by the pennit. Slope planting and irrigation bond win be separate fi-om the performance bond requirements for appurtenant structures and grading. They will be held in the office of the Dìrector of Planning and BuiJding until satisfactory compliance wIth landscaping and irrigation has been accepted. (Ord. 1797 .1 (pan), 1978). 15.04.185 Private contract performance bond-Conditions-Notice of dèfault- Contents-Effect. The bondlbonds shaIl be conditioned upon the payment to the City of any costs incurred by the City or its agent in completing the required work or performing work necessary to leave the site in a non hazardous condition and restoring habitat as may be needed. The bondlbonds shall be further conditioned upon the payment to the City or its agents in completing the work required to protect or repair adjacent public or private propenies from damage from work perförmed under the pennit. Whenever the City Engineer fmds that a default has occurred in the performance of any term or condition afwork authorized by a pemrit, he shall give wrinen notice of such default to the principal and surety of the bond. Such notice shall state the work remaining to be done, the estimated cost of completion and the time estimated by the City Engineer to be necessary for the completion of the work. After the receipt of such notice, the principal or the surety rtrust, within the time specified) either complete the work satisfactorily or deposit with the City an amount equal to the City Engineer's estimate of the completion cost plus an additional sum equal to twenty-five percent of such cost. (Ord. 1797 .1 (pan), ]978). 15.04.190 Private contract performance bond-Principal or surety liable for cost of completing work when. ]n the event that the principal or surety fajls to complete such work within the time specified in the notice, or fails to depösit the estimated cost plus twenty-five percent with the City, the City Engineer may cause the required work to be completed. The principal and the surety shaIl be liable for the cost of completing such work. (Ord. 1797 . ] (pan), ]978). . 4-55 DRAFT ] 5.04.] 95 Private contract performance bond-Liability of City for performance of certain work. If the principal or surety deposits the estimated cost plus twenty-five percent as set forth in the notice, the City Engineer shall cause the required work to be completed. The unexpended money shall be returned to the depositor at the completion of such work, together with an itemized accounting of the cost. The principal and surety shall hold the City blameless fi'om any liability in connection with the work so peIfonned by the City or contractor employed by the City. The City shall not be liable in connection with such work 'other than for the expenditure of said money. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.200 Private contract performance bond-Cash deposit accepted in lieu when-Default correction procedure. In lieu of a bond, the pennittee may post a casb deposit with the Director of Finance in an amount equal to the required bond. . Notice of default as provided above shall be given to the principaL and if the default is not corrected within the time specified, the City Engineer shaU proceed without delay and without further notice of proceeding whatever to use t\1e cash deposit or any portion of such deposit to complete the required work. The balance, if any, of such cash deposit shaH, upon the completion of the work, be returned to the depositor or to his successors or assigns after deducting the cost of the work. (Ord. 1797 .1 (part), ]978). 15.04.205 Private contract performance bond-Not required when. No peñonnance bond under the provisions of this chapter shaH be required from the state~ or any of its poli6cal subdivisions or any governmental agency. (Ord. ] 797 . I (part), 1978). ] 5.04.21 0 Private contract performance bond-Required from certain contractors when-Exception. A contractor working for the state or any of its political subdivisions or any governmental agency shan present a performance bond unless proof is submitted that the work is covered by a bond inUÍìng to the benefit of the state or agency. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), ]978). 15.04.215 Private contract performance bond-Conditions-Compliance with certain terms and pr()Yi~ions required. Every bond or other performance guarantee shall include conditions thàt the pennittee shaU: A. Comply with aJ] provisions ofthis chapter: B. Comply with an temlS and conditions of the land dcveJopmc,,¡ pennit or clearing and ¡;rubbing permit; C. Complète the land development work within the time limit specified in the land development permit or clearing and grubbing pennit. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.220 Private contract performance bond-Method of estimating amount- Schedule. The amount of the bonds or cash deposits covering a specific job shall be based on the amount of the estimate submitted by the person doing the work and approved by the City Engineer and in accordance with the foIJowing schedule: 4-56 DRAFT A. Appurtenant struct1JIes.....100% of.the estimated cost of. retaining walls, drainage f.acilities or otber grading appurtenances; . B. Grading.....25% of the estimated cost. This percentage may be varied by the City Engineer to fit conditions which are unusual in his opinion; C. Slope planting and irrigation.....IOO% of the estimated cost of required landscaping and irrigation facilities; D. Maintenance of landscaping.....100% of the estimated cost of maintaining landscaping for the period specified upon the permit E. Habitat restoration ...... 100% of the estimated cost of repairing or replacing ~ensitive biological resources, as defined by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, including short-term maintenance and long-term monitoring (typiGally five-years), as specified by a biologist. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.225 Release of bonds/security. Bonds and other security shan be released thirty-five days after filing a "Notice of Completion" witb the County Recorder (recorded copy to City Engineer) for improvements accepted by this City and upon acceptance of completed Form PW-E-I06 (Request for Release of Bonds) submitted by the permittee. This form is available in the office of the City Engineer. Such form may not be accepted until the end of the maintenance period for the required Jandsc;aping, unless a separate bond is or has been submitted to guarantee maintenance of landscaping. (Ord. 1877 .2 (part), 1979; Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.230 City Engineer-Enforcement responsibility and permit issuance authority. The City Engineer shall enforce the provisions of this chapter. He shall, upon application by qualified persons, issue permits in connection with land development work when all applicable conditions established by this chapter f?r such permits have been met. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.235 City Engineer-Powers and duties generally. TIle City Engineer e shaH cause land development work being done without a permit to be stopped until a perm.it has been obtained. Be may require that such work done without a pqrnit be removed or corrected, including habitat restoration, at the expense of the responsible person. Where land development work involves an embankment improperly constructed or constructed without adequate testing, he shan cause such embanJanent to be reconstructed or, in lieu thereof, shall cause a dec]aration of improper land development to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder. He shall have work done in connection with land development to insure compliance with the provisions of tbis chapter and shall release the bond when such work is properly completed. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.240 City Engineer-Authority to determine applicable fees. 4-57 DRAFT The City Engineer shaIl determine the fees applicable under the provisions of tlris chapter. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). 15.04.245 City Engineer-Duty to cOnsider certain recommendations and deny certain applications. ' When the nature of the work requested is such that it comes within the requirements of, or affects the operation of dny other department of the City, the City Engineer shall obtain and consider the recommendations of applicahle City departments in determining the disposition of the application. He shall deny applications which are not in the interest of the public health, safety or general welfare, or do not constitute a reasonable use ofland as indicated by the existing zonirig or an approved land use plan. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). 15.04.250 City Engineer-Grounds for canceling pernût or amending'plans. The City Engineer may cancel a permit or may require the plans to be amended when it is in the interest of public health, safety and welfare and under any of the foIlowing: A. Upon the request of the permittee; B. When the facts are not as presented by the pennittee in application; C. When work as constructed or as proposed to be constructed creates a hazard to public health, safety and welfare. (Ord. 1797 , I (part), ¡ 978). '15.04.255 AppealS-Authorized when-Deternûnation authority. An applicant may appeal the City Engineer's denial of, or the conditions of approval of, an application for a land development'or clearing and grubbing.permit to the City Council. (Ord, l797 . I (part), 1978.) 15.04.260 Appeals-Time linût for filing-Form. The applicant for a permit issued pursuant to this chapter, or the permittee, may appeal to the City Council from any decision of the CityEngineer within ten working days after said decision. Appeals shall be in writing and shall state the specific nature of tile appeal. Appeals shan be filed with the City Clerk. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). , 15.04.265 Pernûts-Application-Procedure generally-Detail plan required. Applications for permits authorizing land development work shall be made in accordance with procedures established by the City Engineer. Applications shall be accompanied by such detailed plans, specifications and schedules as listed in the subdivision manual, landscape manual, and as otherwise required by the City Engineer. See Sections 15.04.290 and 15.04.295 oftlris chapter regarding fees. (Ord. 1797 ,] (part), 1978). 15.04.270 Permits-Application-Detail plans and ,pecifications required. A. Detailed plans and specifications for land development work shall include, but not be Jirruted to: 4-58 DRAFT I. Those requirements listed in the sUbdivision manual; 2. A vicinity sketch or other data adequately indicating the site location; 3. A plot plan showing the location of the land development boundaries, lot lines, and public and private rights-of-way lines; 4. A contour map showing the present contours of the land and the proposed contours or grid elevations. Contours will extend beyond the limits of grading at least one hundred feet; 5. The location of any buildings or structures within the land development boundaries, and the location of any building or structure on adjacent property which is within fifteen feet of the land development boundary; 6. Typical sections showing details concerning proposed cut and fill slopes; 7. Adequate plans of all drainage devices, walk or other protective devices to be constructed in connection with, or as a result of the proposed work, together with a map showing the drainage area of land tributary to the site and the estimated runoff of the area served by any drainage facilities and devices; 8. An estimate of the quantity oLexcavation and fill involved, quantities relative to construction of appurtenant structures, estimate of cost and estimated starting and completion dates; 9. A landscape and irrigation plan indicating the total landscaped square footage, plant quantity, spacing, type and location and the layout of the irrigation system, and an estimate of cost of the landscaping and irrigation facilities. ] O. A map, prepared by a biologist, as defined by Section 17.35.030 of ¡he Chula Vista Municipal Code, iJIustrating the proposed land development work relative to sensitive biologicaJ resources in compliance with the applicable Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Permit issued pursuant to Chapter ]7.35 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 11. An erosion control plan as may be required by the City Engineer or the Director of PlanniÌ1g and Building. B. A soils investigation may be required to correlate surlace and subsurface conditions with the proposed land develoPment plan. The results of the .investigation shall be presented in a soils report by a soils engineer which shall include, but not be limited to location of faults; data regarding the nature, distribution, and strength of existing soils and Tock on the site; the soils engineer's concJusion; recommendations for grading requirements, including the correction of weak or unstabk sojj conùitions and treatment of any expansiv~ so(Is that may be present; and ills opinion as to the adequacy ofbuiJding sites to be developed by the proposed land development operations. The soils engineer shall provide ao engineering geology report by an engineering geologist when required by the City Engineer. A seepage statement or a study is required as a part of all soil reports. Whenever blasting is to be performed or bedrock is to be exposed, a seepage study must be performed to determine method of handJing excess water infiltration. C. The Gty Engineer may require other data or information às he deems necessary. He may eliminate or modify any of these requirements where, in his opinion, they win serve no practical purpose. (Ord. 1887 .2 (part), 1979; Ord. ] 797 . I (part), 1978). 4-59 DRAFT 15.04.275 Permits-Issuance-Prerequisites and contents. The City Engineer shall issue permits for land development work upon approval of applications, plans, r~ceipt of the pr~scribed fees and bonds and receipt of letters from the private engineer) soils engineer, engineering geologist, landscape architect, biologist, and others as required by the City Engmeer, that they have been retained by the permittee to perfonn the work specified in Section 15.04.165. The permits shall include, or refer to, the conditions, plans and specifications which shan govern the work authorized. (Ord. 1877 .2 (part), ] 979; Ord. 1797 . I (part), 1978). ]5.04.280 Investigations authorized and required when-Fee. The City Engineer may require the payment of the prescribed fees for special investigations when the proposed work or inquiries necessitate that special work be perfonned by the City. Special investigations shall include all reques.ts for time extensions or variance requests and shall be accompanied by the special investigation fee. (Ord. 1797 . 1 (part), 1978). 15.04.285 Agreement required ror uncontrolled embankments-Additional specifications. A. Applications for land development pennits involving uncontrol1ed embankment shall be accompanied by an agreement signed by the property owner. The agreement shall be prepared by the City Engineer and shall contain the fonowing provisions and such other provisions as may in the opinion of the City Engineer afford protection to the property owner and City: 1. The land development work shall be designated -as uncontrol1ed embankment and shaH be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the City Engineer. 2. The owner acknowledges that as an uncontrol1ed embankment, the site is not eligible for a building permit unless special soils analysis and foundation design are submitted. 3. The land development work shal1 be done and maintained in a safe and sanitary manner at the sole cost, risk and responsibility of the owner and his Successors in interest. who shall hold the City harp-ùess with respect thereto. B. The agreement for uncontroIJed embankment shaH be approved by the City Council and recorded by the City Clerk in the Office of the County Recorder as an obligation upon the land involved. The notice sha]] remain in effect unti] rcJcase of the agreement is fi1ed by the City Engmeer. (Ord. 1797 . I (part), ] 978). 15.04.290 Fees-Collection·-Method of estirnation- Verification-Payment required- Exemptions. A. Fees required by this chapter shall be coIJected by the City Engineer and deposited with the Director of Finance. Such fees shaJI be as presently designated. or ås may in the future be amended, in the m?ster fee schedule. B. No permit shall be issued, and no land development work shaIJ be permitted until the fees applicable under this chapter have been received by the City Engineer. 4-60 DRAFT C. The state or any of its political subdivisions or any governmental agency shall file applications for pennits and shall be issued permits as required by this chapter. No fees shall be required when the work is done by persons working directly for the state or agency. D. The City Manager, or his designee, may authorize, without advaoce appropriation, the refund of fees required by this Chapter to be collected, or such portion of the fees deemed appropriate for refund by the City Manager (net of costs incurred by the City in processing the permit application or unless the City hzs used the fees to construct faciJities for a development for wlúch the fees were paid), if the City Manager finds that the pennit for wlúch they were collected has been revoked, surrendered or terminated without use by the perminee and the refund is less than $100,000. All other refunds shall be authorized by the City Council. (Ord.2594 . I, 1994; Ord. 2011 . I (part), 1982; Ord. 1797 .1 (part), 1978). 15.04.295 Fees-Schedule for computation. Fees shall be as ·presently designated, or as may in the future be amended, in the master fee schedule. (Ord.2506 .1 (part), 1992; Ord. 1961 .1 (part), 1982; Ord. 1797 .1 (part), 1978). ]5.04305 Fees-To be doubled in certain cases-Effect of imposition. In the event that land development work is commenced \vithout a land development or cJearing and grubbing permit, the City Engineer shaH cause such work to be stopped until a permit is obtained. The permit fee, in such instance. shaH then be the nonnalIy required pennit fee, plus $500. The payment of the increased permit fees shall not relieve any person fi-am fuHy complying with the requirements of this chapter in the perfonnance of the work_ Such fee shal1 defray the expense of enforcement of the provisions of this chapter in such cases. When land development work commences without a pemrit and results in damage to sensitive biologicaJ resources, as defined by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, restoration requirements (including maintenance and monitoring) shall be imposed at the sole discretion of the Director of Planning and Building and the full cost of the restoration shall be borne by the property owner. When land development work is inconsistent with a permit issued pursuant to Chapter 17.35 of the Chula Vista Murucipal Code· and results in damage to sensitive biological resources, as defmed by Section 17.35.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, restoration requirements (including maintenance and morutoring) shall be imposed at the sole discretion of the Director of Planning and Bui]ding and the full cost of the restoration shall be borne by the property O\VT1er. . The payment of such fees or penalties ~s described above shall not prevent the imposition of any penalty prescribed or imposed by tlús chapter, Chapter 1.4], or other federal or state law. (Ord 2718 .1 (part), 1998; Ord. 1797 .] (part), ] 978) 15.04.310 Violations-Declared unlawful and public nuisance-Abatement authority. Any land development work commenced, done, maintained or allowed contrary to the provisions of this chapter, shall be, and the same is hereby declared to be, unlawful and a public nuisance. Upon order of the City Council, or upon the determination of the City Manager or the City Attorney, necessary proceedings for the abatement, removal and/or enjoinment of any such public nuisance shall be commenced in the manner provided by law. Alternatively the procedures to abate under Chapter 1.30 may be used. Any failure, refusal, or neglect by a responsible party to obtain a permit as required by'tlús chapter shall be prima facie evidence of the fact 4-61 DRAFT , that a public nuisance has been committed in connection wjth any land development work commenced or done contrary to the provisions of this chapter. (Ord 27] 8 . I (part), 1998; Ord. ]797 . ] (part), 1978). 15.04.315 Abatement of dangerous conditions. Where the City Engineer determines that land deveJoprnent work has created a danger to public or private property or has resulted in the deposition of debris on any public way or interferes with any existing drainage course, the City Engineer shall serve written notice on the property owner, descn'bing the condition and requiring that the property OMler abate the dangerous condition within ten days after the notice is received. If the property owner fails to so abate the condition, the City Engineer may do so, in which event the property owner shaU be liable for all costs of such abatement, including but not limited to reasonable attorney fees. Tbe expenses of abatement shall be a lien against the property on which it is maintained and a personal obligation against the property owner. (Ord. 1877 .3 (part), 1979). 15.04.320 Emergency abatement by City-Liability for costs. ·]f it appears to the City Engineer that an emergency exists because land development work has resulted lD a danger to public or private property, then, without following the procedure established by Section 15.04.315, the City Engineer may order alJ work necessary to remove, abate or mitigate the condition creating such emergency. The City Engineer may do the work with his O\Vn employees or may contract to have the work done; in either event, the City Engineer shaH keep a record of the costs of the work and charge the cost of the work to the property owner who shan repay the City for the cost thereof. (Ord. 1877 .3 (part), 1979). ]5.04.325 Costs of abatement-Special assessment procedure-Statutory authority. The costs of abating a dangerous condition within the meaning of this chapter shan be imposed as a special assessment against the land on which such abatement was. done. Costs and assessment procedures will be in accordance with Chapters 1.40 and 1.4 i. The property owner may raise and the City Manager shaH consider. as a complet~ or partial defense to the imposition of the assessment, questions as to the necessity of the abatement and the means in which it was accomplished. Pursuant to Government Code. 38773.5 abatement costs shaH be transrrutted to the tax collector for colJection. This assessment shall have the same priority as other city taxes. (Ord 2718 . 1 (part), ] 998; Ord. ] 877 .3 (part), ] 979). 15.04.330 Conflicts Except for exempt projects, if a conflict occurs between this Chapter and Chapter 17.35 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the stricter regulation shaU apply. . 4-62 DRAFT Section II. Adoption of this ordinance (Second Reading) is conditioned upon and shall not occur unless and until the issuance of Take Authorizations from the USFWS and CDFG to the City of Chula Vista has occurred in a form acceptable to the City.. Section m. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day from and after the of the ordinance (Second Reading) which shan occur as stated above. Presented by Approved as to form by James D. Sandoval Planning and Bui1ding Director Q Î1/({71Çr- q Ann Moore City Attorney 4-63 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ~ Item: ~ Meeting Date: 05/10/2005 ITEM TITLE: Resolution amending the FY05 Library Department budget by appropriating a one-time unanticipated revenue in the amount of $3,500 for participation in the Scorecards for Results: An IMLS Grant Project. SUBMITTED BY: Assistant City Manager/Library Director ~ REVIEWED BY: CityManage4~'i)~ (4/5thsVote: YES~ NO-> The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) funded a two-year project to develop a Balanced Scorecard for Libraries. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution amending the FY05 Library Department supplies and services budget by appropriating a one-time unanticipated revenue in the amount of $3,500 for participation in the Scorecards for Results: An IMLS Grant Project. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: The Chula Vista Public Library was invited to participate in the Scorecards for Results: An IMLS Grant Project along with three other Southern California public libraries which include: Carlsbad Public Library, Cerritos Public Library and Newport Beach Public Library. The one-time revenue will be used to cover expenses associated with the project, which include the production of a workbook, an independent survey of library services, and staff tr~ining. FISCAL IMPACT: An additional $3,500 will be appropriated into the current year Library budget. This is a one- time revenue for FY 05. 5-1 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005-_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FY05 LffiRARY DEPARTMENT BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING A ONE-TIME UNANTICIPATED REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,500 FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE SCORECARDS FOR RESULTS: AN IMLS GRANT PROJECT WHEREAS, the Institute of Museurn and Library Services (IMLS) funded a two- year proj ect to develop a Balanced Scorecard for Libraries; and WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Public Library was invited to participate in the Scorecards for Results: An IMLS Grant Project along with three other Southern California public libraries which include: Carlsbad Public Library, Cerritos Public Library and Newport Beach Public Library; and WHEREAS, the one-time revenue will be used to cover expenses associated with the project, which include the production of a workbook, an independent survey of library services, and staff training. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the FY05 budget by appropriating a one-time unanticipated revenue in the amount of $3,500 for participation in the Scorecards for Results: IMLS Grant Project. Presented by Approved as to form by David Palmer Assistant City Manager/Library Director !~~~~~C1\1 Moore City Attorney J:/attorney/reso/IMLS grant project 5-2 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item:-L Meeting Date: 5/1012005 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving the Performing and Visual Arts Task Force's selection of the FY 2005-2006 Performing and Visual Arts Grant recipients and their monetary grant award, . totaling $35,730 SUBMITTED BY: Assistant City Manager Pa1m~ REVIEWED BY: CityManager9t"<P" (4/5thsVote: YesA...No~ In 1997, the City Council approved a Sublease with the House of Blues Concerts, Inc. (formerly Universal Concerts) that established a process whereby a portion of ticket sales proceeds at the Coors Amphitheater would be paid to the City and utilized for a Performing and Visual Arts Fund. This fund is to be used for arts grants to the Chula Vista community for the purpose of promoting and stimulating the growth of performing and cultural arts within the City of Chula Vista. This year the Office of Cultural Arts received $36,116.00 ftom the House of Blues for their 2004 Concert Series. As called for in the subleaSe, a Performing and Visual Arts Task Force was established and annually makes recommendations to the City Council regarding the arts grant awards. The Task Force is assisted by the Office of Cultural Arts, which formally conducts the grant application process. The Task Force has reviewed the FY 2005-2006 applications and makes the following recommendations to the City CounciL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Council approves the Task Force's selection of the FY 2005-2006 Performing and Visual Arts Grant recipients (as listed below) and their rnonetary grant awards totaling $35,730.00 BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Task Force recommends that the City Council award arts funds to groups and individual as outlined in this report. DISCUSSION: As it has since the program's inception, the Office of Cultural Arts administered the Performing and Visual Arts Fund grant application process. Performing and Visual Arts Fund Grant Application Packets were distributed by the Office to the Sweetwater Union High School District, Chula Vista Elementary School District, City of Chula Vista web site, all former grant recipients, plus arts groups and individuals in the Chula Vista community. The Office then conducted two "Technical Workshops" on January 19 and 22, 2005. 6-1 Item: &. Page 2 Meeting Date: 05/1012005 Twenty-two applications totaling $55,330 in requests were received by the application due date of February 28,2005. Upon receipt and review, the Office of Cultural Arts made recommendations for funding to the Mayor's Task Force. The current members of the Task Force are: Mayor Steve Padilla Roderick Reinhart, City staff representative David Swift, House of BlueslCoors Amphitheatre representative William Virchis, Sweetwater Union High School district representative Tracy Goodwin, ChuIa Vista Elementary School district representative Chris Redo, Chula Vista Cultural Arts Commission representative Kevin Tilden, At-Large Committee Member A copy of each application was sent to the members of the Mayor's Task Force for their review and numerical scoring. The twenty-two applications were then reviewed and ranked by pre-established criteria by the Task Force on April 15, 2005 (see A TT ACHMENT A for a list of the criteria). The Task Force recommends funding all twenty-two applicants for a total amount of $35,730. While all applicants received funding, a majority of requests were adjusted based on the Council-approved Task Force policies. List of Grant Recommendations: · Imagination Express...Al1-Aboard! $1,000 To present three assemblies in Chula Vista elementary schools using mime to discourage negative behaviors such as smoking, drug use and violence. Also to create a mime performance piece for the 2006 Chula Vista's Taste of the Arts. · San Diego Opera $2,500 To work with the Sweetwater Union High School District's middle school students in Vocal Education, Language Arts, and Theatre Arts. The goal is to develop students' ensemble-singing skills in preparation of high school level choir performance. · Playwrights Project $2,500 To work with SUHSD high school level students in Language Arts and Theatre Arts to produce new play scripts and poetry that will be submitted for the California Playwright's Project. Top judged works will be performed in workshop at The Old Globe Theatres in 2006. 6-2 Item: ~. Page 3 Meeting Date: 0511012005 · Friends of the Arts $1,200 To provide scholarships for children living in underserved areas of Chula Vista for art, music and drama classes offered by local working arts professioÌllÙs. · Southwestern College Concert Choir $1,000 To mount and perform the premiere of a new oratorio, Encounter With Our Lady of Guadalupe, featuring students and co=unity members in a choral performance. · Old Globe Theatre $2,500 To present All Roads Lead to Rome in collaboration with the San Diego Museum of Art and the ChuIa Vista Elementary School District. This is an iDnovative new educatioÌllÙ program aligned with the required 6th grade standards-based curricula on Ancient Civilizations. · Instal1ation Gallery $1,200 To work with staff and students of FiDney Elementary School in providing artist/teacher curriculum planning making the arts a lively, essential and ongoing aspect of elementary school education. · ChulaVistaArtGuild $1,030 Expanding Portrait of the Community concept and exhibition to local and regioÌllÙ artists using the City and its various neighborhoods and citizen as the sources of images that show Chula Vista in a positive manner and raise the awareness about the community. · Bonitafest Melodrama $1,600 To provide funding for a co=unity musicaVmelodrama based on local history appropriate for multigeneratioÌllÙ, culturally diverse family audiences. · San Diego Junior Theatre $1,500 To provide increased local promotions for the Chula Vista branch/classes during the 2005-2006 season. · California Ballet $2,500 In collaboration with the SUHSD and Chula Vista's Office of Cultural Arts, to mount a new production of The Legend of Josefa, a historical love story between Doña Josefa Carrillo and Captain Henry Fitch, at Bayside Park. 6-3 I.t Item: . Page 4 Meeting Date: 05/1012005 · Bonita Artists Potpourri $1,500 To provide free public workshops and painting demonstrations by noted local arts professionals and to conduct workshops for members of the Norman Park Senior Center and Pacific Point Senior Center. · Mariachi Scholarship Foundation $1,250 To provide promotional materials for the Mariachi Scholarship Foundation produced concert that will recognize local students, donors and sponsors (including the City of Chula Vista) and feature El Sol de México, a renowned mariachi group. · Chula Vista High School "Main Attraction" $1,250 To fund the cost of program design and printing for the Southern California Performance Show Choir Invitational that will be held in Chula Vista at the Ruth Chapman Performing Arts Center. This two-day event attracts large crowds and 20 schools participate. · Sound Unlimited $1,250 To provide funding for three adjudicators for the statewide competitive festival for women's show choirs held in February 2006 at Bonita Vista High School. · Music Machine Boosters $1,250 To provide funding for two adjudicators for a non.competitive festival for show choirs to be held in January 2006 at Bonita Vista High School. · Chula Vista High School for the Creative & Performing Arts $2,000 To increase promotion and awareness of the Chula Vista Band Review for 20-30 high school and junior high school bands to be held at Chula Vista High School in 2006. . Rosebank Elementary School $2,500 To provide funding for Artscape, an after-school program where K_6th grade students will study design and create landscape art sculptures. · Hedenkamp Theatrical Ensemble $1,250 To provide promotions support for the Winter and Spring Musicals that will bring cultural awareness and build self-esteem through literature-based original productions. · Hilltop High School Band Boosters $1,700 To provide funding for preparation of band students for solo and ensemble festivals and enhancing the band partnership with the Hilltop Middle School. 6-4 Item: 0 . Page 5 Meeting Date: 05/1012005 · Chula Vista Cultural Arts Commission $2,000 To provide funding for an artist stipend for sculptor Jorge Blanco and sponsorship of the Music in the Park Summer Concert series. · Chula Vista Downtown Business Association To provide partial funding for the development of the new branding elements/icons to be used on Third Avenue banners. $1,250 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no General Fund impact associated with these grants. The recommended FY 2005/06 grant awards total $35,730 leaving a balance of$12,471.35 to be used for emergency "out-of-cycle" grant requests received during 2005/06. Any remaining funds may be carried over and added to next year's program. 6-5 ATTACHMENT A CriJeria for the Allocation of the Performing Am Fund as approved by City Council on December 14, 1999. The Performing/Visual Arts Fund, established by the sublease between the City and House of Blues, shall be annually re-granted through a formal application process. The following groups and individuals shall be eligible to apply for funds: · Chula Vista based tax-exempt, non-profit organizations . Chula Vista based educational institutions . Chula Vista based religious organizations · Performance groups associated with Chula Vista based educational institutions (i.e., the Music Machine) · The City of Chula Vista and its various departments and Boards and Commissions · Individuals who reside in Chula Vista For-profit organizations, institutions and businesses shall not be eligible to apply for funds. Non-Chula Vista based non-profit organizations shall not be eligible to apply for funds unless they partner with Chula Vista based organizations. Individual Chula Vista residents (especially students) shall be eligible to apply, in an effort to develop local talent. Per the agreement, applicants may only apply for funds to underwrite the cost of presentations. Funds shall not be awarded to establish an endowment or trust fund, for administrative costs, for capital projects, for rent of performance or office space, and/or for general operating expenses. 6-6 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE PERFORMING AND VISUAL ARTS TASK FORCE'S SELECTION OF THE FY 2005-2006 PERFORMIN'G AND VISUAL ARTS GRANT RECIPIENTS AND THEIR. MONETARY GRANT AWARD TOTALING $35,730 WHEREAS, in 1997, the City Council approved a Sublease with the House of Blues Concerts, Inc. (formerly Universal Concerts) that established a process whereby a portion of the ticket sales proceeds at the Coors Amphitheater would be paid to the City and utilized for a Performing and Visual Arts Fund; and WHEREAS, this fund is to be used for arts grants to the Chula Vista community for the purpose of promoting and stimulating the growth of performing and cultural arts grant awards; and the WHEREAS, this year the Office of Cultural Arts received $36,116.00 from the House of Blues for the 2004 Concert Series; and WHEREAS, as called for in the sublease, a Performing and Visual Arts Task Force was established and annually makes recommendations to the City Council regarding the arts grant awards; and WHEREAS, the Task Force is assisted by the Office of Cultural Arts, which formally conducts the grant application process; and WHEREAS, the Task Force has reviewed the Fiscal Year 2005-2006 applications and has made its recommendations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Performing and Visual Arts Task Force's selection of the Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Performing and Visual Arts Grant recipients (set forth in Exhibit A) and their monetary grant award totaling $35,730. Presented by Approved as to fo= by David Palmer Assistant City Manager ~",,{V\J\ \<\~r-k~\'\ ATIn Moore City Attorney J :\Attomey\Reso\grants\Library Performing and Visual Arts Task Force 2005 6-7 EXHIBIT A DRAFT IT 2005-2006 Performine: and Visual Arts Grant ReciDients · Imagination Express...AlI-Aboard! $1,000 To present three ass=blies in ChuIa Vista elementary schools using mime to discourage negative behaviors such as smoking, drug use and violence. Also to create a mime perfortnance piece for the 2006 Chula Vista's Taste of the Arts. · San Diego Opera $2,500 To work with the Sweetwater Union High School District's middle school students in Vocal Education, Language Arts, and Theatre Arts. The goal is to develop students' ensemble-singing skills in preparation of high school level choir performance. · Playwrights Project $2,500 To work with SUHSD high school level students in Language Arts and Theatre Arts to produce new play scripts and poetry that will be submitted for the California Playwright's Project. Top judged works will be performed in workshop at The Old Globe Theatres in 2006. · Friends of the Arts $1,200 To provide scholarships for children living in underserved areas of Chula Vista for art, music and drama classes offered by local working arts professionals. · Southwestern College Concert Choir $1,000 To mount and perform the premiere of a new oratorio, Encounter With Our Lady of Guadalupe, featuring students and community members in a choral performance. · Old Globe Theatre $2,500 To present All Roads Lead to Rome in collaboration with the San Diego Museum of Art and the Chula Vista Elementary School District. This is an innovative new educational program aligned with the required 6th grade standards-based curricula on Ancient Civilizations. · Installation Gallery $1,200 To work with staff and students of Finney Elementary School in providing artist/teacher curriculum planning making the arts a lively, essential and ongoing aspect of elementary school education. · Chula Vista Art Guild $1,030 Expanding Portrait of the Community concept and exhibition to local and regional artists using the City and its various neighborhoods and citizen as the sources of images that show Chula Vista in a positive manner and raise the awareness about the community. · Bonitafest Melodrama $1,600 To provide funding for a community musical/melodrama based on local history appropriate for muItigenerational, culturally diverse family audiences. 6-8 EXHIBIT A DRAFT FY 2005-2006 Performine and Visual Arts Grant Recipients · San Diego Junior Theatre $1,500 To provide increased local promotions for the Chula Vista branch/classes during the 2005-2006 season. · California Ballet $2,500 In collaboration with the SUHSD and Chula Vista's Office of Cultural Arts, to mount a new production of The Legend of Josefa, a historical love story between Doña Josefa Carrillo and Captain Henry Fitch, at Bayside Park. · Bonita Artists Potpourri $1,500 To provide free public workshops and painting demonstrations by noted local arts professionals and to conduct workshops for members of the Norman Park Senior Center and Pacific Point Senior Center. · Mariachi Scholarship Foundation $1,250 To provide promotional materials for the Mariachi Scholarship Foundation produced concert that will recognize local students, donors and sponsors (including the City of Chula Vista) and feature El Sol de México, a renowned mariachi group. · Chula Vista High School "Main Attraction" $1,250 To fund the cost of program design and printing for the Southern California Performance Show Choir Invitational that will be held in Chula Vista at the Ruth Chapman performing Arts Center. This two-day event attracts large crowds and 20 schools participate. · Sound Unlimited $1,250 To provide funding for three adjudicators for the statewide competitive festival for women's show choirs held in February 2006 at Bonita Vista High School. · Music Machine Boosters . $1,250 To provide funding for two adjudicators for a non-competitive festival for show choirs to be held in January 2006 at Bonita Vista High School. · Chula Vista High School for the Creative & Performing Arts $2,000 To increase promotion and awarcness ofthe Chula Vista Band Review for 20-30 high school and junior high school bands to be held at Chula Vista High School in 2006. · Rosebank Elementary School $2,500 To provide funding for Artscape, an after-school program where K_6th grade students will study design and create landscape art sculptures. · Hedenkamp Theatrical Ensemble $1,250 To provide prornotions support for the Winter and Spring Musicals that will bring cultural awareness and build self-esteem through literature-based original productions. 6-9 EXHIBIT A DRAFT FY 2005-2006 Performinl! and Visual Arts Grant Recipieuts · Hilltop High School Band Boosters $1,700 To provide funding for preparation of band students for solo and ensemble festivals and enhancing the band partnership with the Hilltop Middle School. · Chula Vista Cultural Arts Commission $2,000 To provide funding for an artist stipend for sculptor Jorge Blanco and sponsorship of the Music in the Park Summer Concert series. · Chula Vista DoWntown Business Association $1,250 To provide partial funding for the development of the new branding elements/icons to be used on Third Avenue banners. 6-10 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date '7 05/10/05 ITEM TITLE: COUNCIL RESOLUTION Appropriating $ 193,770 from the available balance of the technology replacement fund for the replacement of the City's Data General minicomputers and authorize the Purchasing Agent to acquire the equipment through Western States Contracting Alliance (WSCA) and California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS) cooperative purchasing agreements. SUBMITTED BY: Management & Information Services DirEto~ REVIEWED BY: City Manage~~~f' (4/5ths Vote: Yes~ No The City operates two Data General Unix mini computers to run the City's financial applications in eluding payroll, general ledger, purchasing, fixed assets, as well as other applications. These computers can no longer support the new versions of these programs and Data General is no longer supporting the operating system so the systems need to be replaced. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt resolution appropriating $ 193,770 from the available balance of the technology replacement fund for the replacement of the City's Data General mini computers and authorize the purchasing agent to purchase the equipment through the WSCA and CMAS contracts. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable DISCUSSION: In 1999 the City purchased a new financial system and hardware to operate it. This system replaced the City's Unisys mainframe which had operated for many years. The Integrated Fund Accounting System (IFAS) software is still operating very well and is kept up -to-date with various releases of the software for added functionality. IFAS utilizes Unix as its operating system and Informix as the database and this combination has been working well. The hardware that was supplied as part of the ~erall project was from Data General and has also been working well. Unfortunately, Data General no longer supports their Unix operating system and theTefo:ce cannot support t0e newer versions of Infonnix or future upgrades to the IFAS product. These upgrades are necessary to keep current with changes and fixes to the system as well as with new functionality. Staff has been researching various hardware vendors which will efficiently support the Unix system as well as Informix. Staff researched products from IBM, SUN and HP and has determined that the system from HP will work the best in our environment. We have configured the system for optimum performance and expandability in our environment. 7-1 Page 2, Item Meeting Date 1 05/10/05 Staff is recommending purchasing this hardware through two contracts that have been either competitively bid or assessed. These are the Western States Contracting Alliance (WSAC) and the California Multiple Award Schedule ¡CMA8). WSCA was formed in 1993 by the state purchasing directors from fifteen western states. Their purpose is to establish the means by which participating states may join together to achieve cost-effective acquisition of quality products and services. CMAS was established in 1994 for mu ch the same purpose and the contracts are awarded and administered by the State of California. Because the State of California is able to leverage large-volume acquisitions, both contracts allow the City to purchase products and services at much more favorable rates than if the City issued the bid themselves. Council Resolution 6132 and Municipal Code Section 22.56.140 authorize the Purchasing Agent to participate in cooperative purchasing agreements for acquisition of materials of common usage. Fiscal Impact The total cost of this project ,$193,770 will be paid for from the City's technology replacement fund. This fund sets aside funds each year for the purpose of replacing older technology when it becomes obsolete. The available balance of the Tectnology Replacement Fund is $1.7 Million 7-2 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $193,770 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT FUND FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE CITY'S DATA GENERAL MINICOMPUTERS AND AUTHORlZE THE PURCHASING AGENT TO ACQUIRE THE EQUIPMENT THROUGH WESTERN STATES CONTRACTING ALLIANCE (WSCA) AND CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, in 1999 the City purchased a new financial system and the hardware to operate it; and WHEREAS, an important component of the hardware system is two Data General mini computers; and WHEREAS the Integrated Fund Accounting System (IFAS) software, which utilizes an Informix database, is still operating very well and is kept up-to-date with various releases of the software for bug fixes and added functionality; and WHEREAS, Data General no longer supports their Unix operating system, therefore the newer versions of the Informix database will not function properly (and cannot be installed); and WHEREAS, without the newer Inforrnix databases, the IFAS software, in turn, cannot be upgraded; and WHEREAS, staff has researched products from ffiM, SUN, and lIP and has determined that the system from lIP is the best product for the City's computing environment; and WHEREAS, Purchasing Agent is recommending that the City purchase the new mini computers using one of two cooperative purchase agreements negotiated by the Western States Contracting Alliance (WSAC) and the California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS); and WHEREAS, both purchasing agreements where negotiated via a competitive process that was consistent with good purchasing practices; and WHEREAS, Council resolution 6132 and Municipal Code Section 22.56.140 authorize the Purchasing Agent to participate in cooperative purchasing agreements for acquisition of materials of common usage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Chula Vista does hereby appropriate $193,770 from the available balance of the technology replacement fund 7-3 DRAFT for the replacement of the City's Data General minicomputers and authorizes the Purchasing Agent to acquire the equipment through Western States Contracting Alliance (WSCA) and California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS) cooperative purchasing agreements. Presented by Approved as to form by ~{IH--. Louie Vignapiano Director of General Services Ann Moore City Attorney J:lattorneylresolfinancelapproprlation funds - Minicomputers 7-4 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 5 Meeting Date 5/10/05 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Ordering the Summary Vacation of a portion of public right-of way within the cul-de-sac of Harold Place in Eastlake Business Center. SUBMITTED BY: City Engineer ~ REVIEWED BY: City ManagerG~ Ç)'J/ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_Noll) ¡'r! Eastlake Business Center II has requested to vacate a portion of public right-of-way within the cul- de-sac of properties located at 820, 821 and 841 Harold Place in Eastlake Business Center (see attachment). In accordance with Chapter 4, Section 8330 of the State Streets and Highways Code, this type of vacation may be performed summarily through adoption of a resolution ordering said summary vacation provided certain conditions as set forth herein are met. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None. DISCUSSION: On February 2, 2005, Eastlake Business Center II, owner of properties located at 820, 821 and 841 Harold Place, submitted an application to the City to vacate a portion of a public cul-de-sac adjacent to their property (see attachment). This portion of the cul-de-sac was dedicated to the City ofChula Vista per Map No. 13971 on May 26,2000. The applicant proposes to relocate the Harold Place cul-de-sac for the following reasons: 1) The shortening of the public street allows the Developer to construct the site plan as proposed by Venture Corporation and Ware and Malcomb Architect and as approved by the Design Review Committee per DRC-05-17. A new private site driveway with decorative stamped concrete pattem"is proposed to replace a portion ofthe street. This narrows the street from a full width street and allows the Developer to provide more landscaping for the project and better designed entry to the project as approved by the Design Review Committee. 2) The business park site at 820, 821 and 841Harold Place also has approximately 20 feet of grade change across the site and the vacation and relocation of the cul-de-sac allows the Developer to provide a steeper driveway into the site to minimize grading and allows the Developer to eliminate stairs and ramps that would be required to provide access to the proposed commercial condominium units. 8-1 Page 2, Item 5š Meeting Date 5/10/05 Chapter 4, Section 8330(a) of the California Streets and Highways Code states that the legislative body of a local agency may summarily vacate a street or highway that has been superseded by relocation. The vacation of the cul-de-sac has been acknowledged by Design Review Committee in the overall site design on February 21,2005, under application nurnber DRC-05-17. The Public Works Operations Department has been notified of this vacation proposal and has no objection. The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary. The City Engineer has approved street improvement plans (Chula Vista Drawing No. 05016) for the new relocated cul-de-sac and the applicant has secured the work through bonding. The City Engineer has also reviewed and approved the dedication documents needed for the relocated cul de sac. These dedication documents will be recorded if Council approves the proposed summary vacation. All utility companies have been notified of the proposed vacation and utility easements will be retained within the existing right-of-way as needed. FISCAL IMPACT; The full costs related to the processing of this request for vacation and associated construction plans are being paid for by a deposit of monies by the applicant. Attachment - Plat showing vacation Attachment - Vicinity Map J:\Engineer\AGENDA \CAS2005\5-10-05\Harold Place vacation.doc 8-2 I t:: ' , o OJ . OJ G> . ~I;: on /---:+: ----. /' /./ /......... ,/ ."""- " /. , / {' .,/ 2;, '\ Ict .' 'V \ I / ..' \ \ i I .' / . . \ \1 \ ( ./////i¡~/.11- ;\ \), '//i~// //¡ / CP \';!/ ./~~/ :!i I'" \ \ ///< c. /// '..../ /..., J \0,://-,¿C1+-,.,_<,/'· f lJ1\ OJ,"'!·..· C 2 ............ I'" POINT "A" .(i" lA C4 ,<'f::: (J POB PARCEL TWO .... ,,-L2 L5·, & ROW ABANDONMENT i," 5.5' LANDSCAPE EASEMENT~:Þ':¡¡:¡ ?~J?í~. PER MAP NO. 14395 ... ~ <;", TO BE ABANDONDED /6' ~¡ DEDICA 1l0N ..' h :~Ci~± TWO ~.~.~ I.~I:J \~~:~I ç ¡",. VI? I \ß:,/ \" r; C13 i' t'J POB LANDSCAPE L 17~f'~ EASEMENT'/'''''L16 NST54'06"W .. - . .. R 442. 71' ~ ..'\II' ~,\ .,,'0 .¡..'ò "POCO PARCEL ONE, TWO, I ROW ABANDONMENT & I LANDSCAPE EASEMENT "POB" LANDSCAPE ABANDONMENT I a LOT "j PAF{CF"L MAP NO. "14395 , KIER a: WRIGHT CIVIL DtGINEœ a: SURVEYORS, tIC. 1255 Quany Lano, _ 140 (125) Z_ PI_ CGIIIomIa _ Fax (125) 241-11513 /'\lIr',w\o.[14:0/':J\A(J4:0/'.:¡,( WC) JU/11/,.'ÜU-i /:lr):L'! p.~1 1')1 LOT ? PAHCEL MAP NO, 'J4395 NSS'31 'OO"W 383.75' ---- ILO 0> "' ... ~ POB PARCEL ONE \ I~ I~ ¡O'\ ::1-.", DEDICAllON '/ PARCEL ONE "J 858 SF± ~ It .0 I~ / ~II"" o 0...:¡:!: U1¡ I."""" "',/ -', ''I U5 ~,r ::::.'>,1<1) o ':}"õ ,r\' I S8~'3B'01''( R I I \9~ [I ~ _ 5.5' LANDSCAPE EASEMENT :g PER MAP NO. 14395 SJIBIT 1 01' 2 :::; I ' :::;~ , 0- 0< "<I:::; "", ~w '" 0- W , U1 OG ,0 Z 0>52 '"< ..-- Lt.J Om Z LL o LOT 3 P AF{CFL MAP NO, 'jLt395 !11 ¡¡¡ < OJ UJ U EXHIBIT "B" RIGBT-OP-1I'AY AlWlDONIIBNT AND DIIDICATlON IWWLD PUCI: CIItJtA Wll'A. !WI DIIGO COUIITJ 1- = -'0' SCALI! Ð4TB ocr., aoo¿ u: A04C579 BY" CWlOIIIU. lOB NO. 8-3 '1J CJ ;¡:¡ ~ =~~/ m ~ f1:1 m I]!JJJTI CJ ~ So!! 0.> en 25 ;:: '" z ~~ ¡¡ i'õ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ß b ~ . e~l~ ~~ I~ z ~ m rI.' " m --i ::¡ r" IT' HAROL PL / // -«cnI Q) ~ Q) ("') CD ..., etCDO -" ~ a. o :::J "1J - "::::::= (\:' (Y\ RESOLUTION NO. 2005- DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WITIDN THE CUL-DE-SAC OF HAROLD PLACE LOCATED IN THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER WHEREAS, the City of ChuIa Vista is considering the summary vacation of a portion of public right-of-way within the cul-de-sac of Harold Place located in the Eastlake Business Center; and, WHEREAS, the aforementioned public right-of-way within the cul-de-sac of Harold Place shall be relocated and therefore the existing cul-de-sac right-of-way is no longer needed for public purposes; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 4, Section 8330 of the California Streets and Highways Code, the public right-of-way within the cul-de-sac of Harold Place may be summarily vacated through adoption of a resolution ordering said vacation; and, WHEREAS, in order to vacate, Council must adopt a resolution ordering the summary vacation ofthe public right-of-way within the cul-de-sac of Harold Place; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the evidence submitted, the City Council finds that the public right-of-way within the cul-de-sac of Harold Place more particularly described in Map No. 13971, located in the Eastlake Business Center is . unnecessary for present or prospective public use; and, The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby order the summary vacation of the portion of the public right-of-way within the cul-de-sac of Harold Place located in the Eastlake Business Center, more particularly identified in the attachment to the agenda statement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a certified copy of the resolution of vacation, attested by the clerk under seal, to be recorded without acknowledgement, certificate of acknowledgement, or further proof in the office of the recorder of the county in which the property is located. Upon such recordation, the vacation shall be complete. 8-5 Resolution No. Page 2 Presented by Sohiab Al-Agha City Engineer J:\Engineer\AGENDA \Rcsos\Resos2005\5-10-05\ResoHaroldPlSummary.se.doc 8-6 DRAFT Approved as to fo= by dl! P AdL Moore City Attorney COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date 5/10/05 q ITEM TITLE: Resolution Ordering the Summary Vacation of Public Street Easements for Auto Park Drive and Easement for Parking and Emergency Access within the auto dealerships located east ofI-805 and south of Main Street Resolution of intention of the of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista for setting a Public Hearing for June 7, 2005 to consider Vacating a street light and pedestrian easements and public drainage easement located adjacent to Auto Park Drive, east ofI-805, south of Main Streeet SUBMITTED BY: City Engineer~ REVIEWED BY: CitYManager~~\I:'"" (4/5thsVote: Yes_No-X) DGF Family Limited Partnership, owner of the property located at 520 Auto Park Drive, Fuller Ford, has requested the vacation of public street easements for Auto Park Drive and the associated Street Light and Pedestrian Easements, Public Drainage Easement and Easement for Parking and Emergency Access in the auto dealerships located south of Main Street on either side of Brandywine Ave. In accordance with Section 7050 ofthe California Government Code and Chapter 4, Section 8333 and 8334 of the California Streets and Highways Code, the street easements for Auto Park Drive and the Easement for Parking and Emergency Access may be performed summarily through adoption of a resolution ordering said vacation. In accordance with Part 3, Chapter 3 of the California Streets and Highways Code, Council must adopt a Resolution of Intention setting a public hearing in order to consider the vacation request for the Street Light and Pedestrian Easements and the Public Drainage Easement associated with Auto Park Drive. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt a resolution ordering the summary vacation of Public Street Easements for Auto Park Drive and Easement for Parking and Emergency Access within the auto dealerships located east ofI-80S and south of Main Street and that Council adopt the Resolution of Intention setting a public hearing for June 7,2005 at the Council Chambers of the Public Services Building, located at 276 Fourth Ave, Chula Vista CA, at 4:00 p.m. to vacate the Street Light and Pedestrian Easements and Public Drainage Easement related to Auto Park Drive. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None. DISCUSSION: On April 1, 2005, a representative for the DGF Family Limited Partnership, owners of the Fuller Ford auto dealership in Chula Vista, requested the vacation of existing public street e¡tsements for 9-1 Page 2, Meeting Date q 5/10/05 Auto Park Drive and associated Street Light and Pedestrian Easements, Public Drainage Easement and Easement for Parking and Emergency Access within the auto dealerships located east ofI-805, south of Main Street and on either side of Brandywine Avenue (see attached Exhibit "A"). Auto Park Drive was mapped and built in 1993 with the creation of the Ford and Chevrolet dealerships, but the street was not granted for public use until the street easement documents were recorded in 1995 (Doc. No's. 1995-0152161, 1995-0177682 and 1995-0177686). Similarly, the street light and pedestrian easements were granted for public use by separate instruments (Doc. No's. 1995-0152163, 1995-0177684 and 1995-0177688). The Easement for Parking and Emergency Access and Drainage Easement were granted and accepted for public purposes on Parcel Map No. 17197 recorded August 18, 1993. The auto dealers located around Auto Park Drive wish to make better use of the land that currently makes up Auto Park Drive and associated Street Light and Pedestrian Easements, Public Drainage Easement and Easement for Parking and Emergency Access. Their intent is to redesign their dealerships to be of a more typical layout consisting of a main entry drive aisle instead of the frontage road layout (Auto Park Drive) that exists today. This will result in improved traffic circulation and expand dealership inventory storage. On April 26, 2005, Council approved the Redevelopment Agency's transfer of its Option to Purchase the adj acent Shinohara property to DGF Family Limited Partnership, Fuller Ford. The proposed easement vacations will further facilitate the expansion of Fuller's business operations and activities into this newly acquired land. All utility companies have been notified of this street easement vacation proposal. The Otay Water District currently has an existing water utility easement over the entire street easement area and the vacation will not affect the District's easement. SDG&Ehas indicated they have existing overhead utility and underground gas facilities with the area to be vacated and request that the City retain an easement for their facilities upon vacation ofthe street easements. No other utility companies have facilities within the easements proposed for vacation. Chapter 4, Section 8333(a) of the California Streets and Highways Code states that an easement may be summarily vacated if the easement has not been used for the purpose for which it was dedicated or acquired for five consecutive years immediately preceding the proposed vacation. Staff has determined that the Easement for Parking and Emergency Access meets these criteria. The parking and emergency access easement was never used for its intended purpose. The parking areas within the easement have always been used for inventory storage, not customer parking and City's Fire Department staff have determined the easement is not needed for emergency access purposes. Section 8334 (b) of the same Code states that a portion ofa street or highway may be summarily vacated if it lies within property under one ownership and that does not continue through such ownership or end touching property of another. The Auto Park Drive public street easements are composed of three separate easements. Two of which are located entirely within the Fuller Ford parcels and the third located within the Chevrolet parcel, none of which touch the property of the adjacent parcels. The Street Light and Pedestrian Easements and the Public Drainage Easement cannot be vacated summarily and therefore require vacation through the general vacation procedure in accordance with Chapter 3 of the California Streets and Highways Code. Prior to Council action of the vacation of 9-2 Page 2, Meeting Date '1 5/10/05 the Street Light and Pedestrian Easements and the Public Drainage Easement, Section 8320 states that Council must adopt a Resolution of Intention setting a public hearing on the matter. The Resolution is to include: 1. A declaration of intention of the Council to Ýacate the easements 2. A statement that the vacation proceeding is conducted under Chapter 3 of the Streets and Highways Code 3. A description of the general location and extent of the easements to be vacated 4. The date, hour and place for the public hearing (June 7, 2005 at the Council Chambers of the Public Services Building, located at 276 Fourth Ave, Chula Vista, CA 91910, at 4:00 p.m.) Staff will post conspicuously notices of vacation along the eas=ents proposed to be vacated and will publish the notice of the hearing in a local newspaper. The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary. FISCAL IMPACT: Deposits made by the applicant are paying for the costs related to the processing of this vacation request. Attachments: Exhibit "A" - plat showing easement locations J:\Engineer\A GENDA lCAS2005\5-1 0-05\PV092.SE.doc 9~3 '" 0 0 è: (I) '" š:: m (I) » -I 3 _. Z 0 (l)cc :::J::r rn ~~ ~'" -i (fJ "'tJ o :::J ;u :I: :Þ <::rc. m Z (1)"0 m 0 0 :;0 < (I) -i :I: ... "'c. :> ~ ~ )Þ C s:: ~ ;:0 z m < m '" ~ BRANDYWINE AVENUE 0 "'-c 0 (") C1 '" ~ C1 ~ (1),.- en -. ë3cncà 0 C1 (I) '" '" "':::J Z CDcnc. c.~(I) (1)3 :::J (I) ~ ~ ~CC m o (I) 0 <::r:::J ro 0 ro " '< "' en "Tl ro (I) 3- (I) CD ce' ~ :::J::r ~~ ~ -C <::rc. 0 (1)"0 ~;:¡. 0-' < (I) 0 "'c. <::r:::J C1(1) (I) 0 am <..... (1)<; "'» a. w" ¡;]s. :::J roO c.-c '" ~ ,.- 0 :'" 9-4 I I +z ~ o Õö <::r~ (I) 111. < :::J '" '" £~ ~(I) (I) '" c.m (I) 3 (I) :::J ~ 1\ -c o ;:¡. ëõ' <::r:::J (I) 0 <..... ",» C1 c: aõ (I)-c c.", ~ ,.- o :'" ~ z OJ :> ;¡;¡ ^ (fJ -I OLEANDER AVENUE RESOLUTION NO. DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF AUTO PARK DRIVE AND EASEMENT FOR PARKING AND EMERGENCY ACCESS WITHIN THE AUTO DEALERSIDPS LOCATED EAST OF I-80S AND SOUTH OF MAIN STREET WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista is considering the summary vacation of Auto Park Drive and easement for parking and emergency access within the auto dealerships located east of 1-805 and south of Main Street; and, WHEREAS, the aforementioned Auto Park Drive and easement for parking and emergency access is no longer neéded for public purposes; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 7050 of the California Government Code and Chapter 4, Section 8334 (b) of the California Streets and Highways Code, the public street easements for Auto Park Drive may be summarily vacated since they lie within property under one ownership that does not continue through such ownership or end touching property of another; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 7050 of the California Government Code and Chapter 4, Section 8333 (a) of the California Streets and Highways Code, the easement for parking and emergency access may be summarily vacated because the easement has not been used for the purpose for which it was dedicated or acquired for five consecutive years immediately preceding the proposed vacation; and, WHEREAS, in order to vacate, Council must adopt a resolution ordering the summary· vacation of the public street easements for Auto Park Drive and the easement for parking and emergency access; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the evidence submitted, the City Council finds that the public street easements for Auto Park Drive more particularly described in Doc. No's. 1995-0152161, 19950177682 and 1995-0177686 and the easement for parking and emergency access more particularly described in Parcel Map No. 17197, aÜ located east of 1-805 and south of Main Street (see Exhibit A), is unnecessary for present or prospective public use as a public street or for parking and emergency access, reserving therefrom other public uses for the benefit of San Diego Gas and Electric including but not limited to public utilities as exist today; and, The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby order the summary vacation of the public street easements for Auto Park Drive and the easement for parking and emergency access located east ofI-805 and south of Main Street (Exhibit A). 9-5 Resolution No. Page 2 DRAFT BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a certified copy of the resolution of vacation, attested by the clerk under seal, to be recorded without acknowledgement, certificate of acknowledgement, or further proof in the office of the recorder of the county in which the property is located. . Upon such recordation, the vacation shall be complete. Presented by Approved as to fo= by Alex AI-Agha City Engineer J :\Engineer\AGENDA \Resos\Resos2005\5-10-05\ResoAutoParkDrSurnrnary.sh.doc 9-6 RESOLUTION NO. DRAFT RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 7, 2005 TO CONSIDER VACATING A STREET LIGHT AND PEDESTRIAN EASEMENTS AND PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED ADJACENT TO AUTO PARK DRIVE, EAST OF I-80S, SOUTH OF MAIN STREET WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista is commencing the vacation proceedings for the street light and pedestrian easements and public drainage easement located adj acent to Auto Park Drive, east ofI-805, south of Main Street at the request of the adjacent property owner; and, WHEREAS, The aforementioned street light and pedestrian easements and public drainage easement are no longer needed for their intended purposes; and, WHEREAS, in order to process the vacation of the street light and pedestrian easements and public drainage easements, CoUncil must first adopt a resolution of intention and set a public hearing in accordance with Chapter 3 of the California Streets and Highways Code; and, WHEREAS, it is recommended by City staff that Council hold a public hearing on this matter on Tuesday, June 7, 2005 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Ave, Chula Vista, CA 91910. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby set a public hearing on Tuesday, June 7, 2007, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Ave, Chula Vista, CA 91910 to consider vacating the street light and pedestrian easements and public drainage easement located adjacent to Auto Park Drive, east ofI-805, south of Main Street, as shown in Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to post the notice of the public hearing in accordance with the Streets and Highways Code and City ordinances. Presented by Approved as to fonn by Alex Al-Agha, City Engineer. J:\Engineer\AGENDA \R.csos\Resos200S\S~ 1 0-o5\RcsoAutoParkDr.sh.doc 9-7 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item / D Meeting Date: Mav 10. 2005 ITEM TITLE: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an easement to Pacific Bell Telephone Company as necessary for the completion of State Route 125. SUBMITTED BY: City Engineer 6k- City Manage¡}Þ' O~ p (4/5ths Vote:_No-X..J REVIEWED BY: The Council is requested to adopt a Resolution authorizing the granting of an Easement for Communications Facilities over a portion of City owned land Pacific Bell Telephone Company (SBC) as required for the Construction of State Route 125. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council: 1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the granting of an Easement over City owned land to Pacific Bell Telephone Company (SBC). BOARDS/COMMISSION: Not applicable DISCUSSION: The City is a party to that certain "City of Chula Vista Toll Road Agreement" with San Diego Express Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("SDELP") through California Transportation Ventures, Inc., its general partner ("CTV") dated April 16, 2002 (the "Toll Road Agreement"). Pursuant to that Agreement, the City has committed to take certain actions with respect to completing the planning, right-of-way acquisition and construction of the SR-125 Project. Section 2.3 of this agreement provides "CITY shall provide to SDELP reasonable assistance in negotiations with utility companies for utility relocations or installations necessary for completion of the Project." The construction of this project necessitates the relocation of an existing SBC Utility cabinet situated where the future East H Street Northbound on-ramp to SR125 will be located. The only available location for this cabinet is on a City-owned property adjacent to the toll road. The property in question was dedicated to the City in fee for "Open Space, Public Utilities and Other Public Uses" as Lot A of Chula Vista Tract No. 89-9, Salt Creek I, Unit No.4. The City has received a formal request from CTV to grant without compensation this required easement to SBC. A copy of the CTV request and the proposed Easement Deed to Pacific Bell (SBC) are attached hereto. While the City is under no obligation to grant this easement without cornpensation, the request has been made by CTV due to the time constraints that would be imposed by CALTRANS if an appraisal and review were required. Staff has reviewed the request and determined that the proposed easement use is consistent with the permissible uses for this land. as dedicated. Additionally, due to the location, and limited altemative uses for this area, the value of the 10-1 Page 2, Item I 0 Meeting Date Mav 10. 2005 easement is nominal. Staff therefore recommends that the easement be granted to SBC without compensation in order to expedite construction ofSR-125. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City. The easement and facilities are consistent with the allowed uses for the site and will be maintained by SBC. Attachment A: crv request for the subject easement J:\EngineerIAGENDA\CAS2005\S-IO-o5\SBC 125 esrnt.doc 10-2 ctv REC:::!"_'_:-·! CITY OF C'f:/I'¡í ',' ", -, E"G' ,-,-':-, _'_n ~'¡,.: 1'-\ ~ -¡Ntcii!f'fG D[~~r ZíD5 liAR 28 An 10: /4 Cal..Jiornia Transportation Ventures lnc. March 25, 2005 Mr. Rick Ryals Real Property Manager City of Chula Vista Engineering Department 276 4th Avenue . Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: State Route 125 Easement for SSC Dear Rick: SAN DIEGO EXPRESSWAY, L.P. requests the City of Chula Vista to dedicate an easement for SSC in connection with the SR 125 Project. Attached to this letter is a copy of the easement documents from SSC. Please let us know at your earliest convenience if you require any additional information and if the City is able to accommodate this request. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, .~ Anthony G. Evans Chief Financial Officer Cc: Cheryl Revell - Caltrans File £5~·€.ß6 - Pïõ CTV-L TR-05-693 880 Kuhn Drive, Chula Vista, CA 9Pd~3 tel619.591.4200 fax 619.591.4291 RECDRDED AT TFfE REQUEST OF WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO r I I r I r I r I r I r lIlo Documenfarv Transfer Tax Due. Bv THE ABOVE BOX FOR RECORDER'S USE Äoent D3( 54)5308677 APN 59041'O:'f 4" Page 1 of2 DRAfT, .' pÄélAë gaL. m¡:p}iONE éör;,f 5ANY OFFICE COpy Pacific Bell Telephone Company Rigftf of Way Office 4220 Arizona St., Room 200 S<:fñ Díë<fó. CÄ 92'1'04 CHULA VISTA EXCHANGE RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT City of .Chula Vista] a Municipal C.o.rporation, hereinaft~r ,refe~red to as ~Gra~tors," hereby grant(s) to PAC1FIC BE[[ TELEPHONE COWANY, a California CorporatIon, Its successors and assigns, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee," the right from time to time to construct and Install' communication facilities over, across, upon and' under the hereinafter descriéed rear property and to use, operate, inspect, repair, replace and remove said facilities, or any of thèm, togétner with an excrusive right of way and easement, incrudìng ingress and' egress thereto. Said communication facilities shall cOnsist of the following: 1'. Underground'wires, caéles and' otlier erecfricar conductors and appurtenances for communication purposes; 2. Conduits and manholes, together with marker posts above ground; 3. Structures with electronic communication equipment, and associated paving, fencing and other appurtenances related thereto. This legal description was prepared pursuant to Section 8730© of the Business and Professions Code. Grantor, his/ner/their successors and' assigns, shan' not erect or construct any bUilding or other structure or drill or operate any well within said easement. . Grantor also grants to Grantee the right to receive municipai service and commercial power service from the appropriate utility company serving the area, togetner witn tne right for such utility company to place their respective service facilities upon and within said easement. When in Grantee's opinion, the right of way and easement hereby granted is no longer . necessary or usefur in Grantee's performance of its diJtìes to the pubflc, Grantee will" quitclaim all of its right, title and interest in and to said right of way and easement to Grantors, their successors, assigns,' heirs or devisèes; and' grantee at grantee's optìon, shalT aéandon in place any facilities installed in accordance with the terms of this right of way easement. 10-4 ¡¡ g¡ .. o u !ž ~ B o o ..~ .~ 0. ~> 05 ~u ... ·oo ~. og DRAFT D3( 54 )5308677 APN 595-410-14 Page 1 of2 ~.~,.;o Said real property is in the County of San Diego, State of California, and is described as follows: Lot A of Chula Vista Tra~t N-c-. 89"9- Subdivision as" s-aid lot is" sflDwn- on" map" of said subdivision filed for record as Map No. 12917 on the 04 day of February, 1992 in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County. Tlie aforementìoned- easemenf slialT De locafeá on tñaf portìon of said' property cfescriDeá in Exhibit A and delineated on Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof. Granfee shalT De responsiDle for damage causecf infentìonalTy or DY any neglìgenf act or omission of Grantee, its agents or employees while exercising the rights granted herein. Executed this day of ,2005 City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation as owner BY: BY: ITS: ITS: State of California } } Comly of San Diego} On- before me, I CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER I I 0 INDIVIDUAL(S) I I 0 CORPORATE I OffiCER(S) 1 (Name( s) of Signer( s) lOP ARTNER(S) o proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be I 0 ATTORNEY-IN-FACT the- peŒon(s) whose na1Íle(s) is/ar" sUbsçribeâ to I [] tRUSTEES the within:iostrument and acknowledgedto-me- I 0 GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR that he/she/they executed-the same in· his! her! I- 0 OTHER their anthorized capacity(ies5, and that by bislherl I their sìgnatnre(s) on the instrument the person(s), I- or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) I acted, e'xecì1te"d the" inSùunïènt. I SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: I NameofPerson(s)or,Entity(ies)- I I I I Copyright t993 National Notuy I Association, Cano~ Park, CA (Name, Notary Public) (Date) personally appeared (Title(s) o personally known to me - OR - Witness my hand and official seal. Sigœture of Notary 10-5 DRAFT EXHIBIT A .,n,.., Legal Description of Easement Area B'e-gi!îriing at g found Street Survey Monument stamped R.C.E. 16583 delineating the centerline of that certain public road known as East H Street p-eí Map- Nö: 12827 flle<:tfoíraront ö1'1' thð' 1"8" ctaT of Jon-a; 1"991', in-th-e- Offic~r öf" the County Recorder of San Diego County, said monument bears South 74· 29' 25" We-st 676.48" fe'et fröm ttre" inters-e-ctton' of the- centerlim, of th-at certain" public road known as Mt Miguel Road as said road and centerline are also sh-own' on- s-ait!" Map' r'l"O'. 12827 aritt sait!" Ea-st ¡; Stre-et; s-aitt rtröntll1Tent ais-o- being the beginning of a curve concave to the Southeast having a radius of 2000: 00' fe"et; cr ratlia1' line- to- s-aid" b-e-ginrril',-g tre-arS" t<torttr 1"5" 3\)' 35" We-st,· thence Southwesterly 371.76 feet along said curve and centerline through a central" aJ1g1~r of to.. 39' 01~;' thént:ð le-a'Virrg S"aitt œnterl1mr Sötrth- or 08' 43~ East 80.58 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said True Point of Beginning alsu S' pbint on th-e- Söt:Jth-e-asterly' Rrght of Way- lirre- of S"aitt East H Str!!ét ant!' the beginning of a curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 1924.00 fé"et; a' ratliatlin-e-ttrslàÜ:tTrmrpöintofB'eg1nniny-tre-ars-NorttT26" 56' 23" We-st;- thence Southwesterly 36.79 feet along s'aid curvè through a central angle of 01''' 05' 45";- th-enœ' SODth- 28" 02' 1"5" Ecrst 20:00' fe'et ttr th-e" b-e-ginning of a' curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 1904.00 feet; thence Nörth-e-asre-rly' 29:21' firer along sait!" CDIVe- through~ go œntrai' angJe- of 00" 52' 44"; thence North 07° 08' 43" West 21.27 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Area of easement totals 663 square feet. 10-6 '\ , , \ \ \. 1'ifr¡" \ -~~q ~~8f:1 Q......,Io. .~ \ \\ )~"'. ~ \~: \ ~~~~ ~ ~ \ Nd~ . ~ oJ:: 'T tJ , C'J OJ ......./ ë;;~:::¡a .1::1' /......~ ~OdUl //~1. ~ Z;;~ .-'......;'Ç.~\ £-',Qõ15 ~ fT1 /_- '3"', gg'Q9 "3 ~190.L s ~ ! <!>. \ \V\\ ~ \\ "l1r""b ... . "~ . . þ~tJQ.L..§.. r"'Ø -;0._- . -- ~ - - - \~ -- . \ \\ \ \ ~ ~. " ~ -~a ªii-v ~~ SI~ "\ ("\'>.Ç\~ ?>-¿,\ . ® , , ;fØ''I'' . ...... ~~ ~'s: ïJ -- J>rO ïJOAJ -1-1 - 0 tv =2 (OJ> --J 0 '1 -3ß,gõ.Ls-l- - a" ~g¡g~ PP~g¡ .....CI:I 'T :z ........I,.I 'I' (õ) ~IVI.... ~~~~ ~ . ~ ~ -~-- ~ /- DRAFT ¡' ~ , , s: ïJ J>rO ïJO:;O -1-1 ~ :0 wP-~Z \ -..J EXHIBIT B APN 595-410-14 Lot A, Map 12917 10-7 \ o '1 v v .-,,, --- ........I~ /"/0 ~ ..... õ"s¡.1. ..../Ç¡\p --- ... \-....... 1'ifr:- ....c,¿_..... \1\' ~~\ " ~~ ¡;¡B f:ê LJ -,,,. <0 ¡::;~. ~i~\ , , \ \ '.-."" , --,")~' \ \\ '" -' ~.I': ",II, .&.~... ~ \ ) , RESOLUTION NO. DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN EASEMENT TO PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY (SBe) AS NECESSARY FOR THE COMPLETION OF STATE ROUTE 125 WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista is the fee owner of that certain real property situated in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, more particularly described as Lot A of Chula Vista Tract No. 89-9, Salt Creek I, Unit No.4 according to Map thereof No. 12917 filed in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, said Lot A being dedicated to the City of Chula Vista in fee for Open Space, Public Utilities, and Other Public Uses; and WHEREAS, the construction of State Route 125 necessitates the relocation of an existing SBC utility cabinet to a portion of said Lot A; and WHEREAS, the City is a party to that certain "City of Chula Vista Toll Road Agreement" with San Diego Express Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("SDELP") through California Transportation Ventures, Inc., its general partner ("CTV") dated April 16, 2002 (the "Toll Road Agreement"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Toll Road Agreement, the City has agreed to take certain actions with respect to completing the planning, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of the SR-125 Project, including providing SDELP reasonable assistance in negotiations with utility companies for utility relocations or i.nstallations necessary for completion ofthe SR-125 Project. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does resolve as follows: The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the herein described easement deed on behalf of the City of Chula Vista as Grantor as necessary to complete . the State Route 125 Project. Presented by Approved as to form by Alex Al-Agha City Engineer 10-8 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item -.L1 Meeting Date: 05/10/2005 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Accepting bids and awarding a contract for the 2004/05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XIV (SW-23 1); authorizing the transfer of available Sewer Facility Replacement Funds into the project from the 2003/04 Sewer Rehabilitation Program, Phase XIII (SW-230) project and authorizing staff to increase quantities to expend all available funds for this project SUBMITTED BY: Director of General Services ~ G,f{)r/ City Manager ':(c' (4/5ths Vote: Yes.L,No-l REVIEWED BY: On March 30, 2005, the Director of General Services received three (3) sealed bids for the Fiscal Year 2003-04 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XIII (SW-230) and Fiscal Year 2004-05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XIV (SW -231). The project will replace existing broken sewer mains and laterals, repair cracked sewer lines, and replace asphalt concrete pavement in various locations throughout the City of Chula Vista. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt a resolution accepting bids and awarding a $461,458.40 contract for the Fiscal Year 2003-04 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XIII (SW- 230) and Fiscal Year 2004-05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-PhäseXIV (SW-231) to Metropolitan Construction of Bonita, California; and authorizing the transfer of$282,396.00 in available Sewer Facility Replacement Funds from the 2003/04 Sewer Rehabilitation Program (SW-230) to the 2004/05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program (SW-23 1). BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Based on the results of compiled data inspections, including those performed with a closed circuit television camera, a list of existing sewer lines in need of rehabilitation was created. Certain sections of pipe are cracked and need to be replaced, repaired or relined to prevent groundwater infiltration or leaching ofraw sewage into the ground. The general scope ofthe project involves the replacement of existing broken sewer mains and laterals, the installation of pipe lining to repair cracked sewer lines, the replacement of sewer access holes, trenching, and asphalt concrete pavement. The project will include all labor, material, equipment, tools, transportation, mobilization, control of sewage flows, installation of root barrier, traffic control, removal and disposal of existing improvements, protection and restoration of existing improvements, and other miscellaneous work necessary for the project. The locations and types of work to be done are detailed in Tables A8through C (Attachment A). 11-1 Page 2, Item / / Meeting Date 05/10/05 On March 30, 2005, staff received and opened bids from three (3) contractors for the construction phase: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT 1. FilMex Inc., dba Metropolitan Construction - Spring Valley, CA $ 461,458.40 2. BRH-Gaver West Inc. - San Diego, CA $ 484,700.00 3. Zondiros Corp. - San Marcos, CA $ 511,424.00 The low bid by FilMex Inc., dba Metropolitan Construction is $461,458.40 which is $15,891.60 (3.4%) below the Engineer's estimate of$477,350. The Engineer's estimate was based on average prices for similar types of work completed during the last two projects. Staff verified the references provided by the contractor; their work record has been satisfactory. Furthermore, after reviewing the submitted bids, it was found that BRH -Gaver West, Inc. and Zondiros Corp. submitted bid contained mathematical errors; and thus, making both BRH-Gaver West, Inc. and Zondiros Corp bid nonresponsive. Staff recommends awarding a $461,458.40 contract to FilMex Inc., dba Metropolitan Construction of Spring Valley, California. Based on the additional bid amount submitted, staff estimates that there will be approximately $28,238.60 left in a contingency fund to do additional pipe repair. The locations of the proposed additional work are located on the west side of Interstate 805. The additional locations are listed in the attached tables. Any remaining funds at close of this project will be transferred toward the next fiscal year's Sewer Rehabilitation Program. This project concentrated on sewers that were mainly west of the 1-805 freeway. Twenty-eight percent (28%) ofthe project is in the Montgomery Area. The remaining seventy-two percent (72%) is located in the West side of ChuIa Vista and not within the Montgomery Area. Contract Amount Revision The conti-act documents allow the City to decrease or increase the unit quantity for the rehabilitation of additional pipes and manholes without a change in the contract unit price bid by the Contractor. Disclosure Statement Attached is a copy of the Contractor's Disclosure Statement (Attachment B). Environmental Status The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the project qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary. 11-2 Page 3, Item J / Meeting Date 05/10/05 Wage Statement The contractors who bid on this proj ect were not required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed by them for the work performed under this project. No special minority or women-owned business requirements were necessary as part of the bid. However, a "Notice to Contractors" was sent to various trade publications in order to encourage disadvantaged businesses to bid on the proj ect. FISCAL IMP ACT: Sufficient Sewer Facility Replacement funds were previously appropriated as part of the FY2003/2004 and FY2004/2005 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budgets for sewer rehabilitation projects. It is proposed that these funds be combined into the 2004/05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XIV(SW -231) to perform the required work. FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION A. Contract Amount $461,458.40 B. Contingencies $28,238.60 C. Staff Costs (Design & Inspection) $75,000.00 TOTAL $564,697.00 FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION . A. Sewer Facility Replacement funds appropriated for SW -230 and $282,396.00 transferred to SW-231 B. Sewer Facility Replacement funds available for SW -231 $282,301.00 TOTAL $ 564,697.00 Upon completion of the proj ect, the improvements will require only routine City sewer maintenance. Attachments A - Tables A through C B - Contractor's Disclosure Statement File No. 0735-1Q-SW230 0735-10-SW231 M'\General Services\GS AdministrationlCauncil AgendalSW2301SW230-Al13.pgs.jg changes 427.doc 11-3 ¡:.¡ = o .... CI.J ,..;¡ ~ ¡;;¡ ~ ,..;¡ c.? Z ..... --Q~ ;;:;§à¡;;¡ "';'E-<~ ~o CI.J~ 0::I=-= <= "E-< ..,Qo "';'~o ~.....~ CI.J<..... "=- .... >~E-< ~¡:.¡~ f;J=Q <o¡:.¡ =E-<~ =-Cl.J~ ~S~ ~E-<¡:.¡ ¡:.¡~= Cl.JZO <ZE-< =OIZJ p;u~ ~~¡;;¡ =¡;;¡E-< ~E-<j ~<IZJ ~~E-< ::::QZ ¡:.¡¡:,¡õ Cl.JU"" ~< <:,..;¡ê ¡:.¡=-< "';¡~E-< ~¡:.¡~ E-<=U o E-< IZJ E-< Z ¡;;¡ ~ c.? ¡:.¡ IZJ ~ ~ ¡;;¡ CI.J ¡::- U)WW Z ....<C w o II. -:::;¡z li:x- -OU) 1I:1I::r Ua..1- Ula..CJ W<CZ e_W ...J UI II: Z W ~~S~$~ wI::UWeõ!: I-WWmW..J <>-ZOZW .J~~I-WII: U g¡ II: UI e W ZWW mu.Qmg; :;;Ol-O<C ::J UI-a.. Z W w UI II: o '" ....C!!! ...I,cnwD::: <wza..D:: ffi~S~~ <~~;:b .J;>zwO z..", 8 ~ I-<Ca..w 'It :r 1-- a..::: w- e O:r_ I-:;Ë- :;;. 0:I;'It 11::;; II. W o·z wx- ~wmuo:r¡::- <C1I:....w bo...JD..CJw Ol-D..D..ZLL LL w«w O:-...J WLLW !::jo!!: UI a.. Z o ~ U o ...J a....J<CI-UI 11.-D..W "" c '" 0_ o õo g.~ c-.!;;¡:è=:s .'- -' ëã'¡: ~~...a .' ..,. B CQ =.:-j õ ..~""~ ~:7 ii:- r-- -.- OCI 1"'1 ~ í!.Ç: .: '- ~ 1:10 8"Öo"'; .5 u - .... c ::¿~~ oo=u Q.- ~ Q, cn_~ii: '" '" '" ~ co 0 \0 ~ t- '" '" \0 ~ o ~ t- '" ~ . U oc> ~~ ~~ ",,,, '" ~ ~ õo:" ac - fiô ~~ 9~ ö;'~ ~.~ "? e= M':- U CQ I"'I~ jg @~ ~-~ ÍÌ¡~ '=0 ..,. 8,0-. _ 0 M .-'" ... 1:10 !õ ~ ,,;.: ~ = N iü·5 .... ' I_"'¡ 8.~~ j.~ CIJ-NIoCCL. . \0 \0 \0 ~ co ~ oc '" '" ~ '" t- '" '" \0 '" " . ~ . u oc> ~~ t-~ :g", " ~ '" :;., N . - ::;;: .~ I æ ü :... "'E ':: õ'= o .~ © ~-= \0 ~ 'ii:î - '¡ ~ ... c.._ '¡ 0 ~.= o.,l'""I_:J ~"'j" ~.Ë- ...... -= Q., 8.;; .....¡ 0 (I)-I""'IZ o '" '" ~ co ~ oc '" '" ~ '" ~ '" ~ '" \0 ~ · lJ oc> ~~ ~~ :g", " ~ '" ATTACHMENT fH ... \0 rð .' "[ ..., ... ~ u ::2 \0 -¡ ,5 ..W"'I... _ Now riõ:r\ I ãL :.ë ~. .....0- ~;:;:;r--~~ ~~u..~ .=\OÕO.~:ª =___...1 Q.N 1""1 = U :: I I IXI.Eo .. - .. õ CL. 8.~ ~ 0 0 rn-NO::::Z o " t- N~N \0 o " o '" oc M o '" '" \0 ~ ~ p.. . U oc> ~I- "O~~ "'::E "'gj 1-'" N " ¡;.¡ ~ o f-< ~ ¡;.¡ f-< -< ,..¡ " z .... ~Q~ ;;:;~¡;.¡ ~f-<~ ~O en~ o( ¡o..=:¡ o of-< ..,QO ~~o ~<~ o¡o.. = >~f-< ~¡;.¡~ ¡;'¡~Q ~O¡;'¡ æ;;;~g:: o( Z ....0 ........ ~f-<¡;.¡ ¡;.¡~=:¡ enZO -<zf-< =oen ~U~ :;;j~¡;.¡ =¡;.¡f-< ~f-<j ~-<en ¡;'¡~f-< ~QZ ¡;.¡¡;,¡õ enU.., ~-< -<,..¡Q ¡;.¡¡o..;¿ "'¡~f-< P:¡1'i<;:':> ~~U o f-< en .f-< Z ¡;.¡ ~ ¡;.¡ en ~ ¡;.¡ ~ ¡;.¡ en cnUJ~ zl;;w 0"'11. ¡::~z 0..)(- -OUl II:II::J: 00..1- Ulo..C) W<Z C_W ..J UI II: Z W ...JWOuJt¡:O ;2w¡::II:<2: wl::owc2: I-wW!Qw..J <~$ÉOzw ..J~ol-WII: u ~ II: UI C w ZWW !Qu.º ~ :¡¡Ob°o.. ::> wl-w ZUlli:: o a: ~C~ .....rnwa: <WZD.IX a:~Q~~ LLlW~a:: ~>-~S:b ..JS:zwo Zilla: 8 §: I-<o..w .. :J: 1-- c.= w- e O:r.. I-:;i :¡¡. o::t;.. n::¡¡ 11.. w e·z w)(- ~w!Quo:J:¡::- I- <n:l-w oO..JD..t9w O.....c..a...ZLL " w<w .... O::::-...J wu.w !;,Io!!: UI 0.. z o ~ u o ..J o....J<I-UI Q.-c"W ~. . ""';:g;~ ,-- I co;;' ~ Do:; 5 == ~-:-_ 9'Ë .. ..~ !!Æ @)...o~;¡_ N_CO,,"S - 0 IN Bœ :$"7o-'.:! .- ....~~~;¿~ ,;0'\ ..1"1... ""' C. ..- ..'; go :!Š! ~ ÔI e-.5 --N'"'C 11"'1--- .... I. .' ~~ O. 1""1"" _ c. ~~~~jE: 00 '" '" N~'" '" N '" '" '" .... '" '" '" .... 'D ø.. . U 00;> ....~G¡ ~~~ ~'" N '" ;:OÕo ..~ NÕa = I I co &._ . ... i¡)-~ Ò~'E... ....NN_.~ .. .;--; e :a: g: ...!!IJ: @-i::.:!8 O.I.....;!'::=:: '001""1 I .... ~~~Ò ... '-1""1'; ~ .~ Õ':" B-IIG !oN ~":.5 !!- N e.: r ! u...J Õ:"n"".3 ~ 0.0"" __ CI': -N..oc.. .... ~ ..... '" N~N '" .... .... '" '" ~ .... '" '" o 'D ø.. · u 00;> ~G¡ ~f-<~ 0<: ~~ D'" '" '" 00 ....~ 5. 1.1 ~ 9~ ~~ '7 .!:.~ ..... --N I!:a _ ....,!!c::I ..\QM" ... @-,-.... 8 ~;::;::!œ - ..... .... ~o t . -. ~IX N.,.,._ N ......-~ &.... il""l..- ~ ~ ~:!~e:š . J N U...J õr...~.3 8- c,f"'\ r-- ._ {I1-Nl:"'-o.. '" ~ ..... ..... N~N '" o .... '" '" ..,. ..,. '" '" '" " . eJ 00;> >f-< ",¡::~ 8<ê ~~f-< D'" '" ..... ATTACHMENT A- í.- c &'0 .. 9'" ~ !! ~ .... e'~ .1 Be:¡ 0\" ..... N2;,.,Jg @~~~ . - ~ N :::¡~,; ;:::¡ .; .. @" ~ lIS _ _._ Cl.C'I lIS c ~l:IOt::I Õ ~I j g, CI...., ._ (l]1:IO_c.. '" '" ~ NO..... '" N '" '" - ..... '" '" ~ ..... N . ø.. . U 00;> ~~ o<~ ....~~ 0< .... 00 r;.¡ == o E-< ~ r;.¡ ~ ,..¡ " Z .... --Q~ ;:;:;§r;.¡ ~E-<~ (IJ~~ o( ¡:>,,== <:) .E-< ...,Qo '";'~o ~<~ .¡:>" = ;>~E-< ><r;.¡~ r;.¡==Q (IJ -<Or;.¡ =E-<~ ¡:>"(IJ~ o( Z ....0 ........ HE-<r;.¡ i><:U== ""r;.¡0 ",Z<.... -<Z" =0'" ~U~ ~~r;.¡ =r;.¡E-< ~E-<j ~-<", r;.¡~E-< ~Q~ r;.¡r;.¡0 (lJU"" ~-< -<,..¡Q r;.¡¡:>"~ "'¡~E-< ~r;.¡p E-<==U o E-< '" E-< Z r;.¡ ~ r;.¡ (IJ ~ r;.¡ ~ r;.¡ '" ATTA.CHMEf\IT_ A - S . '" = -o~. ~ ~-~ " _I r ~ G~ I = . II>'Ldü ~ 9 "0 o. 1 c..0\ ;.., ~~ ~ 00_. 0... '" 0_ Z~W . ...~::::: i!'~ .. i!.~ o .... :. ~ '&~";j;¡ õo - . ¡::;§Z " j I ~ _ nc::l -0 ~'" ;.., N::!:~.38 I ~~ D..X- ~ N '" -Oil> N -. :: I ~O\~_ ~ D:D:;¡: I @ôo~ "w ® .. .. UD..I- >,0 '" ~~ _ " ~ _ -\0 ~I""'I II)~C) = ~ OCI-N'_M ;,. -- ~ o 0 I .........¡tr""l o- W Z ..¡, .. ~ ~ e_W = ~ 0 '¡;N~ ~ ~ .: ~ f : :së 'ë e-::N'2:Š III N_.- ...J CI.._ N = ...." ::¡ I "-' f I ~;:j ~.:\ ~ Õ.I r-.,3 g, õ~.3 8- 0::::", ¡¡: Q.I,Q 0\ ._ c.._ ._ r.o')O\-aoø.. rn_MCk 0) D: Z W ..JujOWt:° ~W¡::D:<c?: w1¡¡UWe?: \0 N '" '" I- Will ...J «~Z ~W ...J ~~WD: U ê¡ D: 0) e W ZWW III....QIII~ <:) 0 00 ..., -::;; 01:; 0 D.. ::::J WI-W Z II) D: ° a: t-C!:!:! -J'U)WC::: ~"'Z...a: "'0!i« W~~ CD 0 0 00 ..., S~¡¡¡~b Z",O z",a: 8 ~ I-<CD..W 'It_ N<"""!oN N~N N~" N~" . ;¡: I-~ D..;: '" '" '" '" w- e ox.. ..., '" '" ~ .... .... \0 00 I-::;¡ " " '" '" " " '" '" ::;;. ~ ..., 0 .... O;¡:'It .... .... .... .... D:' " " '" '" ....::;; " " '" '" W e·z wx- ~~oo;¡:~ DO " I- <CD:I-w 0 0 oO...JD..C)w .... ..., o~[L[LZL1.. .... w<Cw D: -...J Wu.W ¡:>" · eJ !::Io!!: ôo ôo · U II> D.. 00;> 00> ~ ~ z z z 2S §~ §~ 0 "....¡;>< "'....¡;>< ~ \O~« ~~« <:)p~ «~ ~~ 0 ~CI ~ CI~ z> ~~ 0 u u ~« ...J « « <:) ,.., ,.., '" ~ D.....J<CI-o) " " '" '" D..-D..W '" 0 ~ N ~ ~ ~ I"< ~ o ¡... ~ I"< ¡... j '" z .... ~Q¡:=: ~~I"<~ ~O "'¡:=: o( ¡o.,~ == Q-¡'" "'f;o:10 '";'=0 ~<¡:=: "'.¡o.,Q:i >¡;ât: ~I"<~ I"<~Q '" <01"< Q:i¡"'~ ¡o.,,,,~ ~8~ H¡"'f;o:1 ""U~ f;o:1f;o:10 "'Z¡... ;â~", ~u~ ~~I"< Q:il"<¡'" ¡;â¡...j ¡:=:<", r..:¡ti!¡... ~QZ r..:¡r..:¡õ "'u...., ~< <....¡Q r..:¡¡o.,z ....¡¡;â< ¡:!:1ç.1þ ¡::i~u o ¡... CIJ ¡... Z I"< ~ '" ç.1 '" ¡:=: r..:¡ ~ I"< '" ¡::- u>UJUJ zl;;:UJ 0........ -:Sz b:x- -oen C::c::::C ua.... ena.C) UJ«z e_UJ ..J en c:: z UJ ;iwQwt:fi c::W...c::«- UJt:UUJe:!: ...WUJIIIUJ..J <~~OzuJ ..Jj:O"'UJC:: U ¡s c:: en e UJ ZUJUJ III....QIII~ :S0\:j0a. => W"'UJ Z u> c:: o '" ....C!:!:! ..JLÙ~~~ ffiš~~~ ~~~3:b ..J:>zwo ~m~ u ;:: ...«a.UJ .. ::c ...Z' a._ W- e o:¡;_ ....:¡¡- :s, 0:I;.. C:::s .... UJ e· z UJX- C)«WUO:<:¡::- f-IXI«C::"'W OO--HLCJw Ol-O-O-Zu.. uJ«UJ LL O::-..J W....UJ t:!0!!: rJ Q. z ° ~ U ° ..J Q...J«....en Q.-Q.UJ .. .- ;:""ã. ~~C - ". I I g-~ ;0 ~ ~.~ ~ 7'. 'i! ~ - .. - 21%1 :G!jõ @ ':::~ =-~ ..:.- rr'I"'~O -.- ro"\ '- -.a...... ïã:" !:! ~ c...,._ ._ ~ - e.5 I "..J õir.58- c.ro"\ ._ tI]-\OQ., v - v '" N - v '" 'O '" v ""' '" 00 v ""' - ""' = eJ "'> O~ ~~ ~'" '" ""' - .. ;., ~. " ~ 1- C 11è Ñõ9 ~~e n ;''i! ~ o U._ @~j:; ~ .1 1I'"\.s ~~ i~;" -.;¡ c-.r If!~·~ !:! - f U 10 I u .9-ct ig.3~ 8 cn-It"IZ= == v '" N-v '" '" '" v ""' 'O '" v M o ""' Po. = u "'> Of-< i?i~ :.:~ 'Of-< ~'" 'O v - ATTACHMENT Ii ~ 4 "' ..J <:> ... ... .., C ~..J~ O..:Z ~¡...~ =-o,..¡ ~¡...~ ~ =- = = u u ..: ..: ¡.¡ ¡.¡ .., .... '<> .. c c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ¡.¡ ~ III IZ1 o III ¡... ° ,..¡ ¡... ~ u> rJ ~ ..: ¡.¡ ..J ~ ,..¡ ,..¡ ..: ,..¡ ... ..: o ... ... 0 ... r.. r.. ..J ,..¡ .... .... ~ '" '<> '" ~ ~ ~ ;:¡ ;:¡ ..: ..: Po. =- ¡.¡ ¡.¡ ~ ~ ¡.¡ ¡.¡ c " ~ ~ o ° ~ ~ ,..¡ ..J ..: ..: ... ... o ° ... ... ~ ~ ° ° ~ ~ =- =- =- =- ..: ..: ~ '"" .., ..... , ~~ "-'1'<1 oC Z QI'<1 ..,=- .....0 :i' ,,-,¡;¡ ~1'<1 >=:¡ ><0 1'<1E-< "-'en ~~ oC l'<1 ....E-< ....< ....,..:¡ ~- 1'<1~ ~~ =.... =-,..:¡ 01'<1 ~=:¡ =0 ¡;¡;;; ~¡¡: 1'<1.... ~=- 1'<1~ ~1'<1 =:¡~ 1'<11'<1 ,..:¡"-' ~ E-< ATTACHMENT A-5 c w z W 11. 0 , W 0: iLl III '" '" 00 '<t .., '" - - 0 .... u ..J < 0:: w ~ ..J W u C) '" '" r- ..... N '" « , , , , ¡I\ ...; ¡". ¡". ~ ~ :;;11. c,- o' o' o' o' a,' Ocri .., .., - .., .., 0 :I: 0 .., .., .., .., .., '" ....0:: - - - - - - III 0 - .., N N r- ....<c..w '110 00 00 - - - 0 - - N N N N :I: ....~ '" c..¢: - 00 '" '" \0 a, w~ C '110 r- N N '<t 0 N O· a, .., a, .... .... '" ....:¡; .., - a, '" \0 \0 :;; \0 '" '" '" V) - :;;'110 - r- .... - .... r- 0' 0 a, "" ;g .... '" o::¡; .... .., "" \0 V) u.:;: \0 \0 '" V) V) - Wo ~....c :;:ww -c)z+:" 00 0 0 0 00 N ><<(-- r- "" - "" N - o ...J- .... .., .., '<t '" N o:....w c..°m 11.0 <u. u. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ow u u u u u U wD.. > > > > > > b!tL öo = 00 00 öo u 00 z ~~ ~~ ~~~ >-¡.... >-¡.... o~~ 0 ~ ~¡::;~ ..,¡::;~ r-~ 0< 8<~ ....~~ u -;:¡ -;:¡ 0 ~'" :g", ~'" d '" . d'" ..J .., .... 0< D....J<....u - - N .., .., '<t c..-c..w - N \0 r- oo "" 11-8 -- .... .., N , ~Q "'¡;':¡ ~Z =¡;.:¡ ..,1>; NO , , ~~ -¡;.:¡ >~ ~O ¡;.:¡E-< "'", æ~ ~¡;.:¡ =~ ~...¡ ~ ¡;':¡Q ~¡;.:¡ =~ I>;"'¡ "¡;.:¡ ~~ =0 ~t; ø::¡;.:¡ ~~ ¡;.:¡ø:: "'¡;':¡ ;;;-~ ¡;.:¡¡;.:¡ ...¡'" ~ -o:t: E-< ATTACHMENT ,4-& c w z W 0.. ° W 0:: W IIJ '<) N 0\ '" .... .... ° - "" I- en .... 0( 0:: W ~ .... W ¡,;¡ enO '" '" - - .... 0(0( ¿¡ , 6 , , ¡:¡:¡ :¡¡D.. Q ~ Q 0 0' =" =" 0 0" 0" E-<~ Xen .., .., .., .., - I-~ .., .., .., .., .., ~~ - - - - - IIJ ¡:¡f,:; 1-00D..W '" '" .... .... :! <9 "" - - - - '" '" '" '" '" ,..¡~ x ~ I-~ 0..;: '" '" 0\ '" '" 0 w~ ,.. 0 "" .., '" 0\ - '" 0' .... .... '" 00 '" I-:I; .... .". 0\ '" .... :¡¡ .". .... '" '" .., :¡¡"" - .., 0 .... '" 0' .... .... .... .... 00 0:::I; .". .". 0\ '" .... ....:¡¡ .". .... ..... '" .., ~o 0(1-0 :¡¡ww Q Q -C)Z~ ..... 0 .., .... 0 .... Xo(-- ..... 00 '" .... .., .... '" ° ....~ '" .., .... .., '" '" o::l-w D..°IIJ 0..0 0(.... .... '" '" '" ~~ ~~ Ow U U U wQ, 00 00 > > > "'u OU ~Il. '" °z ,..Z en 00 00 ,...... ¡,;¡'õ' ¡';¡' E-<OO ,..'0 ~ .~ z z ~~ <~ z O~ o~ ~4¡ ~~ ° ....,..¡;>< "',..¡;>< O~ O~ ~ 'O~<: OO~<: ~~ ~~ ~¡:¡ oE-< 00 o:::>~ o:::>~ ø::o u -0 -0 ....> '0'" 1>;0 ø::o ° u u ~« ..,« ~'" ~f« I>;f« .... « <: = I>; ,.., ,.., 0\ - < D......o(l-en .". .... ..... '" '" D..-D..W 0\ 0 - '" .., - - - - 11-9 ~ r.:¡ z r.:¡ ¡:.. o ~ r.:¡ = o Eo< ~ r.:¡ Eo< 6'< ..,"'" ~- ~~ 1:I:)r.:¡ .Z .... .... ...."'" ~r.:¡ r.:¡= 1:1:)0 <Eo< =1:1:) "':r.:¡ ::;je:: =¡:.. ~~ ¡xi~ r.:¡r.:¡ ~I:I:) r.:¡~ ~z uO ..... r.:¡Eo< ""'..... ::;j~ Eo<~ ~ "'" ~ "'" ..... < ~ ~ ATTACHMENT A-7 1:1:) ~ z þ ... ... ..... e w ... ... . z ~:... N ö., W 0\ .:" 0. NO I 00. ... .' - .....co , 0 00. , - ... ;..,. , '" N ...::;¡ W -V"> CO I , 0:: @)"'.ôo @);..õ @)~ .... w .1-0" ...... ",0 .!:: QO ... ._ 0...... ...._N V"> .,..... , r--.._ ..... 0 [.:" 0 0. ' . CI::I.: .. ,,' '" 0. 00 CO ~~ I- ~"'- """CO "'- ( ) Õ .:" ~-- . I , õ\:o ....I Õ N <C 0.0- 0.", ",,,,, 0.' CO '" 0:: , ","'- . . "" ôo w -- Õ - ~ ..."" - '" ....I Q ~ w ¡¡.¡ ~~ ..... N - ¡o.. , ¡,¡ , 0 ::;¡o. ¡i¡ ¡i¡ ¡¡.¡ Oui o' o' Ò = - "" "" :I: 0 "" "" "" 0 1-0:: - - - ... ,..;¡ I-<Co.w "" .... ..... ~ 'It - - 0 '" '" '" :I: I-~ '" c.::: '" ... N W- e 'It '" - 0- o . - - ..... I-J; ... ..... '" ::;¡ "" V"> '" ::;¡'It '" 0 0 O· '" - 00 0::J; "" ..... V"> IL::;¡ "" V"> V"> 0 I-e ww oZ:;::- '" '" <C-- '" ..... 0 ....1- - '" I-w o 0 IL IL Ow w~ 00 00 00 ;:.., ~D.. ... rn ... ¡i¡ ~ . - ~~ z "'¡i¡ o~ 0 G~~ ¡¡j~ ~ ~p.. ...¡o.. ;~ ~g ou ....."'¡i¡ ...> u š~ 0 Ñ": ¡:¡~ ....I ::E - p.. ~~ 0.....1 <C I-rn ..: ..: ..: - - '" 0'" ~o ¡o..O Q.-D..W ..: ..: ..: ¡o..fo< .,., '" ..... <: - - - 11-10 ATIACHMENT ...Q:L, CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ,. Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council, Planning Commission and all other official bodies of th<o City, a statement of disclosur<o of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. Th<o following information must be disclosed: I. List th<o nam<os of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. ,. ~~:., Cf¡ JOSE O. ORTIZ je.' ~": s; MAYLING ORTTZ ¡;-, i :b, 2. If any person* identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity. JOSE O. ORTIZ . " ~, MAYLING ORTIZ ~. ~. 1 3. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. ",. :;j' " 'f· [ ~. I, 4. Please identify every p<orson, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. I ,TO<:1': 0 OR'I'T7. ALBERTO LARIOS i I I ,. I· I 5. Has any person* associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official** of the City ofChula Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months? Yes_ No~ 30 M:\EngineerIDESIGN\SW230\SW230 _ SW23 1_ Specs.r5.doc 11-11 ATTACHMENT 13-2 If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official·· may have in this contract. 6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the Chula Vista City Council? No ~ Yes _lfyes, which Council member? 7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City of Chula Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes _ No ~ lfYes, which official·· and what was the nature of item provided? Date: MARCH 30. 2005 Contractor! Applicant JOSE O. ORTIZ, PRESIDENT Print or type name of Contractor! Applicant . Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit. ** Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members. 31 M:\EngineerIDESIGN\SW230ISW230 _ S W231_ Specs.r5 .doc 11-12 RESOLUTION NO. 2005- DRAFT - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR THE 2004/05 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM - PHASE XN (SW-23 1); AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF AVAILABLE SEWER FACILITY REPLACEMENT FUNDS INTO THE PROJECT FROM THE 2003/04 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM, PHASE XIII (SW-230) PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT WHEREAS, on March 30, 2005, the Director of General Services received three (3) sealed bids for the Fiscal Year 2003-04 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XIII (SW-230) and Fiscal Year 2004-05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program-Phase XN (SW-23 1); and WHEREAS, the project will rehabilitate existing broken sewer mains and laterals, repair cracked sewer lines and replace asphalt concrete pavement in various locations throughout the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the project will include all labor, material, equipment, tools transportation, mobilization, control of sewage flow, install root barrier, traffic control, rernoval and disposal of existing improvements, protection and restoration of existing improvements, and other miscellaneous work necessary for the proj ect; and WHEREAS, the Director of General Services received and opened bids from three (3) contractors for the construction phase as follows: Contractor Bid Amount 1. FilMex Inc., dba Metropolitan Construction - Spring Valley, CA $ 461,458.40 2. BRH-Gaver West Inc. - San Diego, CA $ 484,700.00 3. Zondiros Corp. - San Marcos, CA $ 511 ,424.00 ' ._--~-_._-. . ---- WHEREAS, the bid by FilMex, Inc. dba Metropolitan Construction is $461,458.40, $15,891.60 (3.4%) below the Engineer's estimate of$477,350; and WHEREAS, Engineering staff checked the references provided by the contractor and all references were verified and their work has reportedly been satisfactory; and WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the low bid and recommends awarding the contract to FilMex Inc. for $ 461,458.40; and 11-13 DRAFT WHEREAS, this project concentrated on sewer that were mainly west of the 1-805 freeway, having twenty-eight percent (28%) of the project in the Montgomery Area, and the remaining seventy-two percent (72%) located in the West side ofChula Vista and not within the Montgomery Area; and WHEREAS, the Enviromnental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for the compliance with the California Enviromnental Quality Act and has detennined that the project qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines and that no further enviromnental review is necessary. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City Chula Vista does hereby accept the bids and awards a $461,458.40 contract for the 2004/05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Phase XN (SW-231) to FilMex, Inc. dba Metropolitan Construction of Spring Valley, California. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is hereby authorized to transfer $282,396.00 in available Sewer Facility Replacement Funds from the 2003/04 Sewer Rehabilitation Program (SW-230) to the 2004/05 Sewer Rehabilitation Program (SW-23 1). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of General Services may order an increase in the contract's quantities to expend all available funds for this project. Presented by Approved as to form by Uc..- .,. H, Ann Moore City Attorney ~ Jack Griffm Director of General Services Attorneylresolbids\SW-230 - Sewer Rehab Bid 2005.doc 11-14 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: Meeting Date: Id- 5/10/05 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED REIMBURSEMENT FUNDS FROM THE COMMISSION ON PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 TO THE FY 2004/2005 SUPPLIES AND SERVICES BUDGET OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5ths Vote: YeslLNo -> SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Polic The Police Department has realized unanticipated reimbursement revenue from the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) and requests to appropriate these unanticipated funds to the training budget of the Police Department. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution appropriatíng unanticipated reimbursement funds from the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training in the amount of $50,000 to the FY 2004/2005 supplies and services budget of the Police Department. BACKGROUND: The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) was established by the Legislature in 1959 to set minimum selection and training standards for California law enforcernent. POST funding comes from the Peace Officers' Training Fund (POTF). The POTF receives monies from the State Penalty Assessment Fund, which in turn receives monies from penalty assessments on criminal and traffic fines. Therefore, the POST program is funded primarily by persons who violate the laws that peace officers are trained to enforce. The Police Department is a participating agency of the POST program and is eligible to receive reimbursement for POST-certified training courses. 12-1 Page 2,ltem: /;;;:<, Meeting Date: 5/10/05 DISCUSSION: The Police Department has realized unanticipated reimbursement revenue from the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) and requests to appropriate these unanticipated funds to the training budget of the Police Department. The Department's revenue from POST reimbursements was significantly reduced in the FY 2004/2005 budget because of an anticipated stop of reimbursements. POST has since then reinstated the reimbursements, and the Department is requestinQ to increase both the reimbursement revenue and training expenditure by $50,000. This neutral impact has been adjusted in the FY 2006 baseline budget to avoid future appropriation requests. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution will result in the one-time appropriation of $50,000 to the FY 2004/2005 supplies and services budget of the Police Department. The unanticipated revenue from POST will completely offset these costs, resulting in no net impact to the General Fund. 12-2 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED REIMBURSEMENT FUNDS FROM THE COMMISSION ON PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING IN THE AMOUNT· OF $50,000 TO THE FY 2004/2005 SUPPLIES AND SERVICES BUDGET OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHEREAS, the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (hereafter referred to as POST) was established by the Legislature in 1959 to set minimum selection and training standards for California law enforcement; and WHEREAS, the Police Department is a participating agency of the POST program and is eligible to receive reimbursement for POST-certified training courses; and WHEREAS, the Police Department has realized unanticipated reimbursement revenue from POST; and WHEREAS, the Police Department requests to appropriate the unanticipated funds from POST to the supplies and services budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby appropriate unanticipated reimbursement funds from the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training in the amount of $50,000 to the FY 2004/2005 supplies and services budget of the Police Department. ~:~ Ann Mooré . City Attorney . Richard P. Emerson Police Chief 12-3 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No.: /3 Meeting Date: 5/10/05 ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approving a three-party agreement between the City of Chula Vista; Dudek & Associates, Inc., Consultant; and The EastLake Company, LLC, Applicant, related to preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and BUildin~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager'IVO"<u (4/5ths Vote: Ye5-No---X-) prI The EastLake Company, LLC (Applicant) has filed an application for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project. The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed project requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The item before the City Council is a request for the City Council to approve the proposed contract with Dudek & Associates, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $148,306 to provide consultant services for the preparation of the EIR for the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving a three-party agreement between the City of Chula Vista; Dudek & Associates, Inc., Consultant; and The EastLake Company, LLC for consulting services related to the preparation of an EIR for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: Background The Applicant has submitted an application for the processing of the EastLake III Senior Housing Project. Pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed project requires the preparation of an ElR. Planning and Building Department staff does not have the available time or expertise to prepare the needed EIR. Therefore, the Applicant must enter into a three-party agreement for the preparation of the CEQA docurnentation. 13-1 Page 2, Item No.: /3 Meeting Date: <;/10/0<; Consultant Services Selection Process The Environmental Review Coordinator issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for environmental consulting services for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project on February 23, 2005. A Selection Committee was established pursuant to Section 2.56.110 of the Municipal Code to review the proposals and conduct interviews of the most qualified firms based on established evaluation criteria. The Selection Committee reviewed and ranked the proposals based on company experience, quality of management team, capacity to perform the work, project understanding, proposal quality and clarity, local experience, and competitive billing rates. The Selection Committee interviewed the top two firms and recommended Dudek & Associates, Inc. to perform the required services. Dudek & Associates, Inc. is uniquely qualified to serve as the Environmental Consultant for this contract based on their familiarity with the project and project site, demonstrated ability to perform while working as a Consultant to the City, and their familiarity with project requirements. Dudek & Associates, Inc. is very experienced in analyzing complex issues and preparing EIRs that are adequate under CEQA. Dudek & Associates, Inc. represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they can prepare and deliver the required services to the City of Chula Vista within the necessary timeframes. The Environmental Review Coordinator has negotiated the details of these agreements ill accordance with the Environmental Review Procedures. Scope of Work Dudek & Associates, Inc. will function as the Environmental Consultant to the City of Chula Vista under a three-party agreement with the Applicant and under the supervision of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator. The responsibilities of the Environmental Consultant will include the following: Review of the available project information; Preparation of air quality and noise technical reports; · Preparation of Screencheck draft and final ElRs; · Preparation of responses to comments received during public review; · Preparation of Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, if required, and the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program; and · Attendance at team meetings and public hearings. The scope of work for this contract addresses the proposed EastLake III Senior Housing Project, which requires amendments to the General Plan, General Development Plan, EastLake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, and a Tentative Subdivision Map. 13-2 Page 3, Item No.: I:? Meeting Date: "ill01O"i Contract Payment The total cost of the contract for consulting services is $148,306, including a 25 % contingency ($29,661) for additional services to cover unforeseen issues that may arise during preparation of the EIR and if determined to be necessary by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator. The project applicant will pay all consultant costs, as well as reimburse any City staff time associated with preparation of the EIR through a separate deposit account. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the form of the contract. FISCAL IMPACT: There will be no resulting impact to the General Fund. The EastLake Company, LLC will fully compensate the consultant. In fiscal year 2004-2005 to date, the City of Chula Vista has paid Dudek & Associates, Inc. $446,886.00. Attachments : 1. Three Party Agreement between the City of Chula Vista, Dudek & Associates, Inc., and The EastLake Company, LLC J :\Planning\MARNffi\EastLake Senior Housiog\ConsultantContract\contractstaffreport.doc 13-3 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A THREE-PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA; DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC, CONSULTANT; AND THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC, APPLICANT, RELATED TO PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EASTLAKE ill SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT AND AUTHORlZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted an application for the processing of the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project; and WHEREAS, pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed proj ect requires the preparation of an environmental impact report ("ErR"); and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator issued Request for Proposals to environmental consulting services pertaining to the proposed project; and . WHEREAS, four proposals were submitted in response to the Request for Proposals; and WHEREAS, a Selection Committee was established pursuant to Section 2.56.110 of the Municipal Code to review the qualifications and conduct interviews of the most qualified firms based on established evaluation criteria; and WHEREAS, the Selection Committee interviewed the top two firms and recommended Dudek & Associates, Inc. to perform the required services for the City; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has negotiated the details of this agreement in accordance with the Environmental Review Procedures; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has deposited or will deposit funds for the consulting services necessary for the preparation of the environmental documents; and WHEREAS, Dudek & Associates, Inc. is uniquely qualified to serve as the Environmental Consultant for this contract based on their familiarity with the project and project site, demonstrated ability to perform while working as a Consultant to the City on this and other projects, and their familiarity with project requirements; and WHEREAS, Dudek & Associates, Inc. represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they can prepare and deliver the· required services to the City of Chula Vista within the necessary timeframes; and 13-4 DRAFT WHEREAS, the proposed contract with Dudek & Associates, Inc. to provide consultant services is for amount not to exceed $118,645 with an additional $29,661.00 for additional services if deemed necessary in the discretion of the Environmental Review Coordinator; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the three-party agreement between the City of Chula Vista; Dudek & Associates, Inc., and The EastLake Company, LLC (Applicant) to prepare an EIR for the EastLake III Senior Housing Proj eel. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Agreement for and on behalf of the City ofChula Vista. Presented by James D. Sandoval Director of Planning and Building 13-5 THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL Ann Moore City Attorney Dated: 5"' :3 S Three Party A em nt between the City ofChula Vista, Dudek & Associates, Inc. and the Eastlake company, LLC to preparation of An Environmental Impact Report for the Eastlake III Senior Housing Project 13-6 DRAFT Three-Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista, Dudek & Associates, Inc., Consultant, and The EastLake Company, LLC, Applicant For Consulting Work to be Rendered with regard to Applicant's Project 1. Parties. This Agreement is made as of the reference date set forth in Exhibit A, for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed by the parties hereto, between the City of Chula Vista ("City") herein, a municipal corporation of the State of California, the person designated on the attached Exhibit A as "Consultant", Dudek & Associates, Inc., whose business form and address are indicated on the attached Exhibit A, and the persons collectively designated on the attached Exhibit A as ("Applicant"), The EastLake Company, LLC, whose business forms and addresses are indicated on the attached Exhibit A, and is made with reference to the following facts: 2. Recitals. Warranties and Representations. 2.1. WarrantvofOwnershiu. Applicant warrants that Applicant is collectively the owner of approximately 18 acres ofland within the EastLake ill Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan ("Property") commonly known as, or generally located as, described on Exhibit A, Paragraph 1, or has an option or other entitlement to develop said Property. 2.2. Applicant desires to develop the Property with the Project described on Exhibit A, Paragraph 2, and in that regard, has collectively made an application ("Application") with the City for approval of the plan, map, zone, or other permits ("Entitlements") described on Exhibit A, Paragraph 3. 2.3. In order for the City to process the Application of Applicant, Work of the general nature and type described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 4, ("Work") will need to be completed. 2.4. City does not presentJy have the "in-house" staff or rcsomccs to process thc applicatioJl within the time frame requested for review by the Applicant. 2.5. This agreement proposes an arrangement by which Applicant shall retain, and be liable for the costs of retaining, Consultant, who shall perform the services required of Consultant by this Agreement solely to, and under the direction of, the City. 5/2/2005 'Three Party Agreement Page 1 13-7 DRAFT 2.6. Additional facts and circumstances regarding the background for this agreement are set forth on Exhibit B. 3. Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED TO AND BETWEEN THE CITY, CONSULTANT, AND APPLICANT AS FOLLOWS: 3.1. Employment of Consultant bv Applicant. Consultant is hereby engaged by the Applicant, not the City, and at Applicant's sole cost and expense, to perform to, and for the primary benefit of, City, and solely at City's direction, all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 4, entitled "General Nature of Consulting Services", ("General Services"), and in the process of performing and delivering said General Services, Consultant shall also perform to and for the benefit of City all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 5, entitled "Detailed Scope of Work", ("Detailed Services"), and all services reasonably necessary to accomplish said General Services and Detailed Scope of Work, and shall deliver such documents required ("Deliverables") herein, all within the time frames herein set forth, and in particular as set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 6, and if none are set forth, within a reasonable period of time for the diligent execution of Consultant's duties hereunder. Time is of the essence of this covenant. The Consultant does hereby agree to perform said General and Detailed Services to and for the primary benefit ofthe City for the compensation herein fixed to be paid by Applicant. In delivering the General and Detailed Services hereunder, the Consultant shall do so in a good, professional manner consistent with that level of care and skiU ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations, at its own cost and expense except for the compensation and/or reimbursement, if any, herein promised, and shall furnish aU of the labor, technical, administrative, professional and other personnel, aU supplies and materials, machinery, equipment, printing, vehicles, transportation, office space and facilities, calculations, and all other means whatsoever, except as herein otherwise expressly specified to be furnished by the City or Applicant, necessary or proper to perform and complete the work and provide the Services required of the Consultant. 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 2 13-8 DRAFT 3.2. Compensation of Consultant. Applicant shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant without regard to the conclusions reached by the Consultant, and according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit C adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrang=ent, by paying said amount to the City, within 15 days of Consultant's billing, or in accordance with the security deposit provisions of Paragraph 3.3 and Exhibit C, if checked, and upon receipt of such payment by the City, City shall promptly, not later than 15 days, or in accordance with the Bill Processing procedure in Exhibit C, if checked, pay said amount to the Consultant. City is merely acting in the capacity as a conduit for payment, and shall not be liable for the compensation unless it receives same from Applicant. Applicant shall notrnake anypayrnents of compensation or otherwise directly to the Consultant. 3.2.1. Additional Work. If the Applicant, with the concurrence of City, determines that additional services ("Additional Services") are needed from Consultant of the type Consultant is qualified to render or reasonably related to the Services Consultant is otherwise required to provide by this Agreement, the Consultant agrees to provide such additional services on a time and materials basis paid for by Applicant at the rates set forth in Exhibit C, unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon in writing for said Additional Work between the parties. 3.2.2. In the event that the City shall determine that additional work is required to be performed above and beyond the scope of work herein provided, City will consult with Applicant regarding the additional work, and if thereupon the Applicant fails or refuses to arrange and pay for said Additional Services, the City may, at its option, suspend any further processing of Applicant's Application until the Applicant shall deposit the City's estimate of the costs of the additional work which the City determines is or may be required. Applicant shall pay any and all additional costs for the additional work. 3.2.3. Reductions in Scope ofW ork. City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction. Upon failure to agree, the Fixed Fee may be unilaterally reduced by the City by the amount of time and materials budgeted by Consultant for the Services deleted. 3.3. Securitv for Payment of Compensation bv Applicant. 3.3.1. Deposit. As security for the payment of Consultant by Applicant, Applicant shall, upon execution of this Agreement, deposit the amount indicated on Exhibit C as "Deposit Amount" with the City, as trustee for Consultant, the conditions of such trust being as indicated on Exhibit C and as hereinbelow set forth: Three Party Agreement 5/2/2005 Page 3 13-9 DRAFT 3.3.1.1 Other Terms of Deposit Trust. 3.3 .1.1.1. City shall also be entitled to retain from said Deposit all costs incurred by City for which it is entitled to compensation by law or under the terms of this agreement. 3.3.1.1.2. All interest earned on the Deposit Amount, if any, shall accrue to the benefit of, and be used for, Trust purposes. City may, in lieu of deposit into a separate bank account, separately account for said deposit in one or more of its various bank accounts, and upon doing so, shall proportionately distribute to the Deposit Trust, the average interest earned during the period on its general fund. 3.3 .1.1.3. Any unused balance of Deposit Amount, including any unused interest earned, shall be returned to Applicant not later than 30 days after the termination of this Agreement and any claims resulting therefrom. 3.3.1.1.4. Applicant shall be notified within 30 days after of the use of the Deposit in any manner. Nothing herein shall invalidate use of the Deposit in the manner herein authorized. 3.3.1.1.5. At such time as City shall reasonably determine that inadequate funds remain on Deposit to secure future compensation likely due Consultant or City, City may make demand of Applicant to supplement said Deposit Amount in such amount as City shall reasonably specify, and upon doing so, Applicant shall, within 30 days pays said amount ("Supplemental Deposit Amount") to City. Said Supplement Deposit Amount or Amounts shall be governed by the same terms of trust governing the original Deposit. 3.3.2. Withholding of Processing. In addition to use of the Deposit as security, in order to secure the duty of Applicant to pay Consultant for Services rendered under this agreement, City shall be entitled to withhold processing of Applicant's Application upon a breach of Applicant's duty to compensate Consultant. 4. Non-Service Related Duties of Consultant. 4.1. Insurance. Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and SUbCollsultants employed by it in connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk ofloss by the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: 5/2/2005 Page 4 Three Party Agreement 13-10 DRAFT 4.1.1. Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 10. 4.1.2. Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage"). 4.1.3. Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. 4.2. Proof of Insurance Coverage. 4.2.1. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies. may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. 4.2.2. Policy Endorsements Required. In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City and Applicant demonstrating same. 4.3. Public Statements. All public statements and releases to the news media shall be the responsibility of the City and the Applicant. The Consultant shall not publish or release news items, articles or present lectures on the Proj ect, either during the course of the study or after its completion, except on written concurrence ofthe City and Applicant. 4.4. Communication to Applicant. Consultant shall not communicate directly to the Applicant except in the presence of the City, or by writing an exact copy of which is simultaneously provided to City, except with the express consent of City. The Consultant may request such meetings with the Applicant to ensure the adequacy of services performed by Consultant. 5/2/2005 wee Party Agreement Page 5 13-11 DRAFT 5. Non-Compensation Duties of the Applicant. 5.1. Documents Access. The Applicant shall provide to the Consultant, through the City, for the use by the Consultant and City, such documents, or copies of such docurnents requested by Consultant, within the possession of Applicant reasonably useful to the Consultant in performing the services herein required of Consultant, including but not limited to those described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 7. 5.2. Property Access. The Applicant hereby grants permission to the City and Consultant to enter and access the Property, to take any borings, make any tests, conduct any surveys or reconnaissance necessary to deliver the Services of Consultant, subject to the approval of the Applicant. Consultant shall promptly repair any damage to the subj ect property occasioned by such entry and shall indemnify, defend, and hold Applicant harmless from all loss, cost, damage, expenses, claims, and liabilities in connection with or arising from any such entry and access. 5.3. Communication to Consultant. Applicant shall not communicate directly to the Consultant except in the presence of the City, or by writing an exact copy of which is simultaneously provided to City, except with the express consent of City. The Applicant may request such meetings as they desire with the Consultant to ensure the adequacy of services performed by Consultant. 6. Administrative Representatives. Each party designates the individuals ("Administrators") indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine administration of this agreement. 7. Conflicts of Interest. 7.1. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer. If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, as an "FPPC [¡Jer", ConsuHantis deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report his economic interests to the City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 9 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney. 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 6 13-12 DRAFT 7.2. Decline to Participate. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement. 7.3. Search to Determine Economic Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this agreement. 7.4. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assurne an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act. 7.5. Dutv to Advise of Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant leams of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. 7.6. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests. Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly; whatsoever in the property which is the subject matter ofthe Project, or in any property within 10 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of the property which is the subject matter oftne Project, or ("Prohibited Interest"). Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates by Applicant or by any other party as a result of Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter. 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 7 13-13 DRAFT Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, orfor any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement. 8. Default of the Consultant for Breach. This agreement may be terminated by the City for default if the Consultant breaches this agreement or if the Consultant refuses or fails to pursue the work under this agreement or any phase of the work with such diligence which would assure its completion within a reasonable period of time. Termination of this agreement because of a default of the Consultant shall not relieve the Consultant from liability of such default. 9. City's Right to Terminate PaVITIent for Convenience. Documents. 9.1. Notwithstanding any other section or provision of this agreement, the City shall have the absolute right at any time to terminate this agreement or any work to be performed pursuant to this agreement. 9.2. In the event oftermination of this agreement by the City in the absence of default of the Consultant, the City shall pay the Consultant for the reasonable value of the services actually performed by the Consultant up to the date of such termination, less the aggregate of all sums previously paid to the Consultant for services performed after execution of this agreement and prior to its termination. 9.3. The Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damage or compensation arising under this agreement, except as set forth herein, in the event of such termination. 9.4. In the event of termination of this agreement, and upon demand of the City, the Consultant shall deliver to the City, all field notes, surveys, studies, reports, plans, drawings and all other materials and documents prepared by the Consultant in performance of this agreement, and all such documents and materials shall be the property of the City; provided however, that the Consultant may retain copies for their own use and the City shall provide a copy, at Applicant's cost, of aJl Sllch documents to thc Applicant. 9.5. Applicant shall have no right to terminate Consultant, and shall not exercise any control or direction over Consultant's work. Three Party Agreement 5/2/2005 Page 8 13-14 DRAFT 10. Administrative Claims Requirement and Procedures. No suit shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City, unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if set fully set forth herein. 11. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. 11.1. Consultant to Indemnify City and ADDlicant re Iniuries. Consultant shall defend, indemnify, pro~ect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys fees) arising out of or alleged by third parties to be the result of the negligent acts, errors or omissions or the willful misconduct of the Consultant, and Consultant's employees, subcontractors or other persons, agencies or firms for whom Consultant is legally responsible in cODnection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for (I) those claims, damages, liability, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney fees) arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City its officers, employees, or (ii) with respect to losses arising from Consultant's professional errors or omissions, those claims arising from the negligence or willful misconduct of City its officers, employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Consultant's obligations under this Section shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. Consultant's obligations under this Section shall survive the termination ofthis Agreement. 12. Business Licenses. Applicant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with Chula Vista Municipal Code, Title 5. Applicant further agrees to require Consultant to obtain such business license and to comply with Chula Vista Municipal Code, Title 5. 13. Miscellaneous. 13.1. Consultant not authorized to Represent City. Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, neither Consultant nor Applicant shall have authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. 5/2/2005 Page 9 Three Party Agreement 13-15 DRAFT 13.2. Notices. All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified for the parties in Exhibit A. 13.3. Entitlement to Subsequent Notices. No notice to or demand on the parties for notice of an event not herein legally required to be given shall in itself create the right in the parties to any other or further notice or demand in the same, similar or other circumstances. 13.4. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. 13.5. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. 13.6. Governing LawNenue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of Cali fomi a, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of ChuJa Vista. 13.7. Modification. No modification or waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by the parties hereto, and then shall be valid only in the specific instance and for the purpose for which given. 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreemeot Page 10 13-16 13.8. Counterparts. DRAFT This Agreement may be executed in more than one counterpart, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which, when taken together shall constitute but one instrument. 13.9. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall for any reason, be determined to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, the parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith and agree to such amendments, modifications, or supplements to this Agreement or such other appropriate action as shall, to the maximum extent practicable in light of such determination, implement and give effect to the intentions of the parties as reflected herein. 13.1 O. Headings. The captions and headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not define or limit the provisions hereof. 13 .11. Waiver. No course of dealing or failure or delay, nor the single failure or delay, or the partial exercise of any right, power or privilege, on the part of the parties shall operate as a waiver of any rights herein contained. The making or the acceptance of a payment by either party with knowledge of the existence of a breach shall not operate or be construed to operate as a waiver of any such breach. 13 .12. Remedies. The rights of the parties under this Agreement are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights or remedies which the parties might otherwise have unless this Agreement provides to the contrary. 13.13. No Additional Beneficiaries. Despite the fact that the required performance under this agreement may have an affect upon persons not parties hereto, the parties specifically intend no benefit therefrom, and agree that no performance hereunder may be enforced by any person not a party to this agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this is a three party agreement and the City is an express third party beneficiary of the promises of Consultant to provide services paid for by Applicant. 14. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subj ect to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 11 13-17 DRAFT other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, fo=s or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. (End of Page. Next Page is Signature Page.) 5/2/2005 Three Party Ag¡-eement Page 12 13-18 DRAFT Signature Page To Three-Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista, Dudek & Associates, Inc., Consultant, and The EastLake Company, LLC, Applicant For Consulting Work to be Rendered with regard to Applicants' Project NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto, having read and understood the t=s and conditions of this agreement, do hereby express their consent to the terms hereofby setting their hand hereto on the date set forth adj acent thereto. Dated: City of Chula Vista By: Stephen C. Padilla, Mayor Attest: By: pany, LLC Susan Bigelow, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Ann Moore, City Attorney Dated: Consultant: Dudek & Associates, Inc. By: /#h---;; 51212005 Three Party Agreement Page 13 13-19 DRAFT Exhibit A Reference Date of Agreement: Date of City Council Approval of Agreement Effective Date of Agreement: Date of City Council Approval of Agreement City: City ofChula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 Consultant: Dudek & Associates, Inc. Business Form of Consultant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship ( ) Partnership (X) Corporation Address: 605 Third Street, Encinitas, CA 92024 Applicant: The EastLake Company, LLC Business Form of Applicant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship ( ) Partnership ( ) Corporation (X) Other: A California Limited Liability Company Address: 13520 Evening Creek Drive North, Suite 380, San Diego CA 92128 1. Property (Commonly known address or General Description): The Application covers approximately 18.4 acres at the eastern end of Olympic Parkway. The site is bordered by Olympic Parkway and the EastLake Vistas community to the north, the Lower Otay Reservoir to the east, and the Olympic Training Center to the south and west. 2. Project Description ("Project"): The proposed project is a 494-unit active seniors community. Thc project would require amendments to the City ofChula Vista General Plan, EastLake III General Development Plan, and EastLake ill SPA Plan to change the land use designation on the site rrom Commercial Tourist to Residential- High. Amendments to the EastLake ill Planned Community District Regulations and the EastLake ill Affordable Housing Program as well as a Design Review Permit, Public Facilities Finance Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map would also be required. As currently proposed, the project would be an age-restricted "for sale" residential "gated" community. The residential component would consist of condominium units resulting in a density of 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 14 13-20 DRAFT approximately 27 units/acre. The estimated population of the facility would be 988 residents. 3. Entitlements applied for: GP, GDP, and SPA amendments and Tentative Subdivision Maps approval. 4. General Nature of Consulting Services ("Services-General"): Consultant shall prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures; with the criteria, standards and procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of1970, as amended, (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (Public Resources Code Section 15000 et seq.); and with other applicable regulations, requirements and procedures of any other responsible public agency or any agency with jurisdiction by law. If there are conflicts between the City of Chula Vista's requirements and those of any other agency, the City of Chula Vista's shall prevail when the City is the Lead Agency. All work performed by Consultant shall be to the satisfaction of City's Environmental Review Coordinator. 5. Detailed Scope of Work ("Detailed Services"): Consultant shall prepare a Subsequent EIR for the EastLake ill Senior Housing project. Consultant shall consult with all trustee and responsible agencies, agencies having jurisdiction by law and any other person or organization having control over or interest in the Development as necessary to ensure that the EIR is current and complete as to issues raised by such agencies. The Draft and Final EIR shall be prepared in such a manner that they will be meaningful and useful to decision-makers and to the public. Technical data is to be summarized in the body of the report and placed in an appendix. All documents shall be prepared in Microsoft Word 2000. . Consultant shall compile supporting documents into separate volume( s) to be referred to as the Appendices to the EIR' The Appendices shall include the Notice of Preparation (NOP), responses to the NOP and any technical reports and relevant technical information generated for the EIR. The Detailed Services to be provided are described below: Proiect Start-Up and Initiation Project initiation will include review of existing infonnation and data sources as identified by thc City. Consultant will evaluate the necessary infonnation with respect to the existing conditions, impacts, rnitigationmeasures, cumulative impacts, and unavoidable adverse impacts associated with environmental issues identified for the proposed project, available project information, and any other relevant and valid informative sources. The analysis will include all available data, initiation of additional research as appropriate, and an assessment of existing technical data for adequacy. 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 15 13-21 DRAFT CEOA Notices Consultant will prepare a Notice of Preparation (NOP), including a detailed project description and project maps. At the completion of the Draft EIR preparation stage, consultant will prepare a Notice of Completion (NOC) in the fo= of the most recently updated California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (January 2005). The NOC will be forwarded to the State Clearinghouse and to reviewing parties. If the City Council elects to approve the proposed project, consultant will prepare a Notice of Determination to be filed with the County Clerk's office within five days of the decision on the project. Environmental Impact Report The EIR will be written in compliance with the criteria, standards and procedures of the CEQA Statute and Guidelines, as well as the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista and the regulations, requirements and procedures of any other responsible public agency with jurisdiction by law. The following is an outline of the content and specific sections to be included in the EIR analysis: EIR Contents Table of Contents The Table of Contents will contain a list of the EIR contents, including text discussions, list of tables and exhibits. The table of contents will follow the outline and numbering as outlined in Attachment D of the RFP. Executive Summary Pursuant to Section 15123 of the CEQA Guidelines, the summary will contain an overview of the proposed project, including a list of required discretionary approvals. The summary shall also include a summary of impacts and mitigation measures, known areas of controversy including issues raised by agencies and the public, as well as a summary of alternatives to the proposed proj ect. Introduction The Introduction section ofthe ElR will define the purpose, scope and legislative authority ofthe EIR, requirements of CEQA and other pertinent environmental rules and regulations. This section would also describe the EIR process, structure, required contents and its relationship to other potential responsible or trustee agencies. This section will also identify all relevant environmental documentation and incorporate and summarize relevant documents by reference, as appropriate. 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 16 13-22 DRAFT Enviromnental Setting The Enviromnental Setting Section of the EIR will provide a description of the existing site conditions. The section will also provide an overview of the local and regional enviromnental setting of the project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). Proiect Description This section will describe the location of the project, both within the regional context and the local context. The description of the project characteristics would include proposed land uses, circulation, and project phasing. Project background, including a history of uses on the site, as well as the planning and enviromnentaI review process for the current application will be provided. Proj ect objectives will be clearly defined, and a complete list of required discretionary permits and approvals will be provided with the lead and responsible agencies identified for each. Enviromnental Impact Analvsis Each enviromnental impact section of the EIR will contain a discussion of the existing conditions, thresholds for significance, potential enviromnental impacts, significance of impacts prior to mitigation, recommended mitigation measures to significantly reduce or avoid the impact(s), and significance of impacts after mitigation. The following are the enviromnental issues that are anticipated to be addressed in the EIR: Land Use, Planning and Zoning: The land use analysis would include discussion of potential impacts to existing adjacent offsite land uses, as well as land use plans and policies. Therefore, the analysis will contain a comparative analysis of both "plan-to-ground," or physical impacts that the project would have on existing uses, as well as "plan-to-plan" impacts to make sure that all potential enviromnental effects related to land use and planning are considered. Section 15125 (d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that a discussion of inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable general plans and regional plans be provided (the "plan-to-plan" analysis). The consistency analysis for the proposed project with applicable plans, policies and regulations would be provided in the EIR. The following plans, policies and regulations that are appJicable to the proposed EastLake ill Senior Housing project would be discussed in the Land Use and Planning Section: . City of Chula Vista General Plan · Eastlake ill General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan · EastLake ill Woods and Vistas Replanning Program Final Subsequent EIR #01-01 and Addendum · Congestion Management Plan 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 17 13-23 DRAFT · San Diego Air Pollution Control District Regional Air Quality Strategies · City of Chula Vista Growth Management Ordinance · Zoning Ordinance Landform Alteration and Aesthetics: This section will include a detailed evaluation of the project components that may have an effect on landform, community character, and views of the site from adjacent areas. Information that will be used to evaluate visual impacts of the project, including the mass and scale of the proj ect and architectural design, includes the four applicant-prepared visual simulations, data from the site plan, and available information from the project applicant, landscape elements, and other major physical elements that will have high visual prominence, including signage. Consultant will conduct field investigations and analyze the project's visibility, view corridors, and likelihood of project elements contrasting with existing visual quality and community character. Based upon the field review and verification of the visual simulations, consultant will analyze the visual impacts of the project. Noise: Consultant will prepare a Noise Study evaluating the noise impacts associated with the proposed project. The noise associated with the project's traffic on the adjacent roads will be determined based on noise measurements and noise modeling. The measured and calculated noise levels will be used to predict the potential noise level increase along nearby roads. Noise impacts will be identified for existing off-site and proposed on-site noise sensitive land uses based on the City's General Plan and Noise Ordinance criteria. If significant noise impacts are projected, mitigation measures will be identified. A report summarizing the analysis and coñclusions will be prepared. The results of the noise analysis will be presented in a stand-alone noise report suitable for inclusion as an Appendix to the EIR. Three (3) screencheck copies will be prepared. The Noise Study will be summarized in the text of the EIR' Air Quality: Consultant will conduct an air quality analysis based on traffic and land use information. The analysis will quantify mobile source emissions, and discuss the project's relationship to regional air quality. The EIR will also evaluate the potential for carbon monoxide (CO) "hot spot" formation at project area intersections, as well as quantify any localized impact potential from senior housing operations. Potential short-term construction-related emissions will also be addressed and quantified. Mitigation measures, including dust control for construction activities, will be included in the EIR. An air quality technical report will be prepared describing the analysis and conclusions of the study, and will be included in the EIR Appendices. Three (3) screencheck copies will be prepared. The EIR will contain a summary of the conclusions contained in the technical analysis. Transportation, Circulation and Access: Dudek will surrrrnarize the City approved traffic analysis prepared for the proposed project in the EIR. Based on the technical traffic study, this section will address existing conditions, proj ect impacts, cumulative impacts, and recommend feasible mitigation measures. In addition, based on information available in the traffic study this section will assess the project's compatibility with the existing "Agreement to Monitor Building Permits". The traffic study will be appended to the EIR. Tbree Party Agreement 5/2/2005 Page 18 13-24 DRAFT HydrologylDrainage/Water Quality: The consultant will use the technical information provided by the applicant and any other information available to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the project to hydrology, drainage, and water quality. In addition, relevant information from the project's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan will also be included to address urban runoff and water quality issues. Consultant will also include the project's relationship with the San Diego Region's Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) and the City's Jurisdictional Urban Run-off Master Plan (JURMP). Appropriate mitigation measures, including best management practices for the construction and post construction condition, will be identified, as necessary, to reduce project related impacts. Geology and Soils: The consultant will use the technical information provided by the applicant and any other information available to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the project to geology and soils. As appropriate, the EIR will include any mitigation measures outlined in the technical study to avoid significant impacts. Public Services and Utilities: Consultant will contact potentially affected agencies to identify and obtain information for an analysis of the existing services, the project's impacts to the services (including the proposed change in land use), and recommended mitigation measures. Consultant will contact agencies associated with the areas of sewer and water service, police service, fire protection, emergency medical services, solid waste disposal, gas and electric, and telephone and cable. The discussion will focus on the required alteration of existing facilities, expansion of new facilities, and the increased demand on services based on City approved standards and measures. Threshold Analysis: Consultant will prepare an analysis of the project's compliance with the City of Chula Vista's growth management standards that pertain to the following public services and utilities, and fiscal issues: Drainage Traffic Fiscal Police Water Air Quality Sewage Fire/Emergency Medical Services The inability ofthe project to meet any ofthe established thresholds regarding any ofthese issues wou1d be considered a significant impact. Other CEQA Mandated EIR Sections In accordance with Article 9 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will contain a discussion of the irreversible environmental changes that will result from the proposed proj ect, unavoidable significant impacts and those effects found not to be significant. The analysis of effects found not 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 19 13-25 DRAFT to be significant shall pay particular attention to the environmental analyses that have been previously conducted for the subject site. Other CEQA mandated sections include the following: Cumulative Impacts: This section will be based on a list and description of closely related past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects within the project vicinity that would have the ability to contribute to cumulative effects in any of the environmental issue areas discussed in the EIR. This section will evaluate whether individual proj ect impacts create any newly identified curnulatively significant impacts when viewed in combination with these other projects. The discussion will include an assessment of the project's ability to compound or increase adverse environmental impacts when added to cumulative projects. The curnulative analysis will evaluate compliance with adopted "Threshold Standards" and applicable policies and programs. Growth Inducement: The growth inducement discussion will assess the potential of the proposed project to induce economic or population growth and the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Growth management and compliance with the Chula Vista Threshold Standards, including the phasing and delivery of community services and facilities to serve new development in a timely and logical fashion will be discussed. The project will also be discussed in relationship to its compliance with regional and local growth management policies and growth forecast assumptions. In addition, the potential for use oflarge amounts of fuel or energy will be discussed. Alternatives The EIR will address a reasonable range of project alternatives that could feasibly attain the basic objectives ofthe senior housing development. Determination of specific alternatives will be made in coordination with City staff. The focus of the Alternatives discussion will be those project alternatives that reduce or avoid any identified significant environmental impacts, in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. The Alternatives discussion will include a comparative analysis of the various project alternatives in relation to the proposed project. The analysis will include a quantitative analysis of effects, where appropriate. The Alternatives will include the "No Project Alternative" and will be addressed as the "No Development" Alternative. Potential alternatives could include a reduced density and/or alternative use alternative(s). References, Persons and Agencies Contacted and EIR Preparation The EIR will contain a list of all references useù anù persons and agencies contacted in preparation of the EIR. In addition, the EIR will list all persons involved in the preparation of the document and their title and role. Appendices The Appendices shall include an Initial Study, a copy of the Notice of Preparation (NOP), Three Party Agreement 5/2/2005 Page 20 13-26 DRAFT Responses to the NOP, and any technical studies prepared for the project that are not a part of the EIR. Screencheck Draft EIR Consultant will prepare a Screencheck Draft of the ErR for review by City staff and outside agents of the City. It is anticipated, for purposes of cost estimation, that there will be three rounds of review of the Draft ErR prior to release for public review. Public Review Draft EIR Upon final acceptance by City staff, a public-review Draft ErR will be prepared. The public review draft shall incorporate all co=ents made by City staff on the three screencheck draft EIRs. Miti!!'ation Monitorin!!' and ReDortin!!' Pro!!'ram A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) will be developed at the First Screencheck Draft EIR stage and will include monitoring team qualifications, specific monitoring activities, a reporting system and criteria for evaluating the success of the mitigation measures. The MMRP shall be in a format approved by the Environmental Review Coordinator. Mitigation measures contained in the EIR will be developed in consideration offuture monitoring requirements and will be written in sufficient detail to address impacts at the project level, referencing the appropriate implementing permits such as grading permits, final maps, and landscape plans. Final EIR All comments received in response to the Draft EIR will be discussed with the City staff, and an approach to the responses will be subject to City approval prior to preparation of the draft responses. Draft responses to comments will be submitted to City staff for review. Consultant will then revise responses in accordance with City directjons and will prepare the document for final distribution. For purposes of cost estimation, it is assumed that Consultant will respond to up to fifty (50) public comments on the Draft ErR (note that a single comment letter may contain multiple comments). Candidate CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (if !'l'Jilicab!e) Candidate CEQA Findings of Fact will be prepared for submittal to the City of Chula Vista Planning Commission and City Council. The draft Candidate CEQA Findings should be submitted at the beginning of the public review period of the Draft EIR to allow sufficient time to review for completeness and adequacy. The Findings will include all measures which would be implemented to mitigate potentially significant impacts; a statement, as appropriate, that the proj ect mitigation may be the responsibility of another agency; and an evaluation ofproject alternatives and why each 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 21 13-27 DRAFT was found to be infeasible. A major portion of~e Findings will be compiled using information contained in the EIR. The Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) will be prepared, if applicable, and will present the social, economic or other reasons why the project should be approved even though significant environmental impacts may result (i.e., why the project's benefits override the environmental issues). Similar to the Candidate CEQA Findings, the SOC (if applicable) will be presented in draft form to the City at the beginning of the public review period. The Findings and SOC will be revised as City determines to be necessary, and printed to accompany the Final EIR for review and consideration by the City ofChula Vista Planning Commission, and ultimate adoption by the City Council. The Findings and SOC shall follow the format and style as generally accepted by the City of Chula Vista. Meetine:s and Hearine:s Consultant and the appropriate technical staff will attend project meetings and hearings. For cost estimation purposes, the following meetings have been assumed. · One (1) project initiation meeting with the City, Applicant(s), and others as determined by City staff; · One (1) project workshop if requested by the City; · Weekly meetings with City staff to discuss EIR progress and issues (for the duration of the project as indicated in the project schedule); · One (1) scoping meeting; · One (1) Resource Conservation Commission meeting; · One (1) Planning Commission public hearing on the Draft EIR; · One (1) Planning Commission public hearing on the Final EIR; and · One (1) City Council hearing on the Final EIR Additional meetings beyond those listed would be provided under a separate scope of work on a time and materials basis, with prior authorization from the Environmental Proj ects Manager. Project Manae:ement This task includes consistent and thorough coordination with the Envirornnental Project Manager. Specific tasks include monitoring the project statns, schedule, and budget and infonning the Ellvironrnclltal Project IYfanager of any changc;) to the approved scope of work or schedule 011 a timely basis. Monthly status reports as well as preparation of team meeting notes are required. This task also includes overall quality assurance and quality control of written docurnents. Three Party Agreement 5/2/2005 Page 22 13-28 DRAFT Deliverable Products Notices · One (1) reproducible copy of the Notice of Preparation · One (1) reproducible copy of the Notice of Completion · One (1) reproducible copy of the Notice of Availability · One (1) reproducible copy of the Notice of Deterrnination and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) fee certification letter Project Description Fifteen (15) copies of a Preliminary Draft Project Description Screencheck Draft EIRs · Twenty-five (25) copies of the first Screencheck Draft EIR (at 1.5 spacing), including Technical Appendices (10 copies will be submitted in three ring binders - remaining 15 copies will be bound). Appendices shall be single spaced. · Twenty-five (25) copies of the second Screencheck Draft EIR (at 1.5 spacing), including Technical Appendices (10 copies will be submitted in three ring binders - remaining 15 copies will be bound). Appendices shall be single spaced. · Five (5) copies of the third Screencheck Draft EIR (single spaced), including Technical Appendices (all copies will be bound). Public Review Draft EIR · Seventy-five (75) copies of the Public Review Draft EIR and Appendices · Fifteen (15) CD-ROMs of the Public Review Draft EIR (with all graphics) and Appendices and fifteen (15) copies of the Draft EIR Sununary for distribution to the State Clearinghouse Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program · Twenty-five (25) copies of the MMRP will be provided with the First Screencheck Draft EIR (under separatc cover) ~ Twenty-five (25) copies ofthe 1\1MRP will be provided with the Second ScreencheckDraft EIR (under separate cover) · Thirty-five (35) copies of the MMRP will be provided under separate cover from the Final EIR 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 23 13-29 DRAFT Final EIR · Five (5) copies of the first draft responses to comments and amended EIR sections, including MMRP, to the City for review by City of Chula Vista staff. · Following City staff review, Consultant shall submit five (5) each of the second draft responses to comments, amended EIR sections, draft Candidate CEQA Findings of Fact and, if necessary, Statement of Overriding Considerations based on comments submitted by City staff. · Thirty (35) copies of the Final EIR and Appendices · One (1) reproducible master copy of the Final EIR suitable for reproduction on City equipment and not three-hole punched · One computer disk copy or CD ROM version of the Final EIR and related documents that can be read with Microsoft Word 2000 Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations (if applicable) · Five (5) copies of the draft Candidate Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations at the beginning of the public review period. · Thirty-five (35) copies of the [mal Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (if applicable) under separate cover from the Final EIR. 6. Schedule, Milestone, Time-Limitations within which to Perform Services. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services: (X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliver abies: · First Screencheck Technical Reports - June 13,2005; · First Screencheck Draft EIR, MMRP and Technical Appendices - July 11, 2005; · Second Screencheck Draft EIR, MMRP and Technica1 Appendices - August 15, 200S; · Third Screencheck Draft EIR, MMRP and Technical Appendices - September 26, 2005; · Public Review Draft EIR, MMRP and Technical Appendices -October 19, 2005; · First Draft Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, if applicable - October 25, 2005; Three Party Agreement 5/2/2005 Page 24 13-30 DRAFT . First Draft Responses to Comments received during public review-December 21, 2005; · Second Draft Responses to Comments received during public review and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations -January 11, 2006; and · Final EIR for public hearing including final responses to comments, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations (if applicable) - January 18, 2006. Dates for Completion of all Consultant Services: Date of City Council final action on environmental documents, or completion of all tasks to the satisfaction of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator, whichever is later. 7. Documents to be provided by City to Consultant: (X) site plans (X) grading plans (X) architectural elevations (X) proj ect description. (X) other: photosimulations, second draft traffic study, EastLake ill Woods and Vistas Replanning Program EIR and appendices 8. Contract Administrators. City: Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi, Environmental Review Coordinator Applicant: Bill Ostrem, President, The EastLake Company, LLC Consultant: Frank Dudek, President, Dudek & Associates, Inc. 9. Statement ofEconormc Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code: (X) Not Applicable. ( ) Category No.1. ( ) Category No.2. ( ) Category No. 3. ( ) Category No. 4. 5/2/2005 Not an FPPC Filer. Investments and sources of income. Interests in real property. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject to the regulatory, pennit or licensing authority of the department. Investments in business entities and sources of income which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property. Three Party Agreement Page 25 13-31 DRAFT ( ) Category No. 5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( ) Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( ) Category No. 7. Business positions. 1 O. Insurance Requirements: (X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance (X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000. (X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000. () Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability coverage). ( ) Errors and Omissions insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability coverage). 11. Permitted Subconsultants: None 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 26 13-32 Exhibit B DRAFT Additional Recitals WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted an application for the processing of the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project; WHEREAS, pursuant the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed proj ect requires the preparation of an EIR; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator issued Request for Qualifications to environmental consulting services pertaining to the proposed project; WHEREAS, four proposals were submitted in response to the Request for Qualifications; WHEREAS, a Selection Committee was established pursuant to Section 2.56.110 of the Municipal Code to review the qualifications and conduct interviews of the most qualified firms based on established evaluation criteria; WHEREAS, the Selection'Committee interviewed the top two firms and recommended Dudek & Associates, Inc. to perform the required services for the City; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has negotiated the details of this agreement in accordance with the Environmental Review Procedures; WHEREAS, the Applicant has deposited or win deposit funds for the consulting services necessary for the preparation of the environmental documents; WHEREAS, Dudek & Associates, Inc. is uniquely qualified to serve as the Environmental Consultant for this contract based on their familiarity with the project and proj ect site, demonstrated ability to perform while working as a Consultant to the City, and their familiarity with proj ect requirements; WHEREAS, Dudek & Associates, Inc. represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they can prepare and dclivcrthe required services to the City ofChula Vista within the necessary timeframes; and WHEREAS, the proposed contract with Dudek & Associates, Inc. to provide consultant services would be in an amount not to exceed $118,645 with an additional $29,661 for additional services should they be necessary. 5/212005 Page 27 Three Party Agreement 13-33 DRAFT Exhibit C Compensation Schedule and Deposit: T=s and Conditions. ( ) Single Fixed Fee Arrangement. Forperforrnance of all of the General and Detailed Services of Consultant as herein required, Applicant shall pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones set forth below: (X) Single Fixed Fee Amount: $ 148,306.00 (including contingency fee if authorized in the sole discretion of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator as provided below) EIR for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project Milestone or Event Percent and Amount Of Fixed Fee 1. Signing of this agreement by all parties and upon the request of the Consultant. $11,865 (10%) 2. Submittal of First Screencheck Environmental Document* $47,458 (40%) 3. Submittal of Second Screencheck Environmental Document** $11,865 (10%) 4. Commencement of Public Review $17,796 (15%) 5. Completion of Final Environmental Document $17,796 (15%) $11,865 (10%) 6. Completion of All Remaining Tasks as outlined in Exhibit "A" to this Agreement .SllbtoJ-ªJ ~11 S,64;2()() 7. 25% Contingency Fee*** (for task(s) as determined at the sole discretion of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator) $29,661.00 Total Fixed Fee Amount $148,306.00 Three Party Agreement 5/212005 Page 28 13-34 * ** *** DRAFT For purposes of payment, the first screencheck shall completely address and analyze all issues identified in the detailed scope-of-work (described in Exhibit "A") to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Payment shall not be made until the City's Environmental Review Coordinator determines that a complete screencheck document has been submitted. For purposes of payment the second screencheck shall completely address all comments identified in the first screencheck to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Payment shall not be made until the City's Environmental Review Coordinator determines that a complete second screencheck document has been submitted. Pursuant to Section 3.2.2 of this Agreement, the Environmental Review Coordinator in her sole discretion independently and or upon request from the Consultant, may from time to time, negotiate additional services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement in order to cover unforeseen issues that may be identified during the preparation of the environmental document ("Additional Services"). The cost of Additional Services in connection with the environmental document shall not exceed 25% of the total contract amount ($29,661.00). ( ) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement. For the performance of each phase or portion of the General and Detailed Services of Consultant as are separately identified in Exhibit C, under the category labeled "Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement", Applicant shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in the amounts and at the times or milestones set forth hereinbelow ("Phase Fixed Fee Arrangement"). Consultant shall not commence Services under àny Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless Applicant shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase. 1. 2. 5/2/2005 Phase Fee for Said Phase $ $ Page 29 Three Party Agreement 13-35 DRAFT 3. $ 4. $ ( ) Time and Materials For performance of the General and Detailed Services of Consultant as herein required, Applicant shall pay Consultant for the productive hours of time and material spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts set forth hereinbelow according to the following terms and conditions: ( ) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximurn Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of the General and Detailed Services herein required of Consultant for including all Materials and other "reimburseables" ("Maximum Compensation"). The City will also receive a standard administrative fee amounting to 10% of the contract. (X) Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to $118,645.00 (plus the 25% contingency if authorized in the sole discretion of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator as provided above) ("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approved by the City Council. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional Services at Consultant's own cost and expense. 5/2/2005 Three Party Agreement Page 30 13-36 Rate Schedule Categorv ofErnplovee Proj ect Principal Project Manager Environmental Planner Environmental Planner Environmental Assistant Noise Specialist GIS Graphics/W ord Processing Name Joe Monaco* Sarah Lozano* Elizabeth Candela Myloc Nguyen Mike Komula DRAFT Hourly Rate $150 $149 $100 $100 $60 $110 $85 $65 *Other individuals from the Consultant firm may be substituted in place of the names listed solely at the discretion of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator. Consultant Cost Breakdown is attached to this Agreement. () Consultant's hourly fates may increase by 6% for services rendered after Materials Separately Paid For by Applicant ( ) Materials Reports Copies ( ) Travel ( ) Printing ( ) Postage ( ) Delivery ( ) Long Distance Telephone Charges ( ) Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs ( ) Other 5/2/2005 Page 31 13-37 Cost Of Rate None. Included in Cost. None. Included in Cost. None. Included in Cost. None. Included in Cost. None. Included in Cost. None. Included in Cost. None. Included in Cost. Three Party Agreement DRAFT ----------------------------------- Deposit (X) Deposit Amount: $118,645. Applicant agrees to deposit within 10 days if City requests to do so, a sum (estimated to be up to $29,661.00 (contingency fee) for additional services if such services are required by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator. (X) Use of Deposit to Pay Consultant. Notwithstanding the sole duty and liability of Applicant to pay Consultant, if this paragraph is "checked", upon City's receipt of billing by Consultant, and determination by City in good faith that Consultant's billing is proper, a judgment for which Applicant agrees to hold City harmless and waive any claim against City, City shall pay Consultant's billing from the amount of the Deposit. If Applicant shall protest the propriety of a billing to City in advance of payment, City shall consider Applicant's protest and any evidence submitted prior to the due date for the payment of said bill by Applicant in making its good faith determination of propriety. Applicant agrees to maintain a minimum balance of immediately replenished upon the request of the City. in subject account that shall be ( ) Use of Deposit as Security Only; Applicant to Make Billing Payments. Upon determination by City made in good faith that Consultant is entitled to compensation which shall remain unpaid by Applicant 30 days after billing, City may, at its option, use the Deposit to pay said billing. ---------------------------------- (X) Bill Processing: A Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period oftirne: ( ) Monthly ( ) Quarterly (X) Other: In accordance with milestones identified herein. B. Day of [he Period for submission of Consultant's Billing: ( ) First of the Month . ( ) 15th Day of each Month ( ) End of the Month (X) Other: Upon completion of the milestones identified herein. Three Party Agreement. 5/2/2005 Page 32 13-38 51212005 DRAFT C. City's Account Number: To be assigned after agreement is processed. D. Security for Perfo=ance ( ) Perfo=ance Bond, $ ( ) Letter of Credit, $ ( ) Other Security: Type: Amount: $ (X) Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their option, the following Retention Percentage until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred: (X) Retention Percentage: 10% ( ) Retention Amount: $ Retention Release Event: (X) Completion of all remaining tasks as outlined in Exhibit "A". ( ) Other: Page 33 Three Party Agreement 13-39 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item~ Meeting Date 05/10/05 ITEM TITLE: Resolution awarding a three-year contract to NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS for performance of Special District Apportionment, Delinquency Monitoring, Administration and Other Services for Assessment Districts (ADs), Community Facilities (Mello- Roos) Districts (CFDs) and Open Space Districts (OSDs), and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. Resolution extending the agreement for Assessment District and Community Facilities District judicial foreclosure services to Stradling Y occa Carlson & Rauth, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. Resolution authorizing the City Attorney or its designee to initiate foreclosure proceedings. SUBMITTED BY: City Engineer ~ Director ofFinanc~ I~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager''.. ~r! (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X) .{.J The City requires the services of NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS to perform Apportionment Services, Delinquency Monitoring Services, Administration Services, and Continuing Disclosure Services for the City's Assessment Districts (ADs), Community Facilities Districts (CFDs) and Open Space Districts (OSDs). The City requires the services of Stradling Y occa Carlson & Rauth to perform judicial foreclosure services on City Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts and coordinate the collection of all delinquent installment payments on these Districts. The proposed resolutions also authorize Stradling Y occa Carslon & Rauth to proceed with judicial foreclosure if necessary. The performance of all of these required services will ensure that the City's fiduciary responsibility to the bondholders is fulfilled. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution awarding a three-year contract to NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS for the performance of these specified services, and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement. That Council extend the agreement to Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth for Assessment District and Community Facilities District judicial foreclosure services, and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement. /4-1 Page 2, ItemJi Meeting Date 05/10/05 That Council authorize the City Attorney or its designee to initiate foreclosure proceedings. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDA nON: Not Applicable. DISCUSSION: NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS (NBS) During the last two decades, the City has formed twelve (12) Assessment Districts under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 and bonds have been issued pursuant to the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 to provide financing for the construction of public infrastructure for new developments through the issuance of Assessment District bonds. The repayment ofthe bonds is made from assessment installments collected from the property owners in co~unction with their property taxes. The following table shows the City's current 1913 and 1915 Act Assessment Districts: Current 1913 & 1915 Act Assessment Districts within the City of Chula Vista Assessment Refinancing Disfrict District No. No. Name 85-2 1995 Eastlake I 86-1 1995 Eastlake 1 (Residential) 87-1 1995 East H Street 88-1 2001-2 Otay Lakes Road I 88-2 1995 Otay Lakes Road, Rancho del Rey 90-1 2001-1 Salt Creek I 90-2 2001-2 Olav Valley Road 90-3 2001-1 Eastlake Greens 1 91-1 2001-1 Teleoraoh Canvon Road 1I 92-2 2001-2 Aulopark 94-1 None Eastlake Greens 1I 97-2 None Olav Ranch Villaoe 1 In addition to the principal and interest, Section 8730 of the Streets and Highways Code allows the collection of an "annual administrative fee" (currently $16.00 per parcel maximum) from every parcel within an Assessment District to cover the cost of the administration of the District. On top of the annual administration fee, developers are required to deposit with the City an "apportionment fee" (currently $25.00 per parcel maximum) along with an application for apportionment prior to approval of a map creating new parcels or any other approval changing the configuration of a parcel of land subject to an assessment. In conjunction with the Assessment Districts, the City has established eighteen (18) Community Facilities (Mello-Roos) Districts (CFDs) in accordance with the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 for the construction of public facilities and the maintenance of open space areas. These Districts are as follows: /1ø< Page 3, ItemK Meeting Date 05/10/05 Current Community Facilities Districts within the City of Chula Vista Community Facilities District No. Name 97-1 Open Space Maiotenance District (Otav Ranch - SPA One, Villages 1 & 5) 97-2 Preserve Maintenance District 97-3 Otav Ranch McMillin Acouisition 98-1 Interim Open Space Maiotenance District (Otay Project, LLC-OVP, Villages 1 West, 2, 2 West, 6, 7 & Planoiog Area 12)' 98-2 Interim Open Space Maiotenance District (McMillin - D.A. America, Otay - SPA Two, Villages 6 & 7) 98-3 Open Space Maiotenance District No. 35 (Sunbow 11) 99-1 Otav Ranch SPA I (Series A bonds) 99-2 Otav Ranch SPA One - Village 1 West 07M Easúake Woods, Vistas & Land Swap 08M McMillio Otav Ranch Village 6 09M Village 11 - Otav Ranch Brookfield Shea 11M Rolling Hills Ranch 06-1 Easúake Woods, Vistas & Land Swap 07-1 Otav Ranch Village 11 08-1 Otav Ranch Village 6 2000-1 Sunhow II Villages 5-10 2001-1 San Miguel Ranch 2001-2 McMillio Otav Ranch Village 6 Ten (10) of these Districts (CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-1, 98-2, 98-3, 99-2, 07M, 08M, 09M and 11M) provide funds for the maintenance of open space or preserve areas. Eight (8) Districts (CFDs 97- 3, 99-1, 2000-1, 2001-1, 2001-2, 06I, 071 and 081) provide funds for the construction of backbone streets and associated improvements, Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) improvements, and pedestrian bridges. The eight (8) improvement CFDs were established to provide funding for infrastructure and involve bond issues. One of the provisions of issuing limited obligation bonds under both the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 and the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 is that the City must monitor the collection process. These Acts state that the cost of collecting a delinquent installment, penalties, interest and collection costs are recoverable from the delinquent parcel. Community Facilities Districts offer more flexibility in the methodology for assessing fees than Landscape Maintenance, Municipal Improvement, Open Space, or Assessment Districts, all of which have been previously established by the City. Separate rates have been established for developed and undeveloped properties. In order to establish the annual rate for each District and to include each parcel on the tax roll prior to August 10, several steps are necessary. The budget and reserve requirements for these Districts will need to be established. In addition, building pennits will need to be reviewed in order to detennine the square footages necessary for assessment calculations. Final Maps and Site Development Plans will need to be reviewed in jL/~3 Page 4, Item--.i!L Meeting Date 05/10/05 order to determine acreage for Exempt Areas and rates for commercial and multiple family properties. In order to reflect changes in density and land use, Backup or Extraordinary Special Taxes must be calculated for all bonded CFDs. In addition to Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts, the City also established Open Space Districts (OSDs) over the last thirty years. The City administers and maintains twenty-four Open Space Districts. These Districts are shown below: Current Open Space Districts within the City of ChuIa Vista Open Space District No. Name I EI Rancho Del Rev 1-4 2 Lark Haven 3 Rancho Robinhood Units I & 2 4 Bonita Ridge 5 South Bav Villas 6 Hillton Vista 7 Zenith Units 2, 3, 4 8 Rancho Robinhood Unit 3 9 EI Rancho Del Rev 10 EI Rancho Del Rev, Casa Del Rev II Hidden Vista Village 14 Bonita Long Canvon 15 Bonita Haciendas 17 Bel Air Ridge 18 Rancho Del Sur 20 Rancho Del Rev 23 Otav Rio Business Park 24 Canvon View Homes 26 Park Bonita 31 Telegravh Canyon Estates 33 Broadwav Business Home Village - Eastlake Maintenance District No. I - Bav Boulevard Maiotenance District - Towne Centre Maintenance District OSDs were created in conjunction with each particular development to ensure financing for the perpetual maintenance of common open space areas. The Districts provide a financing mechanism for the City to levy an annual collectible to cover the costs and maintenance associated with each OSD. City Council approves the annual collectible and then, similar to Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts, Open Space Districts levy collection also appears on the owner's property tax bill. The City of Chula Vista Municipal Code makes the distinction between the assessment and the amount that the City may collect against the assessment (the "collectible"). The assessments are amounts adjusted by an inflation factor pursuant to the Municipal Code. The collectible is the amount to be actually collected from the property owner and is equal to, or lower than, the / '-/~ Page 5, Item~ Meeting Date 05/10/05 proposed assessment. The collectible is based on the budget, the reserve requirement, savings and fund balances, earned interest, and prior years' savings. Scope of Work NBS shall prepare annual assessment collection reports, assessment diagrams, annual collections, tapes, and spreadsheets and submit them to the County Auditor-Controller before August 10 of each year for inclusion on the property owner's tax bill. The annual assessment collection report is done in compliance with Section 8730 of the Streets and Highways Code, which states that when a parcel of land on which there is an unpaid assessment divides, the original assessment must be segregated and apportioned in accordance with the benefits to the several pieces of the original lot. In addition to the reports, NBS shall notify bondholders and underwriters of the apportionment. NBS will prepare these reports and perform these activities for all Special Districts within the City. Moreover, NBS will provide bi-annual reports of delinquent parcels to the City and, upon approval of the reports; contact delinquent property owners; be responsible for requesting direct payments to the City by delinquent property owners; and removal of the delinquent assessments from the County tax roll for all Special Districts. Additionally, the administration of Special Tax Districts involves other tasks, such as performance of bond call spreads, early redemption of outstanding bonds, and releasing of liens associated with early payoffs. Backup or Extraordinary Special Taxes must be recalculated upon permit issuance in order to reflect changes in proposed density and land use. Lastly, NBS will provide continuing disclosure pertaining to the Special Districts as necessary to ensure ongoing compliance with the continuing disclosure requirements of Rule IOb-5 and 15c2- 12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. NBS will provide required financial and operating data called for by disclosure agreements or which would otherwise be considered material in keeping securities holders informed of the investment quality of the Debt Issue( s). NBS will prepare an Annual Information Statement, which includes a report that will contain relevant documents relating to Debt Issue( s) and required third-party data and other information, which has been analyzed and verified for accuracy, materiality and appropriateness by NBS. Consultant Selection Process Staff reviewed the methods of accomplishing the work, including performing the activities in- house and using a consultant. Additional staff would need to be hired and trained in order to do the work in-house. This would not be practical due to time constraints (the August 10 deadline) and the fact that most ofthe work involved in this contract needs to be done during a four-month period. The hiring of a consultant would therefore be more practical and cost-effective. In the past, the City has employed different selection processes in choosing the firms that would perform Assessment District apportionment, Community Facilities District administration, and Assessment District and Community Facilities District delinquency monitoring services. During certain time periods, the City has employed as many as three separate firms as consultants on these matters. Staff believes that the combination of these required services under one contract / If--S" Page 6, Item~ Meeting Date 05/10/05 will result in cost savings and facilitate coordination of these services. Engineering staff followed Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 2.56.110 in the consultant selection process. As required, a Request for Proposal (RFP) was prepared and sent to five (5) firms known to have expertise in the administration of Special Tax Districts. Additionally, an advertisement inviting proposals was published in the Chula Vista Star-News. The RFP included a description of the scope of work and the time frames for completion. Each firm was asked to indicate in its proposal: I) proof of general familiarity with various types of Special Tax Districts; 2) proof of capacity, resources and specialized equipment or expertise to perform the work; 3) names and qualifications of all key personnel to be used in the project, including any subconsultants; 4) past record of performance and references; 5) the location of the office where the work is to be performed; and 6) a cost estimate. The following three (3) firms responded to the RFP mailing and invitation and sent proposals: Firm Name NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS MuniFinancial Special District Financing & Administration Location Temecula, CA Temecula, CA Escondido, CA The Selection Committee consisted of the following members: Tiffany Allen, Senior Management Analyst Nadine Mandery, Treasury Manager Veronica Roble, Accountant Amy Partosan, Administrative Analyst II Maria Quicho, Administrative Analyst II The Selection Committee members were provided with individual copies of the proposals from the three (3) firms. Three (3) firms were invited to participate in the interview process and they all accepted. On March 23, 2005 the Selection Committee interviewed, judged, and discussed the firms based on the qualification of personnel, adherence of firm's proposal to RFP guidelines, resources available to perform tasks on time and within budget, firm experience directly related to contract, quality of presentation, response to interview questions, and total cost and justification. NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS was selected as the most qualified to perform the services required for all Special Tax Districts. This decision was based on evaluating many criteria, including project team and area knowledge, experience handling similar matters for other agencies and municipalities, and quality of work based on results achieved through similar contracts. In regard to all of these factors, the Selection Committee concluded that the case for NBS was the strongest among the competing firms. The Agreement The proposed agreement with NBS uses the City's standard two-party agreement. Under this contract, the Consultant agrees to perform the scope of work for a three-year term as outlined in / tf~ /p Page 7, Item~ Meeting Date 05/10/05 Exhibit A of the agreement. This section is extremely precise in order to ensure that all of the City requirements are included in the fee. The compensation schedule can be reviewed in Exhibit A of the agreement. Contract Issues Since expenses associated with Community Facilities District administration will be recovered from the billings to parcels within each District, each firm responding to the RFP was asked to detail costs for each District separately. Additionally, because the amount of work involved varies with the number of parcels and/or the number of building permits issued in each District, the firms applying had the option of including a variable cost factor in the contract. The number of parcels included on the tax roll for each District for Fiscal Year 2005/2006 will not be known until shortly before the County's August 10 deadline, since that number will depend on the parcels split by the County as ofthe deadline. Stradlinl! Yocca Carlson & Rauth One of the provisions of issuing 1915 Act limited obligation bonds is that the City must monitor the collection process and cause judicial foreclosure proceedings to commence in as little as 150 days of an installment becoming delinquent. The City's obligations to the bondholders are spelled out as covenants in each District's bond indenture. In cases where the City does not initiate timely judicial foreclosure proceedings pursuant to the covenants, the City may become liable for the delinquent payment to the bondholders. The 1915 Bond Act states that the cost of collecting a delinquent installment is recoverable from the delinquent parceL The delinquent installment, penalties, interest and collection costs will be collected from the delinquent parcels so that other parcels within the District will experience no additional cost. The City has used the services of Stradling Y occa Carlson & Rauth for the past three (3) years and the proposed extension will retain their services for the time period January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2005. All costs associated with judicial foreclosure services and collection of delinquent assessments are recovered from the delinquent property owners at no expense to the City. Authorize Judicial Foreclosure In order for Stradling Y occa Carlson & Rauth to foreclose on delinquent properties, the City must formally authorize the firm to act on its behalf and initiate the judicial foreclosure proceedings. In the past, this has been done on a District-by-District basis as the need arose. Staff recommends that Council provide a blanket authorization to the City Attorney or its designee to initiate judicial foreclosure pursuant to the bond documents on all delinquent parcels. The benefit of a blanket authorization is two-fold. First, it allows the delinquency attorney to respond quickly to the delinquency and meet the time requirements of the bond indenture. Second, the delinquent properties are not put into the public record, thereby respecting the privacy of those owners. The second resolution will authorize the City Attorney to designate / tj-- 7 Page 8, Item~ Meeting Date 05/10/05 Stradling Y occa Carlson & Rauth as its designee to foreclose on delinquent properties pursuant to the bond covenants. FISCAL IMPACT; NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS (NBS) The administrative costs for each non-bonded Special Tax District (Open Space Districts and Maintenance CFDs) will be financed out of the revenue generated by the individual Districts via the annual levy. Administrative costs incurred by the bonded Districts (Assessment Districts and Improvement CFDs) will be recovered through the 'administrative fee' component of the annual levy, with invoices sent directly to the district's trustee for payment. These costs include the placement of the annual levy on the tax roll and other administrative tasks as required. With the current number of parcels and districts, the annual contract amount for these administration services is approximately $156,000. The exact contract amount will not be known until shortly prior to the submittal of the annual levy to the County, as that number will depend on the parcels split by the County as of the August loth deadline. In future years, the contract amount will vary as additional districts and parcels are created. All costs associated with the preparation of the Annual Continuing Disclosure Report will also be recovered directly from the annual revenues of the Districts. Costs associated with delinquency management services will be recovered from the delinquent property owners. Lastly, all costs associated with apportionment services will be offset by apportionment deposits received from developers via the previously described apportionment application process. All of these contract amounts will vary each year based on the number of disclosure reports generated, delinquencies, and apportionments processed by the consultant. In no instance will this contract impact the General Fund. StradIin ! Yocca Carlson & Rauth There will be no impact to the City's General Fund. The general nature of the regional and local economic picture and homeowners' general ability to fulfill their financial obligations would affect the number of parcels that become delinquent and trigger the foreclosure process. In the past, fees for foreclosure services have been included in the costs incurred by our Delinquency Monitoring Consultant and passed on to the City. In the previous twelve (12) months, Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth was paid $9,581.83 for various services provided to the City. The annual contract amount will vary based on the number of foreclosures processed by the consultant. Once each case is resolved, the owners of the delinquent parcels would pay all legal expenses and the Assessment District or Community Facilities District accounts would be reimbursed. By going through this process and collecting the delinquent assessments, the City will avoid future liabilities. Since all collection costs are recovered for the delinquent parcels, there is no fiscal impact to the General Fund. / Page 9, Iteml Meeting Date 05/10/05 Attachments: A Proposed Agreement with NBS Local Government Solutions for Assessment District, Community Facilities District and Open Space District Apportionment, Delinquency Monitoring, Administration and Other Services. B Initial Agreement between the City of Chlila Vista and Stradling Y occa Carlson & Rauth for Assessment District Judicial Foreclosure Services. C Proposed Agreement Extension between the City of Chula Vista and Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth for Assessment District Judicial Foreclosure Services. /¡j~ 1 ~ 'j~ ~." \~ Parties and Recital Pagels) Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth for Assessment District Judicial Foreclosure Services This agreement ("Agreement"), dated r~k;,~ & k ..?coo i for the purposes of reference only, and effective as ~f the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A, paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("city"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts: Recitals WHEREAS, the city has formed Assessment Districts pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1915 and Community Facilities Districts pursuant to the Community Facilities Act of 1982 to impose assessments/ special taxes on benefitting properties' to finance the construction of various improvements; and, WHEREAS, limited obligation bonds were issued to fund the unpaid assessments/ special taxes pursuant to the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 and the Community Facilities Act of 1982; and, WHEREAS, the City must begin judicial foreclosure proceedings when parcels become delinquent on their assessment installment; and, WHEREAS, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; January 18, 2001 Page 1 / '1-/ tJ " ~ Obligatory Provisions Pages NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Duties A. General Duties Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and, B. Scope of Work and Schedule In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to city such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this Agreement. C. Reductions in scope of Work city may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction. January 18, 2001 Page 2 It/-I/ It e D. Additional Services In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, city may require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1.1. (C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed. E. Standard of Care Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. F. Insurance Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: Statutory Worker's Compensation Liability Insurance coverage in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9. Insurance amount set and Employer's forth in the Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant. January 18, 2001. Page 3 /'-I-/eJ' .~ . Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. G. Proof of Insurance Coverage. (1) Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. (2) Policy Endorsements Required. In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager. H. Security for Performance. (1) Performance Bond. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (2) Letter of Credit. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by January 18, 2001 Page 4 Jtf~/3 i8 . a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the city at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the bank a letter, signed by the city Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (3) Other Security In the event that Exhibit A, at paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the city such other security therein listed in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney. I. Business License Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the city and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula vista Municipal Code. 2. Duties of the City A. Consultation and Cooperation City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the objectives of this agreement. The city shall permit access to its office facilities, files and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to January 18, 2001 /1/-1'1 Page 5 . . proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this agreement. B. Compensation Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the city periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12. All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City'S account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment. 3. Administration of Contract Each party designates the individuals (" Contract Administrators" ) indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine administration of this agreement. 4. Term. This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory provisions hereof. 5. Liquidated Damages The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14. January 18,2001 /if-/5 Page 6 . ,~ ""4g It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate") . Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City'S Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work. 6. Financial Interests of Consultant A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer. If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict. o-f interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney. B. Decline to Participate. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to January 18, 2001 Page 7 ;'1- / ~ c1) . know Consultant has a financial interest other than the compensation promised by th~s Agreement. C. Search to Determine Economic Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this agreement. D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act. E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the city Attorney of City if Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests. Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any January 18, 2001 Page 8 /t!-/1 A '7lII . property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15. Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant I s performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise city of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter. Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with the written permission of city. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement, except with the written permission of city. 7. Hold Harmless Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontrac- tors, or others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the city, its officers, or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall in- clude any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the city, its officers, agents, or employees in defend- ing against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the city, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultant's January 18, 2001 Page 9 11-/6 . .. indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. 8. Termination of Agreement for Cause If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the city, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach. 9. Errors and Omissions In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the city. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement. 10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by city as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall January 18, 2001 Page 10 /~"/l . . be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein. 11. Assignability The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of city. City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants". 12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the united States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. 13. Independent Contractor city is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement. ci ty maintains the right only to rej ect Qr accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed January 18, 2001 Page 11 / if ...;;,0 ') e to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which city employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, city will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the city harmless with regard thereto. 14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the city in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 15. Attorney's Fees Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought. 16. Statement of Costs In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document. January 18, 2001 Page 12 /'1~cfl . ., 17. Miscellaneous A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons. C. Notices All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of the designated parties. D. Entire Agreement This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. E. Capacity of Parties January 18, 2001 Page 13 / t./ -,)~ . ~.~, ~ Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. F. Governing Law/Venue This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the city of Chula vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula vista. [end of page. next page is signature page.] January 18, 2001 Page 14 /~,~3 . . Signature Page to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth for Assessment District Judicial Foreclosure Services IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: Dated: a;;/00/ I I , 2001 City of Chula vista By: Attest: Susan Bigelow, city Clerk Approved as to form: ~~h~i~ttorney Dated: 1~J.-9-() / Stradling Yocca Carlson By: Exhibit List to Agreement January 18, 2001 Page 15 1'-1- d1- .. \11 (X) Exhibit A. Exhibit A to Agreement between city of Chula Vista and Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth 1. Effective Date of Agreement: Upon Approval by city council 2. City-Related Entity: (Xl city of Chula vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California () Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula vista, a political subdivision of the State of California () Industrial Development Authority of the city of Chula vista, a () other: [insert business form] a ("City" ) 3. Place of Business for City: City of Chula vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula vista, CA 91910 4. Consultant: Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship January 18, 2001 Page 16 I tJ -;)5 .. . ( ) partnership (X) Corporation 6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant: 660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1600 Newport Beach, CA 92660-6441 Voice Phone (949) 725-4000 Fax Phone (949) 725-4100 7. General Duties: The Consultant will be responsible for providing services for judicial foreclosure actions, processes .and procedures as requested by the city for any Assessment District and/ or Community Facilities District within the City of Chula vista, in accordance with what the city has covenanted in the Bond Indenture for each Assessment District and Community Facilities District. The time period of the work shall be January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2003, plus two optional one-year periods, January 1 to December 31, 2004 and January 1 to December 31, 2005, if agreed upon by mutual consent of the city and the Consultant. Said extensions would be on the same terms as the original agreement with the exception of section 11, "Compensation", which would be subject to renegotiation. 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: A. Detailed Scope of Work: 1) Upon receipt from the City and from the Delinquency Monitoring Consultant of all pertinent bond transcripts, written evidence of the amount of all delinquencies to be sued upon, and evidence that such delinquent installments have been properly removed from the County tax rolls and authorization to proceed, the Consultant shall review all records of delinquencies, appropriate bond documents, and evidence of removal of such delinquencies from the County tax roll. 2) The Consultant shall represented by delinquent provide special all owners of property taxes and/or delinquent January 18, 2001 Page 17 /1',;;6 tit is special assessments (such ownership is shown on the last equalized assessment roll or as otherwise known to the Consultant), with written notice, mailed first class United States Mail, postage prepaid, that proceedings in judicial foreclosure are being commenced. 3) The Consultant shall also proceed to order and receive title reports and/or litigation guarantees and, if such parcels are not cured immediately, prepare complaints and related documentation pertaining to the legal proceedings in jUdicial foreclosure in the appropriate Superior Court for the collection of delinquent special assessments within the districts. The Consultant shall perform all legal services necessary to complete said action, unless directed otherwise by the City. 4) In the event that special taxes and/or special assessments not yet due become delinquent in the future, the Consultant shall perform such services to collect such delinquencies upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed from the City. To the extent that the City has already begun any foreclosure actions and wishes substitute counsel as attorney of record in any case, the Consultant shall not be responsible for the actions of prior counsel. Unless the City and the Consultant make a different arrangement in writing, the signed Agreement between the city and the Consultant will govern all future services the Consultant may perform for the City. The Consultant will provide copies of all correspondence with delinquent property owners and ensure all payments are made payable to the City. B. Date. for Commencement of Consultant Services: ( ) Same as Effective Date of Agreement (X) other: January 1, 2001 C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables: As specified in each Assessment District=s Bond Indenture. D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: January 18, 2001 Page 18 11-;).7 ra --..fII . That date when all delinquent Consultant during the term of resolved or upon notification termination. parcels assigned to the this Agreement have been from city of contract 9. Insurance Requirements: (X) statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance () Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000 each accident. (X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence. (X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence. () Automobile Insurance: $1,000,000 per accident. 10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: The City will furnish the Consultant with the following documents and information: A. A list of the delinquent properties by Assessment District/ Community Facilities District and the amounts of all delinquencies to be sued upon, evidence that such delinquent installments have been properly removed from the County tax rolls, and authorizations to proceed. B. Any pertinent bond indenture documents. 11. Compensation: A. () Single Fixed Fee Arrangement. For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, city shall. pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set forth below: Single Fixed Fee Amount: follows: , payable as January 18, 2001 Page 19 / '1' - ;;;.:? . . Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee () 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans which must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor. The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment. B. Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement. For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as are separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverahles set forth . Consultant shall not commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless city January 18, 2001 Page 20 /1-/ -;;7 ,. .. shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase. Phase Fee for Said Phase 1. $ 2. $ 3. $ () 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans which must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that phase. percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the city Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the city that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor _ The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment. January 18, 2001 Page 21 ji/-3() 11 . C. (X) Hourly Rate Arrangement For performance of the Defined services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow according to the following terms and conditions: (1) () Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for $ including all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation"). (2) () Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to ("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall.not be entitled to any addi- tional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approved by the city. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional Services at Consultant's own cost and expense. Rate Schedule Category of Employee of Consultant Name Hourly Rate Principal-in-Charge Associate Douglas J. Evertz Allison E. Burns $200.00 $165.00 January 18, 2001 Page 22 / t!, 3/ . . Additional attorneys Paralegal services Out-of-pocket expenses $150.00-$250.00 $100.00 Billed at cost Note: Paralegal services will remain at $100 per hour for at least the first twelve months and, under no circumstances, will the hourly rate for paralegal services exceed $120 per hour during the initial three-year contract term. All rates will be negotiable for the two one-year extensions commencing January 1, 2004. ( ) Hourly rates may increase rendered after [month], 19 services is caused by City. by 6% for services , if delay in providing 12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below: () None, the compensation includes all costs. Cost or Rate () Reports, not to exceed $ (X) Copies, not to exceed $ (X) Travel, not to exceed $ $0.20 per COpy Internal Revenue Service rate (X) Printing, not to exceed $ Postage, not to exceed $ Delivery, not to exceed $ Long Distance Telephone Charges, not to exceed $ Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs: Court costs, not to exceed $ , not to exceed $ ( ) (X) (X) (X) actual charqes actual charges actual charges actual charges 13. Contract Administrators: January 18, 2001 Page 23 / t.}. -.3c;t . . City: Elizabeth Chopp, civil Engineer or Veronica Roble, Accountant, Public services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 Consultant: Douglas J. Evertz, Principal-in-Charge, Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth, 660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1600, Newport Beach, CA 92660-6441 14. Liquidated Damages Rate: $ per day. Other: 15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code: (X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer. ( ) FPPC Filer Category No.1. Investments and sources of income. Category No.2. Interests in real property. Category No.3. Inve.stments, interest in real property and sources of income subj ect to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department. ( ) Category No. and sources development, sale of real 4. Investments in business entities of income which engage in land construction or the acquisition or property. () Category No.5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the city of Chula vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. January 18, 2001 Page 24 / '-//33 . ~ "~ ( .) Category No. .6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. () Category NO.7. Business positions. (X ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any: NONE 16. () Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman 17. Permitted Subconsultants: Not applicable. 18. Bill Processing: A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time: (X) Monthly ( ) Quarterly ( ) Other: B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing: ( ) First of the Month (X) 15th Day of each Month ( ) End of the Month ( ) Other: C. City'S Account Number: Varies, based on District involved. January 18, 2001 Page 25 1~.3'1 I>> ;8 19. Security for Performance ) Performance Bond, $ ) Letter of Credit, $ ) other Security: Type: Amount: $ () Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or "Retention Amount" until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred: Retention Percentage: % Retention Amount: $ Retention Release Event: ( ) Completion of All Consultant Services ( ) other: January 18, 2001 Page 26 /'-1-"35 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP, dba NBS FOR PERFORMANCE OF SPECIAL DISTRlCT APPORTIONMENT, DELINQUENCY MONITORING, ADMINISTRATION AND OTHER SERVICES FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRlCTS (ADs), COMMUNITY FACILITIES (MELLO-ROOS) DISTRlCTS (CFDs), AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS (OSDs), AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City has formed Assessment Districts to provide funding for benefiting properties and infrastructure under the Municipal Improvement Acts 1913 and 1915; and WHEREAS, the City has also formed, or is in the process of forming, Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts to provide funding for the construction of infrastructure or for the maintenance of open space areas in accordance with the Community Facilities Act of 1982; and WHEREAS, the City has formed twenty-four Open Space Districts to provide funding for perpetual maintenance of common open space areas; and WHEREAS, the City requires a consultant for the performance of apportionment, delinquency monitoring, administration and other services for the said Districts; and WHEREAS, as required by Municipal Code Section 2.56.110, a request for proposal (RFP) was prepared and advertised, proposals were received and reviewed, and firms were interviewed and ranked in accordance with selection criteria; and WHEREAS, the selection committee recommends awarding the contract to NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, does hereby approve an agreement with NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS for special district apportionment, delinquency monitoring, administration and other services. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the City. Presented by Approved as to form by DC\.-. ì, H-- Alex AI-Agha City Engineer Ann Moore City Attorney attorneylreso\agreementsWBS - Apportionment, Delinquency Moniton·ng, Admin.doc I /l~ :3 ~ THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL ~t.µ Ann Moore City Attorney Dated: May 4, 2005 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP, dba NBS FOR SPECIAL DISTRICT APPORTIONMENT, DELINQUENCY MONITORING, ADMINISTRATION AND OTHER SERVICES Parties and Recital Page(s) Agreement between City of Chula Vista and NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS for Special District Apportionment, Delinquency Monitoring, Administration and Other Services DRAFT This agreement ("Agreement"), dated for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts: Recitals Whereas, the City has formed Assessment Districts to provide funding for benefiting properties and infrastructure under the Municipal Improvement Acts 1913 and 1915; and, Whereas, the City has formed, or is in the process of forming, Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts to provide funding for the construction of infrastructure or for the maintenance of open space areas in accordance with the Community Facilities Act of 1982; and, Whereas, the City has formed twenty-four Open Space Districts to provide funding for perpetual maintenance of common open space areas; and, Whereas, Section 8730 of the Streets and Highways Code requires that when a parcel ofland upon which there is an unpaid assessment divides, the original assessment must be segregated and apportioned in accordance with the benefits to the several parts of the original list; and, Whereas, the City requires a consultant for the performance of apportionment, delinquency monitoring, administration and other services for the said Districts; and, Whereas, the Request for Proposal was prepared and advertised, proposals were received and reviewed, and firms were interviewed and ranked in accordance with City Policies; and, Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; (End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.) /f~3g Page 1 Obligatory Provisions Pages DRAFT NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Duties A. General Duties Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and, B. Scope of Work and Schedule In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time ftames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time ftames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope ofW ork and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this Agreement. C. Reductions in Scope of Work City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction. D. Additional Services In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed. E. Standard of Care Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. / - Page 2 DRAFT F. Insurance Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9. Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage"). Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. G. Proof of Insurance Coverage. (1) Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. (2) Policy Endorsements Required. In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager. H. Security for Performance. (1) Performance Bond. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a form / Page 3 DRAFT and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (2) Letter of Credit. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (3) Other Security In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney. I. Business License Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with Title 5 ofthe ChuIa Vista Municipal Code. 2. Duties ofthe City A. Consultation and Cooperation City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the objecti ves of this agreement. The City shall perrni t access to its office facilities, files and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this agreement. Page 4 B. Compensation DRAFT Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the tenns and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkrnark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12. All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient infonnation as to the propriety of the billing to pennit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment. 3. Administration of Contract Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine administration of this agreement. 4. Term This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory provisions hereof. 5. Liquidated Damages The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14. It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in perfonnance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess ofthe time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate"). Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control, other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions oftime, when granted, will be based upon the effect of 'Ii /7" Page 5 DRAFT delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work. 6. Financial Interests of Consultant A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney. B. Decline to Participate Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement. C. Search to Determine Economic Interests Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this agreement. D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act. E. Dutv to Advise of Conflicting Interests Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will inunediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant leams of an economic interest of Consultant's, which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. ''~ Page 6 F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests DRAFT Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15. Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter. Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. 7. Hold Harmless Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys fees) arising out of or alleged by third parties to be the result of the negligent acts, errors or omissions or the willful misconduct of the Consultant, and Consultant's employees, subcontractors or other persons, agencies or firms for whom Consultant is legally responsible in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims, damages, liability, costs and expenses (including without limitations, attorneys fees) arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees. Also covered is liability arising from, connected with, caused by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions ofthe City, its agents, officers, or employees which may be in combination with the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Consultant , its employees, agents or officers, or any third party. With respect to losses arising from Consultant's professional errors or omissions, Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys fees) except for those claims arising from the negligence or willful misconduct of City, its officers or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys fees and Page 7 DRAFT liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Consultant's obligations under this Section shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. Consultant's obligations under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 8. Termination of Agreement for Cause If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all fuùshed or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach. 9. Errors and Omissions In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement. 10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and unfuùshed documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein. 11. Assignability The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City. Page 8 DRAFT City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants". 12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. 13. Independent Contractor City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto. 14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 15. Attorney's Fees Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought. Page 9 DRAFT 16. Statement of Costs In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document. 17. Miscellaneous A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons. C. Notices All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served jfpersonally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each ofthe designated parties. D. Entire Agreement This Agreement, together with any other written docurnent referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. E. Capacitv of Parties Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. F. GoverningLawNenue Page 10 DRAFT This Agreement shall be govemed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Ai1y action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. [End of page. Next page is signature page.] I Page 11 DRAFT Signature Page to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS for Special District Apportionment, Delinquency Monitoring, Administration and Other Services IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: Dated: ,20_ City of Chula Vista By: Stephen C. Padilla, Mayor Attest: Susan Bigelow, City Clerk Approved as to form: Ann Moore, City Attorney Dated: 5'- 3 ,20-E5 NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS By: LfffÎJ Â) Mike Rentner, President and CEO Exhibit List to Agreernent (X) Exhibit A. Pagel2 . DRAFT Exhibit A to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS 1. Effective Date of Agreement: Date last executed. 2. City-Related Entity: (X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California ( ) Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California ( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a ( ) Other: , a [insert business form] 3. Place of Business for City: City ofChula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 4. Consultant: NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship ( ) Partnership (X) California S Corporation 6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant: 41661 Enterprise Circle North, Suite 225 Temecula, CA 92590 Voice Phone (951) 296-1997 Fax Phone (951) 296-1998 Page 13 DRAFT 7. General Duties: The Consultant shall provide Special District apportionment, delinquency monitoring, administration and other services as requested by the City from July 1, 2005 until June 30, 2008. The City Manager, at hislher sole discretion, may extend the agreement for two consecutive one-year periods. The two additional one-year periods shall be on the same terms and conditions. All services shall be in accordance with the City's covenants in the Bond Indenture for each Assessment District and Community Facilities District. 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: A. Detailed Scope of Work: The Consultant will be responsible for the following tasks: i. Community Facilities Districts (CFDs) Administration a. Expert Resource: Consultant shall act as the City's "expert resource," and shall be available to answer questions and advise the City on particular issues involving the CFDs. b. Data Collection: Consultant shall gather and review data pertinent to the administration of the CFDs. Data will be obtained from various sources such as assessor's parcel maps, building permits and County Assessor information as determined to be necessary based on the requirements ofthe Rate and Method of Apportionment for each CFD (hereinafter "Rate and Method of Apportionment"). Consultant will maintain and periodically update a database of all parcels within the districts and relevant parcel information. c. Administrative Cost Recovery: Consultant shall identifY all costs associated with the administration of the CFDs and recover those costs through the levy process as outlined in §53317(e) and §53340 of the Government Code of the State of California. Such costs may include, but are not limited to: bank fees, legal fees, County tax collection fees, and all costs and expenses of the public agency and its consultants related to district administration. d. Cash and Equivalents Analysis: Consultant shall determine the Cash and Equivalents balance requirements, acquire the current Cash and Equivalents balances and make recommendations to keep the flow of funds and fund balances in compliance with the bond documents. Fund transfers might include the transfer of available surplus funds to be used as levy credits or the transfer of reserve funds to the redemption fund upon the prepayment of assessments. Cash flow analysis will be performed to determine any levy shortfall or surplus collections. e. Special Tax Requirement: Consultant shall calculate the annual Special Tax Requirement (hereinafter "Special Tax" or "Special Taxes") that will include all necessary components as outlined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment, such as principal and interest due, administrative expenses, collection for direct Page 14 .~ DRAFT financing of services or facilities, and a fund credit or replenishment as determined from analysis of the district funds. f. Levy Calculation: Consultant shall calculate the annual special tax levy for each parcel within the CFDs following the guidelines established in the Rate and Method of Apportionment. g. Prior to June 30th of each year this Agreement is in effect, Consultant shall provide the City with Special Tax for each district, and each billing category within said district. Preceding submittal to the County, Consultant shall provide the City a computer disk or other mutually agreed upon format, which will include the district number, parcel number, and maximum Special Tax on each parcel - in a format which will be acceptable to the City. h. Meeting Attendance: Consultant shall attend any district-related City CouncillBoard meeting related to district administration, as requested by the City. 1. Special Tax Levy Submittal: Consultant shall submit all Special Tax Levies to the County Auditor Controller in the required format and medium (i.e. tape, diskette). Special Tax Levies rejected by the County Auditor Controller will be promptly researched and resubmitted for collection on the same County Tax RolL Any parcels that are not submitted to the County for collection will be invoiced directly to the parcel owner, with payment submitted to the public agency. J. Special Tax Levy Report: Consultant shall provide an annual Special Tax Levy Report. This report will include a parcel listing with levy amounts and other parcel information, the details of the annual Special Tax Requirement, current delinquency information, fund analysis, administrative expenses to be recovered, status ofthe project and current issues affecting the districts. k. Delinquency Monitoring: Consultant shall provide a comprehensive list of delinquencies after each special tax installment becomes due. The delinquency report will provide the district's overall delinquency percentage as well as a detailed list of each delinquent parcel, with the name and address of the delinquent parcel owner, the delinquent amount and penalties. L Backup Special Tax: Consultant shall calculate a Backup or Extraordinary Special Tax and determine if payment of the Backup or Extraordinary Special Tax is required for CFDs 97-3, 98-3, 99-1, 2000-1, 2001-, 2001-2 and othernew CFDs, as requested by the City. This shall be calculated using information obtained from approved maps and building permits over the past year and compared to the tables provided in the Rate and Method of Apportionment for each CFD to determine if there is any loss in units or residential floor area. Ifthe Extraordinary Special Tax is required, Consultant shall provide a list of parcels and amounts owed. For CFD 98-3, the Extraordinary Special Tax shall be calculated and included in the billing in accordance with the Rate and Method of Apportionment. m. Prepayment Calculations: Consultant shall provide special tax prepayment calculations to interested parties. The party requesting the calculation shall pay the fee of any prepayment calculations. Page 15 L/~ DRAFT n. Bond Calls: Consultant shall prepare the spread of principal to be called within maturities for all bond calls and coordinate the call with the Paying Agent/Trustee. o. Release of Liens: Consultant shall prepare and file all documents required to release the liens of parcels that have prepaid the special tax or where the districts has matured. p. CDIAC Reporting: Consultant shall perform all necessary reporting to the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission as required by §53359.5(b) and §53359.5(c) of the Government Code of the State of California. q. Notice of Special Tax Disclosure: Consultant shall provide Notice of Special Tax Disclosure notices to requesting parties as required by §53340.2 and §53341.5 of the Government Code of the State of California. The fee of any Notice of Special Tax shall be billed to the party requesting the disclosure form. r. Toll-Free Phone Number: Consultant will provide a toll-free phone number for use by the City, other interested parties and all property owners. Consultant's staff shall be available to answer questions regarding the districts and ongoing collection of the special tax during normal business hours (Mon.-Fri. 8:00am to 5:00pm). Bilingual staff shall be available for Spanish-speaking property owners. s. Consultant Coordination: Consultant will provide all documentation and information to other City consultants as necessary throughout the year. ii. 1913 and 1915 Act Assessment District Administration Services a. Expert Resource: First and foremost, Consultant shall act as the City's "expert resource," and shall be available to answer questions and advise the City on particular issues involving Assessment Districts. b. Kick-Off Meeting, Project Schedule: Consultant shall meet with City staff, legal counsel and other interested parties to: · Establish lines of communication. · ClarifY the specific project goals and criteria that will meet the City's preference. · IdentifY and resolve any special circumstances that may be involved in the administration of the districts. · Develop project schedules to meet legal requirements and provide for effective interaction of all involved parties. · Establish meeting dates consistent with schedule to achieve project milestones. c. Data Collection: Consultant shall gather and review data relevant to the administration of the districts. Data shall be obtained from various sources, including, but not limited to, City records, Assessor's parcel maps, and County Assessor information. A database containing said information for each of the Assessment Districts shall be created by Consultànt. d. Policy Review: Consultant shall review policies and procedures that have been established by the Agency for compliance with governing documents and law. These policies shall be incorporated into Consultant's service to the City. Page 16 DRAFT e. Cost Recovery: Consultant shall identify all costs associated with the administration of the Assessment Districts and recover those costs through the levy process as outlined in §8682 and §8682.1 of the California Streets and Highways Code. These costs may include, but not be limited to Registrar/Transfer/Paying Agent fees, Arbitrage Rebate calculation fees, bank fees, and expenses of the City and its consultants related to the administration of the districts. f. Fund Analysis: Consultant shall determine the balance requirements and acquire the current cash balances for the districts. Consultant shall make recommendations to ensure that the flow of funds and fund balances are in compliance with bond documents. Cash flow analysis shall also be performed to determine any levy shortfall or surplus. g. Annual Assessment Levy: Consultant shall calculate the annual assessment levy for each parcel in each of the districts and submit the amount for each parcel to the County in the format and medium (i.e. tape, diskette) required by the County Auditor-Controller. h. Resubmission or Rejects: Consultant shall research the status of any parcels rejected by the County Auditor-Controller, and resubmit corrected data for collection on the same County Tax Roll. Any parcels that are not accepted by the County for collection shall be invoiced directly, with payment directed to the City. 1. Maintain Assessment District Data: Consultant shall annually track all parcel changes to ensure that all changes are documented. Historical parcel change and assessment apportionment data shall be maintained by Consultant. J. Annual Report: Consultant shall provide a comprehensive Annual Assessment District Report that shows a detail listing of the amounts submitted to the levy or directly billed for collection, details of delinquent assessments, fund analysis, paid off parcels and release ofliens, all bond call activity, and assessed valuation information. k. Delinquency Monitoring: Consultant shall provide the City with a comprehensive list of delinquencies after each installment becomes due. This report shall show delinquency percentage as well as a detailed list of each delinquent parcel, with the name and address of the delinquent parcel owner, the delinquent amount and penalties. 1. Prepayment Calculation! Amortization Schedule: Consultant shall provide assessment prepayment calculations and amortization schedules to interested parties. The requester shall pay the cost of this service; however, there shall be no chMge to the City or property owners. m. Bond Calls: Consultant shall prepare the spread of principal to be called within maturities for all bond calls and coordinate the call with the Paying Agent/Trustee. n. Release of Liens: Consultant shall prepare and file all docurnents required to release the liens of parcels that have prepaid the assessment. o. Notice of Special Assessment: Consultant shall provide a "Notice of Special Assessment" disclosure notice to requesting parties required by §53754 of the Page 17 / If-~ 'i DRAFT Government Code of the State of California. The fee of any Notice of Special Tax shall be paid by the party requesting the disclosure notice. p. Toll-Free Phone Nurnber: Consultant shall provide a toll-free phone number for use by the City, other interested parties and all property owners. Consultant's staff shall be available to answer questions regarding the fonnation and ongoing collection of assessments for the districts during nonnal business hours (Mon.- Fri. 8:00am to 5 :OOpm). Bilingual staff shall be available for Spanish-speaking property owners. q. County Assessor Reporting: Consultant shall work with the County Assessor to aid in complying with the requirements of Revenue & Taxation Code Section 163. This includes providing data such as parcel number, original assessment and current principal balance to the County Assessor. r. Consultant Coordination: Consultant shall provide all documentation and infonnation to other City consultants as necessary throughout the year. iii. Open Space District Tax Roll Billing a. Expert Resource: First and foremost, Consultant shall act as the City's "expert resource," and shall be available to answer questions and offer advice on particular issues involving the Open Space Districts. b. Kick-off Meeting: Consultant shall meet with City staff to discuss: · . Tax roll billing steps and appropriate timeline. · Method of application of the assessment and the data required to establish the proper procedure for levying the assessment. · The process to follow for any appeals or disputes. c. Data Gathering: Consultant shall gather and review data pertinent to the calculation and billing of the Open Space District and apply the fonnula, created during district fonnation, to detennine each parcel's assessment (hereinafter "assessment fonnula"). Data shall be obtained from various sources, including, but not limited to, the City, assessor parcel maps and County Assessor infonnation. d. Quality Control: Consultant shall perfonn cross-reference tests looking at the various data sources, land use codes, and other pertinent infonnation to ensure the best and most accurate levy application. e. Database Maintenance: Consultant shall maintain and periodically update a database of all parcels within each district and relevant parcel infonnation. f. Levy Calculation: Consultant shall calculate the annual levy for each parcel within the district following the guidelines established by the assessment fonnula. g. Prior to June 30th of each year this Agreement is in effect, Consultant shall provide the City with assessment rates for each district, and each billing category within said district. Preceding submittal to the County, Consultant shall provide to the City a computer disk or other mutually agreed upon media, which includes the district number, parcel number, and maximum assessment on each parcel in a fonnat acceptable to the City. Page 18 DRAFT h. County Submittal: Consultant shall submit the levy to the County Auditor Controller in the required electronic format. Levies rejected by the County Auditor Controller shall be researched and resubmitted for collection on the same County Tax Roll. Anyparcels that are not submitted to the County for collection shall be invoiced with payment to be directed to the City. \, Reporting: Consultant shall provide an annual Open District Levy Report. The report shall include a parcel listing with levy amounts. Parcel and levy data can be provided via a CD ROM, diskette or electronic file. J. Consultant Coordination: Consultant shall provide all documentation and information to other City consultants as necessary throughout the year. k. Toll-Free Phone Number: Consultant shall provide a toll-free phone number for use by the City and property owners. Consultant staff shall be available to answer questions regarding the formation and ongoing collection of assessments for the districts during normal business hours (Mon.-Fri. 8:00am to 5:00pm). Bilingual staff shall be available to assist Spanish-speaking property owners. iv. Delinquency Management a. Delinquency Reports: Consultant shall provide the City with an updated list of delinquencies prior to sending any of the letters listed in this subsection (8.A.iv.). This report shall also detail each district's percentage of delinquencies, as well as a detailed list of each delinquent parcel. b. Reminder Letter: At the City's direction, send a reminder letter (the form of which shall be approved by the City) to the property owner of each delinquent parcel for the December lOth installment. The purpose of the letter is to inform and educate the property owner of their obligation to pay assessments. c. Demand Letter: At the City's direction, send a demand letter (the form of which shall be approved by the City) to the property owner of each delinquent parcel for the April 1 Oth installment. This letter shall be mailed to any property owner who remains delinquent for both installments or who is delinquent after April 10th only. The purpose of this letter is to further educate the property owner and advise them of potential foreclosure. d. Foreclosure Letter: Upon authorization from the City, Consultant shall send a final twenty-one (21 )-day delinquency foreclosure letter to each delinquent property owner via certified mail. This type of letter is typically sent after the installments for a parcel have been removed from the tax roll. The letter delineates what amount must be paid directly to the City to forestall the turnover of documents to the foreclosure attorney. e. Tax Roll Removal: Consultant shall provide and file (if necessary) the information required to remove parcels from the tax roll. Consultant shall work with the County Auditor-Controller to verify the removal. This step is in preparation of turning the parcels over for foreclosure. Once removed from the tax roll, each property owner shall receive one final foreclosure letter indicating the amount due and payment instruction. f. At the City's discretion, Consultant may be order to offer payment plans to property owners in lieu of turning parcels over to the City's foreclosure counsel. Page 19 /,/- DRAFT g. Subsequent Foreclosure Services: Once a decision to foreclose has been made by City, Consultant shall prepare and deliver all information to the City's foreclosure counsel. Consultant shall also continue to supply the City's counsel with additional information throughout the foreclosure process. Consultant shall continue to respond to property owner (unless ordered not to) and City staff phone calls regarding the status of all cases, and shall coordinate and audit status reports on a bi-monthly basis from the City's foreclosure counsel. For those parcels sent to foreclosure, Consultant shall assist foreclosure counsel to initiate and prosecute judicial foreclosure proceedings in compliance with bond foreclosure covenants. h. Toll-Free Phone Number: Consultant shall provide a toll-free phone number for use by the City, other interested parties and all property owners. Consultant's staff shall be available to answer questions regarding the formation and ongoing collection of assessments/special taxes for the districts during normal business hours (Mon.-Fri. 8:00am to 5:00pm). Bilingual staff shall be made available for Spanish-speaking property owners. \. Consultant Coordination: Consultant shall provide all documentation and information to other City consultants as necessary throughout the year. V. Bond Issue Continuing Disclosures In accordance with the Disclosure Certificate of a bond issue, Consultant shall assist in compliance with the annual disclosure requirement of the SEC Continuing Disclosure Rule 15c2-12. Specifically, Consultant shall perform the following: a. Docurnent Review: Consultant shall review pertinent documents related to the bond issue, including the Official Statement and Disclosure Certificate. Consultant shall identify material such as the Consolidated Annual Financial Report and/or other operating data that the City has agreed to provide in the Disclosure Certificate. b. Data Collection: Consultant shall collect the annual financial information and operating data that the City has agreed to provide to each Nationally Recognized Municipal Securities Information Repository (NRMSIR) and the appropriate State Information Depository (SID), if any. c. Report Preparation: Consultant shall prepare the Annual Disclosure Report as required in the Disclosure Certificate. d. Annual Dissemination: Consultant shall disseminate the Annual Disclosure Report to state and national repositories and post to our website to allow public access fiee of charge. e. Significant Events: Consultant shall prepare and disseminate a "Notice of Significant Events", as listed on the Continuing Disclosure Certificate, to the appropriate SID and to either each NRMSIR or the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). Consultant's actions pursuant to this subsection should commence upon notification by the City of the occurrence of any of the events, if deemed by the City to be material. Typical significant events may include: . Principal and interest payment delinquencies Page 20 / DRAFT · Non-payment related defaults · Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties · Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties · Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perfonn · Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax -exempt status of the security · Modifications to the rights of security holders · Bond calls · Defeasances · Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities · Rating changes f. Consultant Coordination: Consultant shall provide all documentation and infonnation to other City consultants as necessary throughout the year. vi. Apportionments Consultant shall provide Special Districts apportionment services as delineated in Section 8730 of the Streets and Highways Code. The Code states that when a parcel of land upon which there is an unpaid assessment divides, the original assessment must be segregated and apportioned in accordance with the benefits to the several parties of the original lot. The Consultant shall apportion the liens among the newly created parcels as if such a subdivision had existed at the time of the confirmation of the District and file documents to effectuate a segregation with the County Tax Auditor after the City reviews and authorizes such. Specifically, the Consultant shall perfonn the following: a. Segregation: Consultant shall apportion the special assessment according to the method described in the engineer's report. b. Notice of Apportionment: Consultant shall prepare a notice of apportionment and send it via certified mail to the issuing underwriter, as required. c. Assessment Diagram: Consultant shall prepare an amended assessment diagram and notice. The diagram and notice shall be filed and recorded with the County Recorder. d. Amortization Schedule: Consultant shall prepare an amortization schedule for each newly created assessment type. e. Apportionment Report: Consultant shall prepare and submit to the City an Apportionment Report showing the finalized apportionment and the amended assessment diagram. f. Optional- Application Fonns: If requested by the City, Consultant shall also provide apportionment application fonns and instructions to the City's . Engineering representative for inclusion as a condition of approval for subdivision within an assessment district. Page 21 /1- :; D r'\r I g. In the event proceedings are undertaken under Division 10, Part 10 of the California Streets and Highways Code, the following additional items shall be prepared: · Resolutions. Consultant shall prepare the required City Council resolutions to order the amended assessment, the amended assessment diagram, notices to the property owner, and fix the amount of costs to perform the apportionment. · Public Meetings. Consultant shall be available to attend any public meetings required to complete the apportionment. h. Consultant Coordination: Consultant shall provide all documentation and information to other City consultants as necessary throughout the year. vii. D-F AST® Software Services a. D-FAST Online: To complement the administration of the City's districts, Consultant shall provide City staff, up to 10 usernames, access to D-F AST Online. D-F AST® is a state-of-the-art proprietary software program specifically designed for the administration, management, billing, and tracking tasks of Special Tax Districts. b. Web Interface: Consultant shall provide programming support to the City to create an interface between the City's web site and parcel data within D-F AST for public access. viii. Optional Items If requested by the City, the following services shall be provided: a. Proposition 218 Compliance · Consultant shall work with the City, as needed, given the requirements of Proposition 218. Consultant understands that each City has different requirements and resources to complete the necessary tasks for the assessment balloting procedures. Therefore, an individually tailored approach to Proposition 218 Compliance may be required. b. District Closeout: Consultant shall administer the districts under the City's direction, taking into account the final-year maturity. Thereafter, Consultant shall perform the following: · Perform a complete analysis of all funds for each Assessment District in accordance with Municipal Improvement Act 1913 and the Improvement Act of 1915. · Prepare a detailed Analysis Report for each district projecting revenue and expenditures resulting in a surplus amount. Projected revenue may include, but is not limited to, investment earnings and assessment levies. Projected expenditures may include, but is not limited to, debt service payments, arbitrage rebate payments, administrative costs and proj ect maintenance costs. Page 22 /7'- DRAFT · Determine if arbitrage rebate calculations have been performed and funds have been cleared for disbursement by the City Finance Department. . · Determine the best use of the surplus amount in accordance with applicable laws. · Prepare a Certificate of Project Completion and Use of Funds for Project Maintenance Letter, to be signed by the Public Works Director. · Prepare a City Council Resolution Declaring Surplus, Determining Use and Approving the Analysis Report. · Prepare documents and coordinate the advanced maturity of bonds as required. · Prepare a detailed report for the processing of refunds to property owners by the City. · Review procedures with legal counsel and City staff as required. · Prepare a detailed delinquency report and consider the delinquencies in the analysis of funds and refunds. · Coordinate the implementation of a policy for the collection of delinquencies and tirneline for completion. c. Processing of Bond Tenders (1915 Act Bonds and CFD Bonds) · Expert Resource: First and foremost, Consultant shall act as the City's "expert resource," and is available to answer questions and advise the City on particular issues involving the use of Bond Tenders. · Kick-off Meeting. Consultant shall meet via telephone or in person with City staff, legal counsel and other interested parties to discuss details and implementation of a bond tender policy. · Implementation of Bond Tender Policy. Consultant shall implement the City's existing bond tender administrative policy. If desired, Consultant shall review and make modifications to this existing policy or develop and implement a new policy. As this requires significant additional work, hourly rates shall apply. · Primary Contact. Consultant shall serve as the primary and direct contact for property owners, bondholders, and other interested parties. Consultant shall provide instructions and guidelines on the bond tender process. · Letters of Intent to Tender. Consultant shall review and reply to Letters of Intent to Tender with a formal Letter of Instructions to Tender, and shall provide updates to the Letter of Instructions based on amount change triggers. · Facilitator of Bond Tenders. Consultant shall act as facilitator of bond tenders, and shall provide the following: 1. Analysis of bond tendered and application of bonds tendered as payment of delinquencies, current year installments, and prepayment of the future of the lien. Page 23 / DRAFT 2. Provide documentation of the tender to property owners, trustee, fiscal agent, paying agent, City! Agency and other professionals. 3. Update of debt service schedules and mandatory sinking fund schedules, as required. 4. Calculation and request payment of any amounts due in cash in addition to the bonds tendered. . Data Corrections: Consultant shall perform County Tax Roll corrections, future annual levy, and future amortization (annual levies) corrections resulting from the bond tender. . Toll-Free Phone Number: Consultant shall provide a toll-free phone number for use by the City, other interested parties and all property owners during normal business hours (Mon.-Fri. 8:00am to 5 :OOpm). B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services: (X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement ( ) Other: C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliver abies: Deliverable No.1: Prior to June 30th of each year this Agreement is in effect, Consultant shall provide the City with Assessment rates for each Community Facilities, Assessment and Open Space. Deliverable No.2: On August 1st of each year, submit a computer disk of annual assessments and/or collections to the County Auditor-Controller. Deliverable No.3: On or before August lOth of each year, final corrections to the tax roll shall be submitted to the County Auditor-Controller. Deliverable NO.4: On or before October 15th of each year, submit to the City three (3) copies and one (1) unbound copy of each final Special Tax District report with corrected printouts and computer files. Deliverable No.5: On September 30th of each year, submit to the City a copy of each Amended Assessment Diagram. Deliverable No.6: Within 10 business days after the effective or execution date of this agreement (whichever is later), provide City staff with access to the D- FAST® Online, and establish a time line for creation of web interface. D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: Page 24 j DRAFT The date when all services assigned to the Consultant have been resolved, or upon notification from City of contract termination 9. Insurance Requirements: (X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance (X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000. (X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000. () Business Automobile Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000 () Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability coverage). (X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability coverage). 10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: A. Copy of Final Special Tax Report for all Community Facilities Districts. B. Copy of Final Official Statement, bond indenture, arbitrage certificate and other documents as required for Community Facilities Districts involving a bond issue. C. Access to the City's computerized permit tracking system. D. Copies of Site Development plans (for commercial and multiple family properties), Final Maps which have been approved prior to March 1st of the previous fiscal year, and building permit information. E. (After first fiscal year off ormation) Copies of tax reapportionment forms completed by City for parcels which have been segregated by the County during the previous fiscal year. F. Budget information. G. List of Special Tax Districts the City would like Consultant to administer for each Fiscal Year. H. Copy of Final Engineer's Report and Final Official Statement for each Special District. 1. Listing of parcels that have paid off their assessments (partially or fully) since the districts were formed. J. List of the bonds that have been called for each Special District since the bonds were issued. The list should include the amount of bonds called and their corresponding Fiscal Year for each Special District. K. List of parcels requiring apportionment services for each Assessment District for each Fiscal Year. 1. Name and address of the underwriter or other original purchaser of the bonds for each Special District. M. A sample copy of the City-approved notice to underwriters or other original purchaser of bonds. N. A copy oflast year's database (in electronic format if available) and diagrams for each Special District. Page 25 DRAFT 11. Compensation: A. () Single Fixed Fee Arrangement. B. () Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement. C. () Hourly Rate Arrangement () Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after [month], 20 , if delay in providing services is caused by City. D. (X) Other: For performance ofthe Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay according to the following schedules/rates: . Annual Administration Services - The following fees are annual fees for the administration of Special Districts. A. Community Facilities Districts: 1. Bonded Districts $3.00 per parcel plus base fee of $2,000 2. Non Bonded Districts $1.50 per parcel plus base fee of$I,500 B. 1915 and 1913 Act Assessment Districts: 1. Districts with parcel counts up to 1,000 2. Districts with parcel counts over 1,000 and up to 3,000 3. Districts with parcel counts over 3,000 and up to 5,000 C. Open Space Districts: 1. Districts with parcel counts up to 500 2. Districts with parcel counts over 500 and up to 1,000 $2,500 $3,500 $5,000 3. Rancho Del Rey and Eastlake Maintenance District No.1 $750 $1,250 Total for both $16,000 · Other Services - The following fees are the services rendered in support of the annual administration of the districts. A. Delinquency Management: 1. Annual Base Cost Per District No charge 2. Reminder Letters *$10 3. Demand Letters *$15 4. Foreclosure Letters $30 5. Payment Plan Administration $150 6. Tax Roll Removal **$50 7. Subsequent Foreclosure Fees ***$75 Page 26 DRAFT All fees are based on a per parcel/per district basis * This fee will be recovered as part of the next levy. ** This fee includes filing of "Notices of Intent to Remove Delinquent Installments" but does not include County fees for removal from the tax roll. *** This fee is per parcel/per district/per year from the initiation of the foreclosure. Note: At the option of the City, Consultant will set up historical delinquency information into software at our hourly rates or as negotiated on a per district basis. · Continuing Disclosure: The Annual Report Fee is based on the complexity of the disclosure requirements. Consultant will provide the services for the Special District bonds existing at the date of this agreement for the fees as listed below. Additional issues may be added at similar fees. This Fee typically ranges from a base of$I,OOO and up. A. Annual Report Fee 1. Annual Report (perreport) B. Significant Event Notification C. Dissemination Services 1. Report Dissemination (per recipient) 2. Significant Event Dissemination (per recipient) D. Posting to CPO and Consultant website $1,250 hourly $25 $25 No charge · Apportionments: 1. Annual Per District Method $750 per district plus $35 per parcel Alternatively, at the City's discretion, Consultant shall provide apportionment services as provided below: Application Method Division 10, Part 10.5 of the Streets and Highways Code 1. Apportionment Fee (4 parcels or less) $950 . $1800 2. ApportIOnment Fee (5 or more parcels) (pI $35 I) us per parce $40 3. Recording Fee (each) Hearing Method Division 10, Part 10 of the Streets and Highways Code 1. Resolutions 2. Meeting attendance $300 Hourly, plus travel · D-FAST Software Services: 1. D-FAST Online 2. Web Interface Annual Fee $2,500 (Set Up fee waived) Hourly (not to exceed $5,000 without written amendment) · Optional Services: At the discretion of the City, Consultant shall provide those services related to annual use, increases, closeouts, refunding, etc. Fees for those services will be determined by the City and Consultant as fixed-fees (to be negotiated later) orat Consultant's Page 27 DRAFT hourly rates. The City may choose which method (negotiated fixed-fee or hourly). The hourly rates are as shown below. Rate Schedule Consultant Em 10 ee Title Director Engineer Senior Consultant/Prograrnrner Consultant Analyst ClericaVSupport Houri Rate $135 $125 $110 $85 $65 $45 Terms: The annual recurring base fees shall be billed during the year, at the beginning of each quarter. Other fees shall be invoiced upon completion of the project. Payment shall be made within 30 days of subrnittal of an invoice. If payment is not received within ninety (90) days, simple interest shall begin to accrue at the rate of 1.5% per month. Cost of living increases as measured by the Southern California Counties CPI will be applied each year, starting October 2006, to the services listed in this Paragraph (11.D). · The following fees are noted herein, and paid by others (not fees paid by City): 1. CFD Prepayment Calculations (per request) (Fee based on complexity of calculations. Party requesting calculations shall pay) 2. Notice of Special Tax (per notice) (The fee of any Notice of Special Tax shall be billed to the party requesting the disclosure form) 3. 1915 Act Prepayment Calculations (each) (Party requesting calculations shall pay) 4. Notice of Special Assessment (per notice) (The fee of any Notice of Assessment shall be billed to the party requesting the disclosure form) $150 $10 $35 $10 12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement For the cost of out-of~pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below: () None, the compensation includes all costs. ( ) Reports (X) Copies (X) Travel (X) Printing (X) Postage (X) Delivery (X) Telephone Charges not to exceed $ not to exceed $ not to exceed $ 1.000/year not to exceed $ not to exceed $ not to exceed $ 250/vear not to exceed $ 1.000/year Cost or Rate $ $ 0.10/page $ actual cost $ actual cost $ actual cost $ actual cost $ actual cost Page 28 DRAFT (X) Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs: County Charges (for tapes, maps, and recording fees) not to exceed $ LOOO/vear not to exceed $ $ actual cost $ 13. Contract Administrators: City: Tiffany Allen, Senior Management Analyst Consultant: Tim Seufert, Managing Director 14. Liquidated Damages Rate: ( )$_perday. ( ) Other: 15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code: (X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer. ( ) FPPC Filer ( ) Category No.1. Investments and sources of income. ( ) Category No.2. Interests in real property. ( ) Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department. ( ) Category No.4. Investments in business entities and sources of income which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property. ( ) Category No.5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( ) Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. Page 29 , i '¡I~ DRAFT ( ) Category No.7. Business positions. (X) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any: 16. () Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman 17. Permitted Subconsultants: None 18. Bill Processing: A. ( ) Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period oftime: ( ) Monthly ( ) Quarter! y (X) Other: See Section 11. Part D "Terms" B. ( ) Day ofthe Period for submission of Consultant's Billing: ( ) First ofthe Month ( ) 15th Day of each Month ( ) End of the Month ( ) Other: C. (X) City's Account Number: Appropriate CFD, AD, and OS accounts 19. Security for Performance ( ) Performance Bond ( ) Letter 0 f Credit ( ) Other Security Type: $ $ $ () Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or "Retention Amount" until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred: ( ) Retention Percentage: _% Page 30 / / '/ t DRAFT ( ) Retention Amount: $ Retention Release Event: ( ) Completion of All Consultant Services ( ) Other: Page 31 i' RESOLUTION NO. 2005-_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXTENDING THE AGREEMENT FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES (MELLO-ROOS) DISTRlCT JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE SERVICES TO STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT DRAFT WHEREAS, the City requires a consultant for the perfonnance of Assessment District and Community Facilities District judicial foreclosure services; and WHEREAS, the proposed action will retain the services of Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth to perfonn judicial foreclosure services on City Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts and coordinate the collection of all delinquent installment payments on these Districts, as requested by the City; and WHEREAS, this action will ensure that the City's fiduciary responsibility to the bondholders is fulfilled by providing these required services and all costs associated with judicial foreclosure services and the collection of delinquent assessments are recovered from the delinquent property owners at no expense to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby approves the extension, until December 31,2005, of the Agreement dated February 6, 2001, with Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth for Assessment District and Community Facilities District Judicial Foreclosure Services. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the City. Presented by Approved as to fonn by :u~ ì. He Alex Al-Agha City Engineer Ann Moore City Attorney attorney\reso\agreemenlslstrad/ing yocca extension. doc / I THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL ~ 7. H--- Ann Moore City Attorney Dated: May 4, 2005 AMENDMENT EXTENDING THE FEBRUARY 6, 2001 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH TO PERFORM JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE SERVICES ON CITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS /t!- 70 ~, --.-.-- ._... ._-_.-_._..~ ..--..--.---------..-- - May-05-05 05/05/05 09:1,am From-SYC¡R 4 TUU D7;4¡ ¥A~ D~~ O~~ 949 m 4100 T -057 P. ooz/ooz F-zgg .......&. WHEREAS, the Ci1.y of Ch1l1~ Vista ("City") and StradliD.g Y oeca Carbon & Rat~th ("SYC&R") entered into an Agreement for Assessment and Comml IÚty Facility District judicial forcc;losure services on Febplary 6, 2001 ("Agreement"); and ExteDston of the Agreement Dllted Febrllary 6, 2001 BetweeJl. the City of Cbula Vista and Stradling Yocea C.-rlson & Rauth for ASsessment District Judicial Foreclosure Services DRAFT WHEREAS, after the initial term expired, the AgreC!!lent a110wed the City to extend the Agreement in one- ycar increments until Decctnber 31, 2005; and WH,E!IŒAS, the City wishes to eJlecutC its option(s) to extend the Agreement, thereby aInending the termination date of said AgreC!!lent to Dec<:>mber 31, 2005; and WHEREAS. SYC&R wishes to continue perl'orming its duties until Dc:cœnber 31, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, the CIty and SYC&R mutually agree that the Agreement shall be amended as follows; Section 1: The term of the Agreement shall be extended to December 3 t, 2005. AI! other provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged alld in full forco and effect. Section 2: IN WITNESS wrœ:REOF, City and SYC&R have executed this extension of the February 6. 2001 Agreement, thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consont to its teIIIlS: Dated: ,200_ City of Chulll Vista Stephen Padilla, Mayor Attest: Sl!Saß Bigelow. City Clerk Approil'ed as to !onn: AIIn Moore, City Attorney /¿/¢ '7/ DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005-_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE TO INITIATE FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS WHEREAS, the City has formed a number of Assessment Districts pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1915 and Community Facilities Districts pursuant to the Community Facilities Act of 1982 to impose assessments/special taxes on benefiting properties to finance the construction of various improvements; and WHEREAS, limited obligation bonds were issued to fund the unpaid assessments/special taxes pursuant to the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 and the Community Facilities Act of 1982; and WHEREAS, one of the covenants applicable to the issuance of such limited obligation bonds is that the City must monitor the collection process and cause judicial foreclosure proceeding to commence in as little as 150 days of an installment becoming delinquent; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to authorize a firm to act on its behalf and initiate the judicial foreclosure proceedings when appropriate; and WHEREAS, in the past, this has been done on a district-by-district basis as the need arose; and WHEREAS, a blanket authorization to allow the City Attorney or hislher designee to initiate foreclosure proceedings would allow the City to respond more quickly to a delinquency and meet the time requirements of the bond indenture. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby authorize the City Attorney or hislher designee to initiate foreclosure proceedings, as needed, on any delinquent parcel which is part of a district associated with the issuance oflimited obligation bonds. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the authorization set forth above shall stay in effect until the City Council formally rescinds said authorization. Presented by Approved as to form by Dc.. -/ 7. H-- Ann Moore City Attorney Alex Al-Agha City Engineer attorney\reso\agreementsIBond Foreclosure Authorization.doc / 1/-- ~7 d' COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item /~ Meeting Date May 10, 200S ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: Regarding the Proposed Assessment of Certain Delinquent Sewer Service Charges as Recorded Liens Upon the Respective Owner Occupied Parcels of Land and Placement of Delinquent Charges on the Next Regular Tax Bill for Collection RESOLUTION No. Assessing Delinquent Sewer Service Charges as Recorded Liens Upon the Respective Owner Occupied Parcels of Land and Approving Placement of Delinquent Charges on the Next Regular Tax Bill -- SUBMITTED BY: Director of Financerrreasurer~ City ManagerC~ {It .v" In order to adequately protect the City's interest in delinquent sewer service charges and ensure that collection efforts are directed towards the responsible property owner in the event of a change in ownership, staff is recommending approval for liens against affected properties as a preliminary action to replacing the delinquencies on the property tax rolls if they remain unpaid. Adoption of this resolution will enhance the collection process for delinquent sewer service charges by ensuring that the correct property owners are charged and that payment be received on a more timely basis. This is the identical process approved by City Council since August 1998. REVIEWED BY: (4/Sths Vote: Yes _NoJL) RECOMMENDATION: That Council open the public hearing to consider assessing delinquent sewer service charges as recorded liens on the affected properties, consider all testimony and adopt the resolution overruling all protests and assessing these charges as liens upon the respective owner occupied parcels of land. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 13.14.150 allows delinquent sewer service charges to be assessed as recorded liens upon the affected properties and ultimately placed on the property tax bills for collection. The ordinance states that upon notification of the property owners, a public hearing is set for sewer service accounts which are over sixty days delinquent. At the hearing the City Council considers the delinquent accounts together with any objections or protests by interested parties. At the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council, may either approve the delinquency and amount owed on the accounts as submitted or as modified or corrected by the City Council. Lastly, the City 15-1 Page 2, Item_ Meeting Date May 10, 2005 16 Council adopts a resolution assessing such amounts as liens upon the respective parcels of land, and the amounts are charged to the property owners on the next regular property tax bill. Because charges can only be submitted for placement on the property tax bills once a year in August, staff is recommending assessing liens on the affected properties midyear as to better ensure the City's chances for collection. If the City were to address these delinquent charges only once a year in August, the effectiveness of using the property tax bill as a means of collection would be significantly reduced as the owners of record in August would not necessarily be the people responsible for the delinquent charges. In cases where the properties are sold or transferred, assessing liens midyear holds the correct parties responsible for the delinquent charges. In cases where the property owners choose to refinance their mortgages, the midyear liens would ensure the City receiving payment in a more timely manner as the delinquent charges would be paid through escrow during the refinancing process. In December 2004, City Council approved liens for 98 delinquent sewer service acc:õLints valued at $27,400 to be forwarded to the County"for collection on the next regular property tax bill. Staff has currentiy identified 315 owner occupied accounts totaling $79,800 as being over 60 days delinquent (listing available at the City Clerk's office). Many of these property owners have gone through this lien process previously as they continue to leave their sewer service accounts unpaid. These property owners have been notified of their delinquencies, and last month, they were notified of the public hearing and were asked again _to pay their delinquent sewer service charges to avoid a lien being placed on their property. Payment arrangements will be set up as needed, and staff will continue to update this list as payments are received and accounts are cleared. A final list will be submitted to the City Council for consideration as soon as all payments are recorded. Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the final list of delinquent sewer accounts as submitted, and that these charges be forwarded to the County and assessed as liens on the respective owner occupied parcels of land and ultimately placed on the next regular tax bill for collection. FISCAL IMPACT: By placing delinquent sewer service charges on the property owner's regular tax bill, $62,000 in additional sewer fund revenues were collected in FY03-04. For FY04-05, an estimated $80,000 in additional revenues should be realized using this collection method. 15-2 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSING DELINQUENT SEWER SERVICE CHARGES AS LIENS UPON THE RESPECTIVE OWNER OCCUPIED PARCELS OF LAND AND APPROVING PLACEMENT OF DELINQUENT CHARGES ON THE NEXT REGULAR TAX BILL WHEREAS, Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 13.14.150 allows for delinquent sewer service accounts to become a lien upon the affected property served and also charged to the property owner on the next regular tax bill as a special assessment; and WHEREAS, the ordinance states that upon notification of the property owners, a public hearing may be set for sewer service accounts which are over sixty (60) days delinquent at which time the City Council is to consider the accounts together with any objections or protests by interested parties; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council may either approve the delinquency and amount owed on the accounts as submitted or as modified or corrected by the City Council; and WHEREAS, these property owners have been notified of their delinquencies, and of the public hearing, and asked to pay the delinquent sewer service charges prior to said hearing to avoid property liens; and WHEREAS, staff is recommending that the City Council approve the [mal listing of delinquent sewer service accounts as submitted and that these charges be forwarded to the County Assessor/Recorder/Clerk (hereinafter "County") for recordation as a lien and placement on the next regular tax bill for collection; and WHEREAS, the City Council held the required public hearing on May 10, 2005, and considered any and all protests and objections presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby: (1) overrule any and all protests or objections presented at the public hearing; and (2) approve, with respect to the derinquent account list presented by staff and on file in the office of the City Clerk, assessing delinquent sewer service charges as recorded liens upon the respective owner occupied parcels of land and the placement of such delinquent charges on the next corresponding regular tax bill, unless cleared prior to transmittal of the delinquent account list to the County. Presented by Approved as to form by D~l.~ Maria Kachadoorian Director of Finance Ann Moore City Attorney J:\attorney\reso\sewer\Sewer delinquencies 0510 05doc 15-3 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date /fa 5/10/05 ITEM TITLE: Public hearing to consider an increase of the Sewerage Capacity Charge and the modification of the Master Fee Schedule. Ordinance approving an increase of the Sewerage Capacity Charge and the modification of the Master Fee Schedule. Urgency Ordinance approving an increase of the Sewerage Capacity Charge and the modification of the Master Fee Schedule. SUBMITTED BY: City Engineer fj( REVIEWED BY: CitYManager$!'otv (4/5ths Vote: Yes ...x.. No ---1 The City of San Diego, as part of the Metropolitan Wastewater District ("Metro"), provides sewage treatment services to fourteen participating agencies that do not own and operate a sewage treatment facility. The City of Chula Vista, along with.the other participating agencies, sends all the sewage generated to the City of San Diego's Wastewater Treatment Plants for treatment. In 1985, the City of Chula Vista established the Sewerage Capacity Charge to fund the planning, design and construction of wastewater collection or treatment facilities needed to facilitate the development of the City. It was also intended to fund either the construction of treatment facilities or the purchase of additional treatment capacity rights in the Metro sewer system. Since then, the City has made several adjustments to the Sewerage Capacity Charge. However, another increase is needed to ensure that there is adequate revenue necessary to fund the acquisition of additional sewage treatment capacity rights. Based on the Wastewater Master Plan Update, it is recommended that the current Sewer Capacity Charge be increased from $3,000 to $3,478 to ensure that there is adequate capacity in the system. RECOMMENDATION: That City Council: 1. Conduct the Public Hearing. 2. Approve the Ordinance implementing an increase of the Sewerage Capacity Charge and modifying the Master Fee Schedule (first reading). 3. Approve the Urgency Ordinance implementing an increase of the Sewerage Capacity Charge and modifying the Master Fee Schedule. BOARDS I COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. 16-1 DISCUSSION: Background Page 2, Item Meeting Date /0 5/10/05 The Sewer Capacity Charge is paid by the owner or person applying for a permit to develop or modify the use of any residential, commercial, industrial or other property, which is projected by the City Engineer to increase the volume of flow in the City's sewer system by at least one-half of one Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) of flow. Prior to 1985, the City of Chula Vista was one of the very few agencies which did not impose a charge on new construction for sewage treatment and trunk sewer capacity. Capacity in such facilities was characteristically provided to new development with no upfront cost. However in March of 1985, the City established a capacity fee of$300 per EDU that would be applicable to all new connections to the City's sewer collection system. Since then, said fee has been amended several times. The table below shows those increases: Year Resolution! Ordinance Reso. No. 13004 and Ordinance No. 2002 Reso. Nos. 15352 & 15352A 1987 1989 1990 Reso. No. 15894 2003 Ordinance No. 2900 Justification Anticipated costs of upgrading the Point Lorna Treatment Plant to a second treatment faci1i Cost of bringing the Point Loma Treatment Plant into compliance were far greater than anticipated and Federal funds were not available Meet City's obligation to the Metro System for the u ade of the treatment 1ant Interim adjustment based on the ENR -Index to account for inflation and in anticipation of the increase in the cost of acquisition of additional treatment capacity rights in the Metro System. This adjustment was done pending the completion of the Wastewater Master Plan U date Rate ($) $600 $2,000 $2,220 $3,000 Need for the Update of the Sewerage Capacity Charge When the last adjustment occurred in 2003, it was understood that the increase was an interim adjustment pending the completion of the Wastewater Master Plan. The goal of the Master Plan Update was to analyze the ability of the City's wastewater collection system to accommodate the build-out of the City under the adopted General Plan and the various land use scenarios 'considered for the General Plan Update. Since then, the Wastewater Master Plan has been completed. The study determined that the wastewater collection system was mostly adequate and would to a large extent be able to support the build out of the City with the completion of certain required improvements. However, the study indicated that the City would need to acquire additional treatment capacity. The City currently has 19.843 million gallons per day (mgd) of sewage treatment capacity rights within the Metro system; however, with the completion of the 15 Mgd South Bay Treatment Plant, Metro is in the process of completing a re-rating study to allocate the additional capacity 16-2 Page 3, Item Meeting Date 1& 5/10/05 resulting from the completion of that plant. Preliminary indications from that study indicate that the City will receive an additional 1.027 mgd resulting in total capacity rights of 20.870 mgd in the Metro System. The City currently generates approximately 17 mgd of sewage. However, the preferred alternative in the General Plan Update projects a sewer capacity need of 26.2 mgd at build-out. Therefore, the City will need to acquire a minimum of 2.5 mgd of treatment capacity under the existing general plan or up to 6 mgd under the proposed General Plan Update. Capacity Acquisition Strategy Staff will pursue all possible options to acquire the additional "capacity rights" with the following broad goals: to minimize future risks; ensure sufficient fund balance; to minimize acquisition cost; to ensure positive cash flow; to reduce or eliminate impacts on rate payers; and to maintain equity between users. . Fee Determination The Wastewater Master Plan Update determined that the Capacity Fee needs to be increased from $3,000 to $3,478 based on a "Buy-In" methodology as shown in the table below. The foundation of the "Buy-In" method is to create equity among existing and new users, such that the new users pay for the cost or value associated with the portion of existing system capacity that they use. Therefore, the capacity charge is calculated by dividing the total value of the regional wastewater system by the total wastewater flow. The following table illustrates this method for fee determination: Cost Average Flow Assets (present Value) (I) Cost per EDU (2) (mgd) Metro Facilities $1,874,042,515 198.392 $2,503 Chula Vista $72,996,399 19.843 3.68 $975 Pi e1ines (I) METRO flows are based on audited fiscal year 2003 flows. Chula Vista flows are based on the City's existing contractual capacity in the METRO system. (2) Based on unit flow rate of265 gpd per EDU. (3) Present value of METRO assets is based on ENR index, Dec. 2003= 7,531.77 See Attachment 1 for supporting infonnation regarding the System Buy-In Methodology The analysis is discussed in greater detail in the attached copy of the Executive Summary. 16-3 Page 4, Item Meeting Date 1& 5/10/05 The feasibility analysis also conducted a similar exercise to determine a capacity fee that corresponds to each of the alternatives evaluated. The attached Table 1 summarizes the findings. Comparison of City of Chula Vista's Sewerage Capacity Charge with Other Local Agencies Most agencies in the area between Poway and the International Border collect sorne form of connection fee, which is used to defray some portion of the cost of existing sewerage facilities. Those fees are sometimes part of a larger fee covering specific work involved in making a physical connection to the sewer. Consequently, it is difficult to do a proper comparison of the proposed fee increase with those of other agencies. The attached Table 2 is a compilation of the fees charged by other local agencies. Urgencv Ordinance The Urgency Ordinance will enable the City to collect the fee during the 60-day waiting period before the regular Ordinance becomes effective. This Urgency Ordinance is only valid for 30 days; therefore, it will be necessary to notice and hold further hearings in order to extend the Urgency Ordinance in 30-day increments until the permanent Ordinance becomes effective. Staff recommends that the increase to the Sewerage Capacity Charge go into effect immediately by adopting the Urgency Ordinance. The urgent implementation of the fee is needed in order to require all developments to pay their fair share of the cost of: purchasing additional sewage treatment capacity; constructing improvements to enhance the capacity of the City's sewer system and all other related costs or impacts to the collection system caused by their development. Furthermore, immediate implementation of this fee is necessary due to the current and immediate threat to public safety, which will result, should there be a shortfall in funds required to pay for the required improvements to the wastewater collection system and to purchase additional sewage treatment capacity. The prospect of having insufficient sewage treatment capacity to accommodate further development within the City, and concerns about increasing the charge to remaining property owners, presents a threat to the public health, welfare and safety and justifies the immediate increase of this fee. Attached is related section of the Master Fee Schedule on Exhibit 3. Environmental hnpact The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed aclivity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(93) of the State CEQA Guidelines the áctivity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary. 16-4 Page 5, Item Meeting Date I~ 5/10/05 FISCAL IMPACT: It is estimated that the approval of these ordinances will result in an increase in revenue of $956,000 annually (assuming that 2,000 permits are approved over this period). All sewer capacity fees collected shall be deposited in the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. . Attachments Table 1 - Treatment Plaot Options aod Financial Impact Table 2 - Sewer Capacity Fee Comparison Table Exhibit 3 - Master Fee Schedule Executive Summary - Wastewater Reclamation Plaot Feasibility Analysis Executive Summary - Wastewater Master Plan Update J :\Engineer\AGENDA\CAS2005\4-26-05\A 1 13-200S-Sewer Capacity Fce Increase.ac.doc 16-5 ." .. -;c; e'õ :CE-o ~ ¡,¡ ... -- .-. ...- .. .. ...... .... u ... =", =0= 'õ~ E- ~e (I ~ 1.0 "C:c ~ t: æ. ~ ¡.~ ~u= ~ N ~CI: '~ ~ =æ~ ~..S:;OO ·i'....;:è=~ ë. \0 ~~·=U·-==~~M _ = >I '" (I ~ W't -u¡,¡ "'<- '" .... ... .. 5' .... - .. .. ... = .. = ~ ." = .. '" = Q .. .... C>. o ';;::::6' - = ... 5 ~~ g~ - ... 0= - ã; 3r; ~ _ u ... I ,!~ - ø.,.ë; ~I'S ~Q .=:ä,,-f=tJ ~~~t:fii:~ <; - 1;; = u = - '6. .. U .. ~.s ~ -:a+:: õ = 1:10 r:/. :f!o .... = .. ¡¡; .... = '" 8 .... .. '" ... E-< I ....... ~ - ..c ..s Eo-< - .. = .~ "Qo "I-; "s.5 = .9: CIiI ~ ..J~:: E-< ~ " Ê C- o - " .. e - .. .. ... E- S' Q ¡,¡ ~ .... o ~ ...." '" N '" '" '" '" ~ '" N '" ~ '" ..; '" ~ .... '" N '" o ~ '"' '" ~ '" o '" o o o N" o '" ~" N '" o o o N" '" '" <Xi ~ '" - N N ~ .5 ~.~ 13 "0 "'0 §: co::! ~ 00 ~ ::I,.c:: co::! e = ~." ~ v;=:.s:5..c ... = 1:: gg~~8. "'8.~ 0 ë ;g tt=E~-å.~ 0..;9- :::= C!) 1ì .~ "g -B C!)"c: cd Or'. ~4-0,.Dr-<<r.I Q.~:2 0ª~ 5 .~ g Ë 'u 8 ~§~.8~~ cu ª' tï ~ ~C£j t: u ~ U.:S <3 :t 8 ~ .... 1:: c:: 01J '-<=< U B co::! c ~ "2 0:5 IIJ co::I .9 .5 0 .š å :E"aÆo!t.l>' Æ-g~;g [å3 I ~ C!) <:U >'£ M cu..c ,.t:;¡ = 1 ,!1TjE-~oo .2: ~ .1 a:: ~ .... "'0 ... C c::..c:: CIiI u .ž ¡.L 0 ..... E E ïñ .s ~ :§ a ~"S;: ~ :( ~ -š 0 ~¿ '" .... .... "," '" ~ '" '" N '" ~ '" ~ '" o ~ N '" ~ '" o o o ~" .... .,. "," o '" - '" N ..s.sõ .~ "0 c: .... õ·~ ã (I) 'ti:i ë..,.g..s ë.s tï Ë tï cu ~~~ C!) ~ <IÎ .p"'O t ~.. E @ E 0 "O"@ t;; 0 §õ Ô 0 u" '" ~~ ~V] 5b~~£ EooE~B o ~"C .-Vi=iU =š: It) 0::1 t: IU U >. 0 c.g bQ~ co::! e U ;j "C C. c .I:: :O::o¡).¡ Æ::~~ I C ::I "C I"'\ËO] 4I....~::. :> CI , c. ~ :c ß §-13 ~ >. CI'J E ¡¡.~ .s"¡; =t::<ü <BCI)~ '" '" '" .,." '" '" ~ "," '" .... '" '"' '" '" ~ - N '" ~ '" ..; '" ~ oo \G! ".:: ~ ~ '" '" '" oo ..; oo N 00 - '" - '" o '" o 00 o o o Ô .... .,. '" '" '" o o o "," - oo Ñ oo - '" N - 00." " .. ";;; ~ =.0 >. 00 õ..ã3..9 8"¿;;j g >< E.c u '';:: ~ ~ - .. ..- > .. " ~ ~ Ë ro :3: ~ .. '" NjO ~ .. 0 ~ .g; U @ c<J >,-g E b!) 0 ~..s~ <g~ CI'J'5~ .. ..'" u:6 E ~ ~ ~ " = CI.I 0 ~ I 5." - ~ " 0 ~ "¡: :D M s- U .. 0 " .~ ~ E ~tî~ E 1:1 u ~ E E < 8 § 16-6 .... .,. o .,." '" ¡;; oo o .,. M '" '" '" .... N '" ¡;; '" '" '" ¡;; '" oo '" '" ~ oo '" '" M M '" "" '" "1 - '" .... oo '" oo - '" '" - '" o 00 o 00 o 00 - - - o o o ",' .,. '" ~ o o o ~ ... .... oo" '" ¡;; o o 0" - '" ...." - '" "" - '" N - N ~ '" ~ 00"0 " .. "¡;:j ¡Q ".0 - "0 a... 8<;; K E u "';:: ~ .. " ~ ~ .g ~ MjO ~ .. 0 .?:u ;>, ?,j >--.~ E .9Jg ':;: 015 ~ " .. -5- ~.g~ u ~ e ~ 8 !ð CI.IE!,g I::-t- " ~ ~"g. § .. 0 " > ~ ~ ~t)~ E"'''' :t E";:e :( 8 § Table 2 1 · City of Imperial Beach $700 2 · Lemon Grove County Water District $1,000 3 City of Vista $1,922 4 · Alpine Sanitation District $2,000 4 · Lakeside Sanitation District $2,000 4 Pine Valley County Sanitation District $2,000 4 * Spring Valley Sanitation District $2,000 4 Winter Gardens Sewer Maintenance $2,000 District 5 · City of Del Mar $2,004 6 · City of La Mesa $2,400 7 · City of National City $2,420 8 · Otay Water District $2,500 9 · City of Coronado $2,559 10 San Marcos (Vallecitos Water District) $2,650 11 City of Encinitas $2,680/$3,417 12 Buena Sanitation District $3,000 13 * City of Po way $3,256/$2,356 14 çjtyO£€~ulª:Vls~~7(RtO¡)(jd~çlFe~)+..· .... $3,478 15 Cardiff Sanitation District $3,417 l6 * City ofEl Cajon $3,472 17 · City of San Diego $3,710 18 City of Oceanside $4,114 19 Leucadia County Water District $3,950 20 Julian County Sanitation District $4,000 -- .....- _.~~---~ - ------ 21 Fallbrook Public Utility Distnct $5,000 16-7 05/04/2005 13:18 FAX 61939762S4 CHULA VISTA DPW ~002 EXHIBIT 3 Chapter XII Engineering - Sewer, Section 3(a) of part A of the Master Fee Schedule 3. Sewerage Capacity Charge a. The owner or person making application for a pemút to develop or modify use of any residential, commercial, industrial or other property which is projected by the City Engineer to increase the volume of flow in the City sewer system by at least on-half of one equivalent dwelling unit of flow shall pay a Sewerage Capacity Charge. The base charge is hereby established as $3,478 per equivalent dwelling unit offlow. 16-8 WATER RECLAMATION PLANT FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Background The City of Chula Vista (City) does not own or operate its own wastewater treatment plant. Instead, the City sends its wastewater to the system managed by the Metropolitan Wastewater Department (MWWD) of the City of San Diego. All the £low generated in the City is collected in severallatge trunk lines, which ultimately connect to the MWWD interceptor system, and then is treated at MWWD's main Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) at Point Loma. Based on the City's agreement with MWWD, the City cuttently has 19.843 mgd of treatment capacity rights in the MWWD system, which is approximately 8 percent of the cuttent total system capacity. Recent £low records indicate that the City generates an annual average wastewater £low of about 17 mgd. Based on a recent analysis performed as part of the General Plan Update, it is estimated that by the year 2030 (assumed for build-out) the City will generate approximately 26 mgd of sewage. One possible alternative to purchasing additional capacity in the MWWD system would be for the City instead to build and operate its own water reclamation plant (WRP). This would allow the City to decrease its reliance on MWWD and take advantage of the increasing market for recycled water. The local water purveyor (Sweetwater Authority) is interested in purchasing recycled water to supply Duke Energy who plans to build a new electrical power facility near the site of the existing South Bay Power Plant. Tbis plant will likely require a reliable source of reclaimed water for their cooling systems. If the City builds a WRP on available land near the proposed location of the new Duke Power Plant, the City and Sweetwater Authority (SA) could benefit from shared reductions in infrastructure costs with Duke Energy. The feasibility of such a venture would, of course, depend on cost versus benefits in comparison to increased participation in the MWWD system. For the reasons described above, the City wants to explore the economic feasibility of constructing a City-owned WRP to treat wastewater £lows in excess of the City's current owned capacity tights in the MWWD system. The City has hired Brown and Caldwell (BC) to study this possibility and determine if it is economically feasible compared to purchasing new capacity in the MWWD system. Objective ofThÙ Report The main objective of this report is to develop a cost model with which the City of Chula Vista can evaluate the economic feasibility of building and operating a WRP compared to the baseline practice of purchasing and maintaining capacity tights in the MWWD system. Wastewater Alternatives The cost analysis presented herein considered various liquid treatment and solids handling alternatives. These were compared to the "baseline" alternative of acquiring additional capacity in the MWWD system. The list of alternatives considered included: . Alternative 1 - Acquire additional capacity in the Metropolitan Wastewater System Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final J:\Engmcer\SEWER\FINAL \VRP Fl:!Isibility Study R~tt.doc April 2005 16-9 Executive Summary ES-2 · Alternative 2 - Build a new treatment plant to produce 5 mgd of reclaimed water and allow for expansion of the facility to 10 mgd in the future. The reclaimed water would be sold to SA to supply Duke Energy and/ or other customers. This plant would have provisions to bypass the tertiary facilities and transport bypassed flow to the South Bay Ocean Outfall (SBOO). · Alternative 3 - Build a new 10 mgd secondary treatment plant with tertiary treatment to produce 5 mgd of reclaimed water to be sold to SA to supply Duke Energy and/or other customers. Water that is not reclaimed would be transported to the SBOO. · Alternative 2a - Same as Alternative 2 above except using compact footprint process technology. Costs were estimated based on membrane bioreactor (MER) secondary treatment technology. · Alternative 3a - Same as Alternative 3 above except using compact footprint process technology. Costs were estimated based on MER secondary treatment technology. In addition to the alternatives listed above, the following two solids handling options were considered: · Solids Handling Option 1 - Build and operate solids handling facilities for on-site treatment of solids with hauling for off-site disposal. · Solids Handling Option 2 - Pump concentrated solids (sludge) back to MWWD system. The cost analysis presented herein considered the above solids handling options in combination with alternatives 2, 2a, 3, and 3a. Design details for each of the wastewater alternatives (including solids handling facilities) are presented in Appendix A. In addition, required infrastructure to bring sewage to the proposed WRP and treated water to point of use or disposal were also considered. These costs were estimated and included in the evaluation of each alternative. Design Basis for Wastewater Alternatives Sizing and subsequent cost estimation of the wastewater alternatives and solids options was based on historical wastewater characterization and wastewater flow projections. Wastewater flow projections were taken from the 2005 Draft Wastewater Master Plan for the City of Chuh Vista which reflects the "Adopted General Plan". The sections of the master plan dealing with projected wastewater flows are provided in Appendix B. The projected wastewater flows from the City system that would be available for diversion to the proposed new WRP are summarized in Table ES-l. However, it should be noted tbat modeling efforts by the City have resulted in slightly higher projected flows tlBn used in the Adopted General Plan (G1'). The higher flow scenario is the so called "Preferred Alternative." The City anticipates that the Adopted General Plan will be updated to reflect the Preferred Alternative model flows. These model flows are summarized in Table ES-2. The basis for a 5 mgd WRP comes from the projected capacity deficit calcuhted as follows: · Current MWWD capacity rights = 19.843 mgd · Expected reallocation from recent MWWD system expansion through construction of the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWR1') = 1.027 mgd . Revised MWWD Capacity rights upon completion of re-rating process = 20.870 mgd Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility St1.1dy-Final )=\Engmecr\SE\VER\FINi\I. WRP Fca~ibility Srudy Rt"pon.doc April 2005 16-10 Executive Summary ES-3 · Current Adopted GP build out Flow = 23.322 mgd · Additional Capacity Rights required to facilitate buildout under current GP = 23.322 - 20.870 = 2.452 mgd · "Preferred Alternative" GP buildout flow = 26.20 mgd (See Table ES-2) · Additional Capacity Rights required to facilitate buildout under current GP = 26.20 - 20.870 = 5.33 mgd Table ES-1. Chula Vista Projected Dry Weather Wastewater Flows (Adopted General Plan) Average Dry Weather Flow (mgd) Trunk Unes 2000 2010 2020 2030 Date-Faivre + Maio Street CVl 3.789 4.470 4.601 4.720 Telegraph Cyn + 50 Percent Bayfront CV2 4.332 5.671 5.811 6.057 G Street + 50 Percent Bayfront CV3 1.887 2.046 2.231 2.392 Salt+ Poggi CV14 1.234 4.621 5.736 6.011 Potential Flows to WRP 11.2 16.8 18.4 19.2 Sweetwater (Spring Valley Outfall) I CV 5 - CV 12 3.697 3.887 4.035 4.143 Total City Flow 14.9 20.7 22.4 23.3 Table ES-2. Wastewater Flow Projections Based on Tributary Sub-Basins (Proposed General Plan Update) 2030 Buildout Flow (m£d) 2005 Flow (1) Adopted General Preferred Model Basin (mgd) Plan Alternative North-West 10.213 11.802 14.847 East Telegraph 2.605. 2.462 2.462 Poggi Canyon/Date-Faivre NA 3.470 3.470 Salt Creek NA 5.107 5.107 Bayfront Parcels Not in Models 0.225 0.314 0.314 Model Total Flow NA 23.2 26.2 (1) Existing models for Poggi Canyon/Date-Faivre, and Salt Creek were not developed as part of thereferenced wastewater master plan. Because the City would have the ability to bypass seasonal peaks back to the MWWD system, seasonal flow variation was not considered. To guarantee availability of recycled water to SA to supply the Duke Energy facility and other potential SA customers, onsite equalization of diurnal Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final J:\Engineer\SEWER\FJNAL WRP FC11sibility StuJy RepC>rt.dQC: April 2005 16-11 Executive Summary ES-4 flows was considered. Because long-tenn diurnal flow monitoring data were not available, sizing of 5 mgd flow equalization facilities was estimated based on a typical bimodal wastewater flow curve. This curve is shown in Figure ES-l and was constructed based on BC experience with other domestic wastewater collection systems in San Diego County. Using an average flow of 5-mgd and the diurnal curve shown in Figure ES-l, a cumulative 24-hoUI 5-MGD inflow mass diagram was used to size on-site flow equalization. The cumulative 24-hoUI 5-MGD inflow mass diagram is shown in Figure ES-2. The wastewater characterization was based on MWWD monitoring data provided by the City of Chula Vista and presented in Appendix C The wastewater constituent concentrations used in the analysis presented hoxein are summarized in Table ES-3. 2.00 1.80 3: £ 1.60 " g> 1 .40 ~ " > « 1.20 o - ~ 1.00 ¡¡: » "i: 0.80 :J o :r: ..... 0.60 o o ~ 0.40 II:: 0.20 0.00 ~ !':' '" f:' !!' en .... ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" '" 0 0 ~ '" '" f:' !!' en .... co '" 0 ~ '" '" ö 0 '" 0 '" '" '" '" 0 '" ö '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 '" '" 0 0 0 Time of Day Figure ES-l. Typical Biomod~l Diurnal Domestic Wastewater Flow Curve Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final }:\Enginc:c:r\SEWER\FINAL WRP Fc:;u:ibìlity Study Rc:pon.doc April 2005 16-12 Executive Summary ES-5 800000 700000 100000 600000 'f' 'õ;" 500000 E " Õ ::; 400000 ! tv 'S E 300000 " o " ow qua 1Z3 Ion Volum. -110,000 ft' 200000 o o N ~ .0. en ë ö ö c ö ë o C 0 CI 0 0 '" ... co ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - N !::1 N N '" Ö Ö Ö Ö '" - N '" ... en '" ... co ... '" N '" Ö co '" co co ö 8 8 ö ö 8 8 ö ö ö ö ö ö ö co '" co co co co co co co '" co Tim. of Day I - Diurnal Inflow Curve - - - Average Inflow Curve 1 Figure ES-2. Inflow Mass Curves Showing Required Flow Equalization Volume for Tertiary Facilities Table ES-3. Summary of Historical Wastewater Characteristic Data Listed By Trunk line Trunk Sewer Parameter CV1 and CV 14(1) CV2 CV3 Average 180 207 202 TSS Max(') 288 246 229 Average 649 578 689 COD 1Y1ax (2) 797 672 587 (1) Data available for CV 1 and extrapolated to CV 14 based on service area similarities (2) Excludes outliers on 9/8/1999, 6/15/95, 1/31/96, 5/25/2000, and 5/15/2002 As shown in Table ES-3, the organic contents are reported in tenns of COD. However, the COD also includes inorganic compounds and is a gross measurement of oxidizable compounds. A more detailed fractioning of organic constituents is typically required for modeling biological wastewater. process components. Therefore, typical domestic wastewater attributes were assumed given the TSS Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final j:\Engineer\SEWER\FINAL WRP Føsibility Study Report.doc April 2005 16-13 Executive Summary ES-6 and COD data available. Using these asswnptions, biological process modeling (using BioWin TM software) was used to size the secondary treatment facilities required for each of the alternatives described above. The modeling input (including asswned organic fractions) and output are summarized in Appenclix C. Cost Model Description The cost model used to evaluate the alternatives described above consisted of the following elements: · Cost to purchase capacity in the M'W\ì7D system · Annual O&M fee charged by M'W\ì7D based on flow to the system· and wastewater characteristics · WRP costs - capital and operation · Infrastructure costs · Solids handling costs · Cost to purchase capacity in the SBOO · Land acquisition costs · Credit for sale of recycled water Capital Costs The analysis contained in this report compares various WRP alternatives with the current practice of ownership (with all costs that this implies) in the MWWD system. For this analysis, capacity in the MWWD system is considered to be a commodity having an estimated market value of approximately $15,000,000 per MG of capacity on an average flow basis. For example, 5 MGD would be worth approximately $75,000,000 on the open market. Alternatives to current practice include alternatives 2, 2a, 3, and 3a described above. Each of these involves the construction and operation of a City run WRP. Two different solids handling options were also considered and described above. Table ES-4 summarizes the capital costs (including land infrastructure, and SBOO capacity costs) estimated for each WRP alternative and solids handling option. Annual C.JtJ The annual cost of the current practice of MwwD capacity ownership comes to the City in the form of an annual O&M fee charged by MWWD. This cost is estimated to be approximately $2,500 per MG wastewater discharged to the MWWD system. Annual costs associated with each WRP alternative and solids handling option were also considered. The estimated annual costs for each alternative are summarized in Table ES-5. Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final j:\En,!!;ineer\SE\VER\F!NAL WRP Feasibility St\Jdy Repon.doc April 2005 16-14 r- , (/J ~ ::: 0 .~ .... Po 0 01) ::: :ä ::: '" :r: "' "d ::: 0 rn "d ::: '" " .~ '" ::: .... " :;j í'::' ..<:: u '" '" ~ ¡;¡:¡ .... ..s (/J "' " .... .£j "' 0 S u - " '" " .... W .~ Po '" U ~ ~ .... _0 ç '" e e ;; rn -<i , (/J ¡;¡:¡ " - ..0 '" r-< .... 0 0 0 0 0 "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a, -; N- N' 00' 0" "," "," ...." ....- 0 r- ,.... .... .... ,.... o '" 0-, 0-, .... r- oo 0-, I"- '" ~.-:: 0-, .... 1"-, 00' 00' 0-,' 0-,' N' .,.,' 00' §< N 0 00 ,.... .,., ,.... ,.... 00 - '" ,.... ,.... ,.... 0-, U ... .... .... .... .... .... ... .... ::: 01) 0 0 0 0 0 0 ::: ';j 0 0 0 .~ '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ""d .... N' ,.: ~ N' 00' r-' 0-,' "," " ::: "' '" N r- '" '" .s eIS "a .,., '" 00, N 00 ...., .,., .... ",' -.0 0-, 0-,' r-' ,.... 01) 's 00' - ",' ,.... 0-,' ::: - .... - .... - - - .... ¡;¡:¡ "d .... .... .... .... .... -< .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0" 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 u - ",' ",' ~" ,.... "," ",' ....' "d 0 - '" 0 - '" .... 0-, .,., .,., - 0-, .,., .,., -, ::: 0-,' r-' ",' 0-,' r-' ",' '" ,.... - ,..:¡ - - - - ,.... ,.... ,.... - .... .... .... .... ... .... .... .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01) .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 JJ "' N" 0 ,.: 0 00" r-' U')' r-" 0 N .,.," 0 U')' U') 00 U') 00 "d U '" 0-, r- 0-, '" N, .... N, ::: ",' 0-, ",' 0-, r-' r-' '" '" .... '" .... U') ,.... U') ,.... :r: .... ... .... .... .... .... "' "d ::: ::: 0 0 .~ N N N N .... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... rn Po 0 0 0 0 0 " ç 0 0 0 0 ¡,.¡o·... 0 0 0 0 .~ u 00" 00' ;;0," 0-,' 0-,' ,.... ,.... O"~ Po U') U') U') U') urn'" N N A' 0" -< U U"Î U')' .... .... - - .... .... " .... a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u .... 0 0 a" 0, Ë "' N' N' ,.... ,.... 0 ,.... - 0-, 0-, "' u 0 0 '" '" '" 0," 0,' 0,. 0,. .::: .... ... ... .... ::: >-< -- --- ----- - ----- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..... 0 0 0 0 E "' ",' 00' 0" 00 " 0 r- '" r- r- g U U') - .... '" r-' ",' U')' 0,' '" .... '" '" .... " ... .... ... .... .... r-< "d ~ 'S ';j 0" '" '" '" ;.:¡ e N N '" '" ~ <1 '" o o N 'to 0- ~ -; .5 ~ II.~ J-.E ";j ~ B'" "'~ ~ þ~ "'''' ,.0;:;: .;;:..9 ~ ñ II."" -¡¡ ¡¡" ¡;::;j ='" .g; ,"" .u u~ ~~ - , u ô, - , ~'" ~~ 16-15 Executive Summary ES-8 Table ES-5. Summary ofWRP Annual Costs fOr Each Alternative and Solids Handling Option Liquid Treatment Solids Handling Annual Cost Annual Cost Total WRP Alternative ($/year) Option ($/year) Annual Cost (1) 2 $4,467,000 1 $734,000 $5,201,000 2 $2,406,000 $6,873,000 2a $4,467,000 1 $734,000 $5,201,000 2 $2,406,000 $6,873,000 3 $8,935,000 1 $1,468,000 $9,362,700 2 $4,812,000 $12,372,300 3a $8,935,000 1 $1,468,000 $9,362,700 2 $4,812,000 $12,372,300 (1) Since O&M costs were based on a 5 mgd case, a cost scaling factor of 0.9 was applied to alternatives 3 and 3a to account for economy of scale. In addition to the annual costs described above, the cost model considered the credit to the City that would result from the sale of reclaimed water to SA to supply Duke Power and/ or other potential SA customers. The analysis assumed reclaimed water to be a commodity sold on the open market. Therefore, the basis for the estimated credit that the City would receive via the sale of reclaimed water was not the cost of production. For this analysis we have considered reclaimed water at $400 per acre-foot. Capacity Fee Considerations This section considers the potential use of a capacity fee on new sewer connections to finance a portion of the WRP capital costs. The discussion presented herein presumes: · New connections will be primarily residential · The standard equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) contributes 265 gallons of wastewater (based on the Draft Wastewater Master Plan, January 2005) · Sewage generated by new developments will be "typical" domestic wastewater. · One connection per EDU The e~tirJlatcd capacity fees presented below consider the following two fee cotnponents: · Capital improvement costs (i.e., capital, administrative and engineering costs) associated with the construction of the WRP alternatives described herein and presented in Table ES-4. This component of the capacity fee is treated as an incremental system expansion cost. · The present value of the City's existing sewage infrastructw:e. This component of the capacity fee is treated as a "buy-in" fee for capacity in the existing system. Water Reclamarion Plant Feasibility Study-Final ):\Engineer\SEWER\fINAL WRP FC'1tSibility Srudy R~"_ùoc April 2005 16-16 Executive Summary ES-9 Furthermore, this estimate is meant to be a budget level approximation and does not consider the many requirements (e.g., projected depreciation, debt principle, etc.) set by California code for City governments relating to establishment of connection fees. The capacity fee was estimated for each WRP alternative using the combined incremental expansion cost plus "buy-in" method described above. These were calculated by expressing the "incremental" and "buy-in" components in terms of unit cost per gallon of sewage, then multiplying this cost per gallon by 265 gallons per EDU (this value taken from the 2005 Wastewater Master Plan) resulting in a cost per EDU. The resulting approximate capacity fee values are given for each WRP alternative and solids handling option in Table ES-6. The capacity fee estimates shown in Table ES-6 show that the results are substantially influenced by the following two variables: . The associated wastewater flow (either 5 or 10 mgd) . The solids option (either option 1 or option 2) In the first instance, the 10 mgd alternatives result in a lower capacity fee than the 5 mgd alternatives because the flow value is in the denominator of the capacity fee calculation. Thus the higher the flow value, the lower the estimated capacity-fee. In the second instance, the alternatives using solids option 2 have a lower capital cost than alternatives using solids option 2. This is because with solids option 2, on-site solids handling facilities are not required. However, the option-2 alternatives also have substantially higher annual (O&M) costs than the option-1 alternatives. Presumably, the City would need to address these costs through increased monthly sewer fees. Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final ):\Enginecr\SEWER\FINAL WRP Feasibility Study Report.doc April 2005 16-17 o - , UJ ¡r:¡ t' ~ ::> UJ " È ::> u " '" ¡r:¡ "0 ~ 5 ~ 0; ~o S Õ'~ ¡r:¡ .... F-t u.......... t; 8.!:?; ~ ~Ñ' u- ¡:l. ~ '" ~ = 1;; ~ :;8] o ~ 5~ "';_....~ ..... ::: Cf.I - ~arÈ' " " ~ þ .~ u " ª' u OJ ~ " s .¡< o ... p., .? .. ..s þ 2J ......"'" It) '" u "':0 8 gf'< P- I::'~ OJ~ .~, Cf.I bJ)~ ..... ~ - f;' x ~ ~¡r:¡OJ VJ - '" - 0 "u E_:o Š ï3 _~ OJ ;:J '- ~ g:¡!:?; -~ \0 . VJ ¡r:¡ OJ - ..c " f-< 0; tiS' ª ~<¿< ~ <: S ~ E :=;:( ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~¡ï; - " - .~ rJJ p.,o "U U ~ I:: I:: ~ ~ 0 ;.:= "'Co.;! ...... N J5ãg :r: a ~ "0 OJ .~ 'S = " O'~s '" ..... ~ GJ ....:¡ " - ~< r- o 00 r-" .... \0 '" c; '" ..... 00 \0 <"i ..... 00 r- <ri '" .... o o o "," o ç, CX) '" - ifF '" '" '" ",- ..... 00 "': - '" .... 00 \0 <"i .... o 00 ,....: - ..... o <ri o o o ",- ç, ç, co' co if} '" \0 r- '" r- \0 \0" v'" ... ... 00 r- u: u: '" r- '" - .... ..... 00 00 'c: ~ "" "" .... .... o '" ~ ex:: - "" '" - .... ..... o ~ <ri '" o o o co' r- '" ",' o - ~ - '" '" 16-18 o o o 0" r- '" ",' '" if> '" '" - co" '" ... \0 c; - '" ... 00 "è "" ..... co ~ 00 - ..... ~ o - o o o. '" - 00 ",' co - tA - "" r- '" o "," .... r- '" <ri - .... 00 \0 "" .... '" ~ - - .... o o - o o o. '" '" "'. if) - - Y'r '" - 00 - if)" .... if) if) c; - ..... 00 \0 "" .... r- co if) - .... o o - o o o ",' '" r- co' if) - if> - '" "" € i:- iJ ~ 0.. ~ u ... " "" ... 0.. 'ë.. M § ~ ... " .,s >. .0 -0 ... -0 ,; 'i3 00 o '" ",," ... \0 co N - ..... 00 \0 <"i .... ~ ~ " ... " õ! > ~ 00 - c; ..... '" '" '" ..¿ '" '" '" r- .... II ... " ~ o o - ~ " ~ ~ " " ... ~ " ... 0.. ... ... a u B iJ ~ . 0.. ~-o"' ~ 5\; >-' .s ... ß o.a g, I-j .§ '" " ~ 'D 0.. 0Q ("f) U) QJ ~ g '" 10 o o 0. - '" r-. - ç, 'h ç: -~ ~ ~ ~ -:::; 'n 1-< 0 v ~ 'H N ~ ... ~ ~ ¡:; š ... " ~ -d ~ ~ 5\; z: ... 0 ~ ~ 0 8 ~o ~~" 11 iU co ~ -5 C'I" ""3 'H....... ~ ........ " p., 0 U '" 2 € '" o o N 'ti P.. <:: d " ¡:¡:: ... ."! ~ " ~ ... " :< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ... " >. ~ 0.. ... ~ " ... " o ~ u " 0.. § M c§ ~j ~ " ..c: -0 "" o ~ ... -0 " "iJ .S Õ " õ1 .:3 g "'~ ! t >_0 'D~ B':< [/)..g Fe:-; ,;::¡ !:' ..0;.;; .- ~ ~ .~ "'~ Eg;¡ ~¡;, õ:<! ~z .g ~ ~~ ~~ û~ ~~ ... 0 ... ." ~ 0 ~"' ¡,;" " .,s ~ " o Q ~ ~ Execucive Summary ES-ll Results of Analysis A base set of assumptions were utilized to analyze the net present value of the five alternatives to determine the relacive cost of the alternatives over a 30 year project period. The net present value considers capital cost, operating cost, money from the sale of reclaimed water and the rime value of money. The base case was the best estimate of these costs as developed in this report. The sensitivity of the cost model to variations in critical assumptions was then tested and compared to the base case. The assumpcions tested were intended to allow the City to understand the impact of critical items such as a futuIe surcharge by MWWD, increased sales of reclaimed water, solids handling by MWWD and sale of some capacity back to MWWD. The base case analysis presented herein compared the capital costs, annual benefits (reclaimed water sales) and annual costs for the four alternatives described above. The alternatives are: · Alternative 1 is to purchase capacity in MWWD and pay and annual operating fee · Alternative 2 is to build a conventional 5 mgd tertiary WRP · Alternative 2a is to build a membrane tertiary WRP · Alternative 3 is to build a conventional 10 mgd secondary and 5 mgd tertiary WRP · Alternative 3 is to build a compact 10 mgd secondary and 5 mgd terciary WRP The individual costs as described above were entered into the net present value model that calculates the relative costs for a 30 year project Jife. Assumptions for the base case scenario included: · Escalation rate = 3 percent · Discount rate = 5 percent · Purchases ofland and MWWD rights take place in 2006 · Midpoint of construction year = 2008 · Annual sale of reclaimed water (Duke Power only) = 2130 acre-feet · Credit for sale of reclaimed water = $400 per acre-foot The results of the base case comparison are summarized in Table ES-7. Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final ):\Engineer\SEWER\FINAL WRP Fmibiliry Study Rcport.doc April 2005 16-19 Executive Summary ES-12 Table £5-7. Life Cycle Alternative Cost Analysis, Summary of Base Case Alternatives Capital Costs 30-YeatNet Alternatives Name Present Value 1 Acquire Capacity in MWWD System $75,000,000 $112,960,000 2 City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $128,902,000 $156,525,000 (conventional) 2a City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $109,478,000 $137,954,000 (compact) 3 City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $182,816,000 $201,669,000 (conventional) 3a City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility 158,744,000 $175,582,000 (compact) The 30-year net present value shown in this table and subsequent tables is a cost to the City in current dollars. Smaller numbers indicate a favorable or less costly alternative. The results of the analysis show that the present value cost of purchasing additional MWWD capacity is approximates $25 million less costly than the most favorable City owned treatment option. The net ptesent value for acquiring capacity in the MWWD system in Table ES-7 assumed that the City would make a 5 mgd purchase in 2006. If the purchase can be made in increments as needed over the 30 year period the net present value decreases to $99,308,000. If this incremental purchase can be accomplished, the MWWD alternative is even more favorable. The base case assumptions were then modified to compare the following scenarios: · Base Case plus additional assessment for improved treatment at the MWWD WWTP · Base case plus additional sales of reclaimed water · Base case plus additional sale of 5 mgd of MWWD capacity from the 10 mgd City WRP alternatives · Base case except the wastewater sohds would be returned to the MWWD system for an "dditiona! fee. Solids h:mdll1lg would not be built with the City WIZI' The results of these analyses are presented in Tables ES-S through ES-11 The first consideration is that there is the potential that MWWD will have to upgrade treatment at the Point Loma WWTP to meet increasing regulatory requirements. If that were to occur, MWWD would probably put a surcharge on the participating wastewater contributors for the improvements. To test the impact of a surcharge, a $4 per gallon surcharge was assumed on the 5 mgd purchase or an assessment of$20 million in the year 2012. The results are shown in Table ES-S and indicate that surcharge makes a City owned WRP comparable to additional participation in MWWD. Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final ):\Engineet\SEWER\FJNAL WRP Feasibility Study Repon.dot April 2005 16-20 Executive Summary ES-13 Table ES-8. Life Cycle Alternative Cost Analysis, Additional Assessment for Improved Treatment at Point Lorna WWTP Capital Costs 30-Year Net Alternatives Name Present Value 1 Acquire Capacity in MWWD System $95,000,000 $135,323,000 2 City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $128,902,000 $156,526,000 (conventional) 2a City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $109,478,000 $137,954,000 (compact) 3 City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $182,816,000 $198,542,000 (conventional) 3a City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $158,744,000 $175,582,000 (compact) A second assumption in the base analysis was that SA (the sole purchaser of recycled water Í1;om the 5 mgd WRP at Chula Vista) would have only one customer, Duke Energy, and they would only take an average of 1.9 mgd because of the variation in their power production. If additional customers are acquired and the sales can rise to 80 percent of annual capacity or 4 mgd, the economics would be as shown in Table ES-9. Base case assumptions for costs of purchase in MWWD have been reset. The alternatives that include sale of reclaimed water obviously benefit from the greater sales volume. The MWWD purchase alternative and the compact facility alternative are much closer in present value. This analysis emphasizes the importance of reclaimed water volume and sales price. Table ES-9. Life Cycle Alternative Cost Analysis, Additional Sales of Reclaimed Water Capital Costs 30-Year Net Alternatives Name Present Value 1 Acquire Capacity in MWWD System $75,000,000 ..- 2 City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $128,902,000 $138,599,000 (conventional) 2a City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $109,478,000 $120,028,000 (compact) - 3 City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $182,816,000 $311,806,000 (conventional) 3a City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $158,744,000 $157,656000 (compact) A potential advantage of building a larger 10 mgd facility would be the ability to sell some of the rights in the MWWD system to another city or agency. If 5 mgd of MWWD capacity were sold upon completion of a new 10 mgd secondary treatment facility, Alternative 3a would be more Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Fu,a! ):\Engine~r\SEWER\FINAL WRP FeI1sibility Study Report.doc April 2005 1 6-21 Executive Summary ES-14 favorable. The savings would include the avoided operating fees paid to MWWD. The analysis is shown in Table E5-1O. The benefit makes Alternative 3a less expensive and slightly less than MWWD purchase alternative. Table ES-IO. Life Cycle Alternative Cost Analysis, Sale of 5 MGD of MWWD Capacity (Alternative 3 only) Capital Costs 30-Year Net Alternatives Name Ptesent Value 1 Acquire Capacity in MWWD System $75,000,000 $112,960,000 2 City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $128,902,000 $156,526,000 (conventional) 2à City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $109,478,000 $137,954,000 (compact) 3 City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $182,816,000 $130,418,000 (conven tiona!) 3a City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $158,744,000 ~_. (compact) ".. .. .\\""'-",-,.1· One of the large costs in developing a City WRP is the cost of building and operating solids handling facilities. In some systems, reclamation plants are built such that the solids removed ate discharged back to the system and are transported to the original WWfP. If the solids handling costs are removed from the City WRP option and a fee as described in the solids handling section of this report is paid to MWWD, the present values ate as shown in Table ES-11. The discussion of the ability of MWWD to manage these solids is beyond the scope of this economic analysis. Avoiding this initial capital expense and making uSe of the economy of scale in the MWWD system makes the City owned alternative more favorable but still $20 million more expensive in net present value than the life cost of purchasing MWWD capacity. It does significantly decrease the City's initial capital investment but increases operating costs. Table ES-ll. Life Cycle Alternative Cost Analysis, Solids Returned to the MWWD System Capital Costs 30-YearNet Alternatives Name Present Value 1 Acquire Capacity in M\Xl'\VD System $75,000,000 $112,%0,000 ---~----~-.. ---- -.--~_....__. -- ---- 2 City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $88,992,000 $150,742,000 (conventional) 2a City Builds 5 MGD Reclamation Facility $69,469,000 $132,078,000 (compact) 3 City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $115,942,000 $192,902,000 (conventional) 3a City Builds 10 MGD Reclamation Facility $91,760,000 $169,838,000 (compact) Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final J:\Engínc:~t\SE\VER\F1NN. WRP F~asibil¡ty Study Report.do," April 2005 16-22 Executive Summary ES-15 The results in Tables ES-8 to ES-ll show that the analysis of sensitivity is a very important part of the decision process, which can be updated as additional information becomes available. Conclusions and Recommendations This financial study compared the net present value or life cycle cost of Chula Vista continuing to utilize MWWD faculties for wastewater treatment versus four different scenarios in which the City builds and operates its own water reclamation facility and sells reclaimed water to Duke Power thxough the Sweetwater Authority. None of the four City WRP scenarios showed a compelling financial reason to change from the current practice of utilizing MWWD. The sensitivity of key assumptions was tested by modifying the cost analysis for various potential changes to the base assumptions. The modified analyses show the impact of changed conditions and bring the present value costs closer to the costs of the current practice. The base case analysis, which was developed for the current known assumptions, showed that it would be more favorable for Chula Vista to buy additional capacity in the MWWD system. However, several critical assumptions are either part of a negotiation or are subject to modification as the process evolves. The key points to be considered in the analysis of buying capacity in the MWWD system or building a City owned WRP are: · The cost of purchasing capacity from MWWD and whether the cost can be spread out over a longer period. · The terms of the MWWD agreement as concerns future assessments or fee increases and the probability that they will be needed. · The cost of the infrastructure to move water to a City WRP and move the effluent to the SBOO · The amount and value of the reclaimed water that can be sold to offset capital costs The report describes the various sizes of components needed to serve Chula Vista and considers the costs of these facilities. The basic analysis of the life cycle costs for the base case alternatives was shown in Table ES-7 and indicates a NPV difference of 25 million dollars favoring purchase of MWWD capacity. The base assumptions were explained in the report and are representative of current conditions. The less defined issues that can impact the decision are the harder to quantify and were therefote presented as part of the sensitivity analysis so that their impact could be understood. The impact factors that would change the basic analysis are: · Regulatory requirements for the upgrading of Point Loma and the additional costs that will be required · The development of a firm market for more reclaimed water at a reasonable price · The ability and willingness to sell existing capacity rights in the MWWD system · The ability to return solids to MWWD rather than building City owned solids handling facilities The assumptions should be further examined as more definitive information becomes available. Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study-Final J;\Enginc:er\SE\VER\FTNAL WRP FensibiIity Srudy Rt:port.doc April 2005 16-23 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Wastewater Master Plan provides a comprehensive review and evaluation of the City of Chula Vista's wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment capacity requirements under existing and ultimate City buildout conditions. Based on fmdings of the evaluation, the Plan recommends facility improvements and fmancing alternatives to ensure that aging infrastructure remains serviceable and to allow for the continued buildout of the City's General Plan. The City of Chula Vista is located in southwestern San Diego County, approximately seven miles north of the international border with Mexico. Incorporated in 1911, the City currently encompasses over 50 square miles. Chula Vista is one of the fastest growing communities in the State of California - the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projects that Chula Vista's population will increase from approximately 200,000 people today to nearly 300,000 by the year 2020. The City provides sanitary sewer service for all areas within the City limits and owns, operates, and maintains approximately 430 miles of sewer main lines and 14 sewer pump stations. City collection facilities convey wastewater flows generated within eight drainage basins to connections to regional sewerage facilities located along San Diego Bay to the west and the Sweetwater River to the north. Flows are ultimately conveyed to transmission and treatment facilities operated by the City of San Diego's Metropolitan Wastewater Department (METRO). The purpose of the Wastewater Master Plan is to evaluate system capacity, assess the condition of existing pump station facilities, develop a capital improvem,ent plan (CIP) for rehabilitation and expansion of the collection system, and recommend a revised capacity charge. Specific recommendations are made for the repair, upgrading, and buildout of wastewater collection and purnping facilities. The 20-year CIP includes the recommended system improvements to address existing and projected capacity constraints as well as the acquisition of additional regional treatment capacity. This recommended CIP forms the basis for the updated capacity fee and capital facilities financing pJan and will be used in sewer rate evaluations to be completed in separate financial studies. 80\491042 - WWMP Ch 0 . Executive Summary. doc E-1 Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 16-24 Executive Summary STUDY AREA The current population of the City is estimated to be 224,003 as determined by SANDAG. SANDAG forecasts the population of the City in year 2020 to be nearly 300,000 people, an increase of approximately 35 percent from the current census. For purposes of this study, existing land uses within the study area are categorized as single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, parks and vacant land. Table E-l summarizes the existing land uses within the study area. Table E-1 City of Chula Vista Existing Land Use Land Use Units(1) Single-family Residential 40,924 Dwelling Units Multi-family Residential 4,025 Dwelling Units Commercial 1,508 Acres Industrial 733 Acres Institutional 1,423 Acres Park 1,896 Acres Vacant I Open Space 18,649 Acres "J Based on City Parcel Database The City of Chula Vista is a participating agency in the City of San Diego owned and operated METRO system. The system includes regional sewer interceptors and trunk sewers, pump stations, and treatment and disposal facilities. Currently, the City owns capacity rights of 19.843 million gallons per day (mgd) in the METRO system. WASTEWATER GENERAT~ON PROJECTIONS SANDAG population projectioflli.. were used to estimate future City wastewater flows. Growth projections for the City are shown in Figure E-l. Based on SANDAG population projections, the estimated average City wastewater flow rate at buildout of the adopted General Plan is 23.322 mgd. Table E-2 provides estimated basin flow rates based on SANDAG growth projections. 80\491042 - WWMP Ch 0 - Executive Summary. doc E-2 Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 Executive Summary 350,000 Residential Population 300,000 250,000 " .9 200,000' ¡;¡ :; Q. 0 150,000 Q. 100,000 50,000 1.7% Annu i Growth Rate I 0 2000 2005 2010 0.3% Annuai Growth Rat 0.8% Annual Growth Rate Employment Population 1.5% Annual Growth Rate 1.6% Annual Growth Rate 2015 2020 2025 2030 Year Figure E-1. SANDAG Population Growth Projections Table E-2 Projected Wastewater Generation Rates Basin Average Dry Weather Flow (mgd) 2000 2010 2020 2030 Bayfront 0.089 0.133 0.178 0.235 Date-Faivre 0.630 0.630 0.644 0.666 G Street 1.842 1.979 2.142 2.274 Main Street 3.159 3.840 3.957 4.054 Poggi Canyon 0-859 2.109 2.224 2.301 Salt Creek 0.375 2.512 3.512 3.710 Sweetwater 3.697 3.887 4.035 4.143 Telegraph Cyn 4.278 5.604 5.722 5.939 TOTAL 14.929 20.693 22.414 23.322 E-3 Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 80\491042 - WWMP Ch o· Executive Summary. doc 16-25 Executive Summary were identified to reduce the potential for sanitary sewer overflows as well as to allow for projected growth within the City's service area. The objectives of the sewer capacity evaluation included: · Development of hydraulic models of the City's wastewater collection system (generally pipes 12-inch in diameter and larger) · Identification of sewer reaches that may be overcapacity under existing and projected future peak wastewater loading conditions · Recommend improvements to the existing collection system to reduce the potential for sanitary sewer overflows and to allow for planned growth within the City's service area Detailed hydraulic models of the City's wastewater collection system were developed and used to simulate existing and buildout wet weather flow conditions in mains generally larger than 12- inch in diameter. The models were calibrated to meter data recorded over the Memorial Day holiday period in 2003 at both permanent meters maintained by the City of San Diego and at temporary meters placed in support of the Master Plan. City buildout assumed 100 percent development of existing vacant parcels in accordance with current zoning and land use designations. Pipe reaches in which simulated wet-weather flows exceeded a flow depth to pipe diameter ratio of 0.85 were identified as potential improvement reaches. Improvements required to provide adequate capacity for prQÏected flows were then determined through an iterative modeling process. When sizing pipes for ultimate conditions, the size of the replacement pipe was increased such that peak dID ratios within the improved reach were less than 0.75 for pipes 12- inches and larger and 0.50 for pipes smaller then 12-inches. Several reaches within the Telegraph Canyon and Main Street Sewer Basins were identified as over-capacity under both existing and ultimate basin buildout. No constrained reaches were identified within the other sewer basins. Table E-3 presents a summary of the recommended improvements. Prior to construction of improvements, it is recommended that the City conduct detailed engineering investigations of the identified reaches that may include field inspections, flow metering during peak flow periods (such as holidays) and under wet-weather conditions, and video inspection. The cé1pacity evaluation illustrated that the City has a very limited extent of capacity-constrained sewers within the collection system, a testament to judicious facility planning as the older trunk sewers located in the western portions of the City appear to generally be of sufficient diameter to convey projected flows from the extensive planned development in eastern Chula Vista. Newer mains located east of I-80S, which typically have been installed through development fees, showed no capacity constraints through buildout of the City's General Plan. 80\491042 - WWMP Ch o· Executive Summary.doc E-5 Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 16-26 Executive Summary PUMP STATION CONDITION ASSESSMENT An assessment of the city's pe=anent sewer pump stations was completed with the objective of identifying pump station deficiencies and recommended improvements, development of improvement cost estimates, and prioritization of the identified upgrades in a Sewer Pump Station Rehabilitation Plan integral to the Master Plan. Preliminary recommendations were presented and discussed in a meeting with the City on February 18, 2004. A two-phase Rehabilitation Plan was developed with City staff in which improvements were classified as immediate (Phase 1) or long-te= (Phase 2). A summary of the recommended improvements is shown in Table E-4. Table E-4 Recommended Pump Station Improvements Sewer Pump Station Recommended Improvements Phase Police Station Department New pump station with: 1 (SPS-01) Lined wet well Submersible pumps with guide rails Underground valve vault with hatch 6 hours of Emergency Storage Emergency Generator Electrical Controls Landscaping G Street New pump station with: 1 (SPS-02) Dry weill Wet Well configuration Emergency Generator Positive ventilation of dry well Odor Control System 6 hours of Emergency Storage Hill Top Drive New pump station with: 2 (SPS-11) Lined wet well , Submersible pumps with guide rails Underground valve vault with hatch 12 hours of Emergency Storage Electrical Controls Portable Emergency Generator (shared) Landscaping Woodcrest Terranova Wet weill Emergency Storage reconfiguration 2 (SPS-12) 80\491042 - WWMP Ch o· Executive Summary.doc E-? Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 16-27 Executive Summary Table E-6 presents hydraulic sewer design criteria. Table E-6 Hydraulic Sewer Design Criteria Parameter Criteria Peak fiow depth to pipe diameter ratio (diD) 0.50 for d ~ 12-inches 0.75 for d > 12-inches 0.013 for VCP or RCP, d ~ 21-inches Manning 'n' factor 0.012 for VCP or RCP, d > 21-inches 0.012 for PVC, all sizes Minimum velocity 2 feet/second Maximum velocity 12 feet/second CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ) A wastewater system Capital Improvement Program (CIP) was developed based on the [mdings of the collection system capacity evaluation, pump station assessment, and pipeline rehabilitation and replacement analysis. The recommended CIP includes pipeline capacity improvements, pump station operational and capacity improvements, the implementation of a new Video Inspection Program, and several miscellaneous programs. Additionally, the CIP includes annual budgetary allowances for pipeline rehabilitation and replacement improvements. The CIP is presented in three phases - Phase 1: fiscal years 2004 - 2008, Phase 2: fiscal years 2009 - 2013, and Phase 3: fiscal years 2014-2023. The objectives of the Capital Improvement Program included: · Identification of annual budgetary estimates to construct facility improvements required to mitigate existing and projected capacity constraints · Identification of annual budgetary estimates to construct improvements to existing pump stations to address facility condition, operational, capacity, and/or regulatory deficiencies . DeveJopment of annual budgetary estimates for pipeline rehabilitation and replacement improvements . Recorruncndation of a phased implementation schedule for facility improvements A replacement and rehabilitation budget was developed through analysis of the age of the City's collection system. The goal of the age of pipe analysis was to provide a basis for allocating the necessary funds to repair or replace pipe segments that are in the worst condition and pose the highest risks of sewer spills. For this study, the useful life of pipe is assumed to be 80 years. Figure E-3 summarizes the age of the City's collection system. BOW91042 ~ VrlWMP Ch 0 - ExecutJve Summary. doc E-9 Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 16-28 Executive Summary Table E-7 Pump Station Improvements CIP Budget Estimates Improvement Pump Station Budget CIP Phase 1 Police Station $350,000 G Street $2,100,000 Phase 1 Subtotal $2,450,000 CIP Phase 2 Hill Top Drive $320,000 Woodcrest Terranova $190,000 Max Field $80,000 Robinhood Ranch Unit II $270,000 Robinhood Ranch Unit III $310,000 Phase 2 Subtotal $1,170,000 Total $3,620,000 Budgets for sewer capacity improvenients are provided in Table E-8. Since the projects are required to relieve capacity constraints under existing loading conditions, all of the projects were included in the Phase 1 CIP. The cost of each project was distributed evenly over the 5-year CIP phase. Table E-8 Sewer Main Improvements CIP Budget Estimates Approximate Replacement Cost Location Replacement Length Estimate Main Street Trunk Sewer Diversion NA $63,000 (vicinity of Main and Fresno Streets)!1) Colorado Street (Between K and J Streets) 1,314 It $283,000 Moss Street (Btwn Broadway and Woodlawn Avenue) 1,303 It $262,000 Center Street (Between 41h and Garrett Avenues) 630 ft $127,000 . Total 3,247 It $735,000 I'! Proposed diverSion based on City conceptual studies and cost estimates 80\491042. WWMP Ch o· Executive Summary.doc E-11 Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 16-29 Executive Summary Table E-9 Proposed Capacity Charge based on System Buy-In Methodology Avera~e Cost per Cost Flow) Unit Flow Flow per Cost per Assets (Present Value) (mgd) ($/gpd) EDU EDU Metro Facilities(2) $1,874.042,515 198.392 9.45 265 $2,503.23 Chula Vista $72,996.399 19.843 3.68 265 $974.85 Pipelines Total 13.12 $3,478.09 1) . . METRO flows are based on audited fiscal year 2003 flows. Chula Vista flows are based on eXisting pipeline capacity, which is assumed equal to the city's contractual capacity in the METRO system (2) Present value of METRO assets is based on ENR Index, Dee 2003 = 7,531.77 Recommendations actions include: 1. Increase the current capacity fee from $3,000 to an amount that does not exceed $3,478 per EDU. 2. Evaluate the adjustment of the sewer replacement fees. Recommended adjustments include increasing the single-family replacement fee from $0.70 to $1.97 monthly and multi-family/non-residential from $0.06 to $0.11 per RCF. This adjustment will allow the City to fund their replacement CIP in an orderly manner on a pay-go basis. 3. Continue to review all options regarding the purchase of additional capacity for sewage treatment both within and possibly outside the Metro System. 4. Adjust capacity fees annually based on the annual change in the ENR-CCI-LA. A full review and update to the capacity fees should be performed every three to five years or in conjunction with any master plan update. 80\491042 - WWMP Ch 0 - Executive Summary. doc E-13 Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan March 2005 16-30 DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN INCREASE OF THE SEWERAGE CAPACITY CHARGE AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, in March of 1985, the Engineering Department prepared a study titled "Sewerage Facility Participation Fee Study-Modified March 1985". The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of establishing a capacity fee that would be applicable to all new sewer connections to the City's sewer collection system; and WHEREAS, upon completion, this study recommended among other things, the establishment of a Sewerage Capacity Charge that would be adjusted on an annual basis to reflect changes in construction costs (suggested basis: Engineering News Record Construction Index most applicable to July 1 of each year); and WHEREAS, on April 2, 1985, City Council by Ordinance 2107, approved the establishment of the Sewerage Facility Participation Fee, now referred to as the Sewerage Capacity Charge, to enable the citizenry to be repaid for their initial investment and to facilitate the development of Chula Vista. At that time, the fee was set to be $300 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU); and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista along with fourteen other agencies that belong to the Metro System sends its flow to the City of San Diego's Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant for handling of the sewage; and WHEREAS, in anticipation of the significant costs of upgrading the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant to a secondary treatment facility, for which the City of Chula Vista as well as other participating agencies was liable, Council on May 5, 1987, approved Resolution No. 13004 and Ordinance No. 2002 increasing the Sewerage Capacity Charge from $300 to $600; and WHEREAS, in 1989 following the adoption of the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) directed the City of San Diego to upgrade the plant to a Secondary Treatment facility. Since Federal funds were not anticipated to be available for the required upgrades at that time and the cost of bringing the plant into compliance seemed to be far greater than what was originally anticipated in 1987, Council on October 17, 1989 approved Resolution Nos. 15352 and 15352A. These resolutions increased the Sewerage Capacity Charge to $2,000, pending the completion of various studies being conducted at that time to determine thc impact of upgrading the treatment plant; and WHEREAS, in October 9, 1990, Council by Resolution 15894 further increased the Sewer Participation Fee to $2,220 to enable the City meet its obligation to the Metro System for the upgrade of the treatment plant; and WHEREAS, in March 18, 2003, City Council by Ordinance 2900 further increased the Sewer Participation Fee to $3,000 to enable the City acquire additional capacity rights in the Metro System and cover the costs associated with the significant increment in Metro expenditures and improvements required to adequately service the City's growth; and 1 6-31 Ordinance ------ Page 2 WHEREAS, Chula Vista currently has capacity rights in the Metro Sewer System to cover growth for the next few years. This capacity was acquired with funds generated by the Sewerage Capacity Charge that existing residents paid when they made their connection to the City's sewer system. If reserved capacity in the Metro Sewer System had not been purchased, new residents would either have not been permitted to build, or would have been required to pay for the acquisition of additional treatment capacity. Instead, new residents are permitted to make use of the reserved capacity held by the City; and WHEREAS, the increase in the Sewerage Capacity Charge, applicable to all new sewer connections, is proposed as a mean of recuperating the cost of reserve capacity and also maintain a fund that will fund the acquisition of additional capacity and subsidize the cost of the necessary sewer improvements that will benefit all City residents; and WHEREAS, the City recently completed the Wastewater Master Plan Update with the primary goal of evaluating the adequacy of the existing wastewater collection system to sustain the long-term growth of the City. The plan will also assist the City in: budgeting for Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), allocating resources for the acquisition of additional sewage capacity and determining the short and long-term sewer capacity needs of the City. In the study, the consultant is advising the City to implement the "Buy-In" method, which is to adjust the Sewerage Capacity Charge by dividing the total value of the regional wastewater system by the total wastewater flow. This increase will be needed to keep up with inflation while the consultant makes its final recommendation; and WHEREAS, utilizing the "Buy-In" method as the basis of the increase, the Sewerage Capacity Charge will be increased from $3,000 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit to $3,478 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the fee levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the public facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council ofthe City ofChula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTION I: That the Chapter XII Engineering - Sewer, Section 3(a) of part A of the Master Fee Schedule be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: "3. Sewerage Capacity Charge a. The owner or person making application for a permit to develop or modify use of any residential, commercial, industrial or other property which is proj ected by the City Engineer to increase the volumc of flow in the City sewer system by at least one-half of one Equivalent Dwelling Unit of flow shall pay a sewerage facili1y participation fee Sewerage Capacity Charge. The base charge is hereby established as $3,478 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit of flow." SECTION II: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings for Statutory Exemption. The City Council does hereby find that the Sewerage Capacity Charge herein imposed is for the purpose of obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service within existing service areas. Therefore, the City finds that the adoption of this ordinance is statutorily exempt under the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15060( c)(3). 1 6-32 Ordinance ---- Page 3 SECTION III: Findings. The City Council finds that the collection of the Sewerage Capacity Charge, established by Ordinance No. 2107, at the time the building permit is issued is necessary. TIús will ensure that funds will be available for the acquisition of capacity rights in the Metro System, the construction of improvements, and to enhance capacity in the City's sewer system and to pay for the treatment of sewage; and The City Council finds that developers of land within the City should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the payment of a fee to finance a development's appropriate portion of the total cost of the sewer improvements, sewage treatment and capacity rights in the Metro System; and The City Council finds that the legislative findings and determinations set forth in the ordinance referred to in the above recitals continue to be true and correct; and The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it, that the increase of the Sewerage Capacity Charge is necessary in order to assure adequate sewer service to the City; and The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the meeting and the information received by the City Council in the ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of the Sewerage Capacity Charge on all future developments in the City for which building permits have not been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare; and The City Council fmds that the amount of the amended fee levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the sewer service to the developments within the City; and The City Council fmds that it is appropriate to approve an increase to the Sewerage Capacity Charge to reflect: the acquisition of additional capacity rights; the annual increase in the Metropolitan Sewerage System Costs; the increase in the need for improvements created by the demand for more capacity in the sewer system; and The City Council finds it is necessary to ensure sewer capacity in the Metro system before the reserved capacity is exhausted and to ensure the timely payment to adequately fund ongoing and future sewer improvements to enhance capacity in the City's sewer system triggered by future development. SECTION N: Time Limit for Protest and Judicial Action. Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this ordinance shall be brought within the period as established by law. In accordance with Government Code Section 66020( d)( 1), the ninety-day approval period in which parties may protest beginning upon the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION V: Effective Date. 16-33 Ordinance ------ Page 4 This ordinance shall become effective sixty (60) days after its second reading and adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by Alex AI-Agha City Engineer tJL Moore City Attorney 16-34 DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN INCREASE OF THE SEWERAGE CAPACITY CHARGE AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, in March of 1985, the Engineering Department prepared a study titled "Sewerage Facility Participation Fee Study-Modified March 1985". The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of establishing a capacity fee that would be applicable to all new sewer connections to the City's sewer collection system; and WHEREAS, upon completion, this study recommended among other things, the establishment of a Sewerage Capacity Charge that would be adjusted on an annual basis to reflect changes in construction costs (suggested basis: Engineering News Record Construction Index most applicable to July 1 of each year); and WHEREAS, on April 2, 1985, City Council by Ordinance 2107, approved the establishment of the Sewerage Facility Participation Fee, now referred to as the Sewerage Capacity Charge, to enable the citizenry to be repaid for their initial investment and to facilitate the development of Chula Vista. At that time, the fee was set to be $300 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU); and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista along with fourteen other agencies that belong to the Metro System sends its flow to the City of San Diego's Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant for handling ofthe sewage; and WHEREAS, in anticipation of the significant costs of upgrading the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant to a secondary treatment facility, for which the City of Chula Vista as well as other participating agencies was liable, Council on May 5, 1987, approved Resolution No. 13004 and Ordinance No. 2002 increasing the Sewerage Capacity Charge from $300 to $600; and WHEREAS, in 1989 following the adoption of the Clean Water Act, the Enviromnental Protection Agency (EPA) directed the City of San Diego to upgrade the plant to a Secondary Treatment facility. Since Federal funds were not anticipated to be available for the required upgrades at that time and the cost of bringing the plant into compliance seemed to be far greater than what was originally anticipated in 1987, Council on October 17, 1989 approved Resolution Nos. 15352 and 15352A. These resolutions increased the Sewerage Capacity Charge to $2,000, pending the completion of various studies being conducted at that time to determine the impact of upgrading the treatment plant; and WHEREAS, on October 9, 1990, Council by Resolution 15894 further increased the Sewer Participation Fee to $2,220 to enable the City to meet its obligation to the Metro System for the upgrade of the treatment plant; and WHEREAS, in March 18, 2003, City Council by Ordinance 2900 further increased the Sewer Participation Fee to $3,000 to enable the City acquire additional capacity rights in the Metro System and cover the costs associated with the significant increment in Metro expenditures and improvements required to adequately service the City's growth; and 16-35 Ordinance 2900-A Page 2 DRAFT WHEREAS, Chula Vista currently has capacity rights in the Metro Sewer System to cover growth for the next few years. This capacity was acquired with funds generated by the Sewerage Capacity Charge that existing residents paid when they made their connection to the City's sewer system. If reserved capacity in the Metro Sewer System had not been purchased, new residents would either have not been permitted to build, or would have been required to pay for the acquisition of additional treatment capacity. Instead, new residents are permitted to make use of the reserved capacity held by the City; and WHEREAS, the increase in the Sewerage Capacity Charge, applicable to all new sewer connections, is proposed as a mean of recuperating the cost of reserve capacity and also maintain a fund that will fund the acquisition of additional capacity and subsidize the cost of the necessary sewer improvements that will benefit all City residents; and WHEREAS, the City recently completed the Wastewater Master Plan Update with the primary goal of evaluating the adequacy of the existing wastewater collection system to sustain the long-term growth of the City. The plan will also assist the City in: budgeting for Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), allocating resources for the acquisition of additional sewage capacity and determining the short and long-term sewer capacity needs of the City. In the study, the consultant is advising the City to implement the "Buy-In" method, which is to adjust the Sewerage Capacity Charge by dividing the total value of the regional wastewater system by the total wastewater flow. This increase will be needed to keep up with inflation while the consultant makes its final recommendation; and WHEREAS, utilizing the "Buy-In" method as the basis of the increase, the Sewerage Capacity Charge will be increased from $3,000 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit to $3,478 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the fee levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of proÝiding the public facilities. WHEREAS, the City Council is placing an ordinance on its first reading which will increase the Sewerage Capacity Charge and modify the Master Fee Schedule; and WHEREAS, the fees modified by that ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its second reading; and WHEREAS, developers in the City will be applying for building permits during the interim period before the increased Sewerage Capacity Charge becomes effective; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 66017(b) authorizes the City to adopt a fee as an urgency measure upon making a finding describing the current and immediate threat to the public health, wdfarc and safety; and WHEREAS, said measure will be effective for thirty (30) days and may be extended for additional thirty (30) day periods upon subsequent action by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060( c )(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary; and 16-36 Ordinance -A Page 3 WHEREAS, state law requires said Urgency Ordinance to be adopted by a four-fifths DRAFT vote. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTION I: Finding of Urgency The City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds that it is necessary that the Sewerage Capacity Charge be increased and the Master Fee Schedule modified and the increase go into effect immediately. The increase is needed in order to require all developments to pay their fair share of the cost of: acquiring additional sewer capacity, paying for sewage treatment and the construction of improvements needed to enhance the capacity of the City's sewer system, and all other related eligible expenditures resulting from the impacts caused by their developments. Immediate implementation of this fee is necessary due to the current and immediate threat to public safety. Should there be a shortfall in the funds necessary to pay for additional sewage treatment capacity and the needed sewer improvements, it could result in the failure of the existing sewage collection system and sewage spills. The City Council finds that the prospect of a deficit, not enough sewer capacity to serve the growing population, the failure of old sewer infrastructure and concerns about an increased charge to remaining property owners, constitutes a current immediate threat to the public health, welfare and safety justifying the immediate imposition of this fee. SECTION II: That the Chapter XII Engineering - Sewer, Section 3(a) of part A of the Master Fee Schedule be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: "3. Sewerage Capacity Charge a. The owner or person making application for a permit to develop or modify use of any residential, commercial, industrial or other property which is projected by the City Engineer to increase the volume of flow in the City sewer system by at least one-half of one Equivalent Dwelling Unit of flow shall pay a sewerage facility participation fee Sewerage Capacity Charge. The base charge is hereby established as $3,478 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit of flow." SECTION III: CEQA Findings for Statutory Exemption. The City Council does hereby find that the Sewerage Capacity Charge herein imposed is for the purpose of obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service within existing service areas. Therefore, the City finds that the adoption of this ordinance is statutorily exempt under the provisions ofCEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3). SECTION N: Findings The City Council finds that the collection of the Sewerage Capacity Charge, established by Ordinance No. 2107, at the time the building permit is issued is necessary. This will ensure that funds will be available for the acquisition of capacity rights in the Metro System, the construction of improvements, and to enhance capacity in the City's sewer system and to pay for the treatment of sewage; and 16-37 Ordinance 2900-A DR AFT Page 4 The City Council finds that developers of land within the City should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the payment of a fee to finance a development's appropriate portion of the total cost of the sewer improvements, sewage treatment and capacity rights in the Metro System; and The City Council finds that the legislative findings and determinations set forth in the ordinance referred in the recitals set forth above, continue to be true and correct; and The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it, that the increase of the Sewerage Capacity Charge is necessary in order to assure adequate sewer service to the City; and The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the meeting and the information received by the City Council in the ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of the Sewerage Capacity Charge on all future developments in the City for which building permits have not been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare; and The City Council finds that the amount of the amended fee levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the sewer service to the developments within the City; and The City Council fmds that it is appropriate to approve an increase to the Sewerage Capacity Charge to reflect: the acquisition of additional capacity rights; the annual increase in the Metropolitan Sewerage System Costs; the increase in the need for improvements created by the demand for more capacity in the sewer system; and The City Council finds it is necessary to ensure sewer capacity in the Metro system before the reserved capacity is exhausted and to ensure the timely payment to adequately fund ongoing and future sewer improvements to enhance capacity in the City's sewer system triggered by future development. SECTION V: Expiration of this ordinance. This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. SECTION VI: Time Limit for Protest and Judicial Action. Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this ordinance shall be brought within the period as established by law. In accordance wiih Government Code Section 66020(d)(I), the ninety-day approval period in which parties may protest begins upon the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION VI: Effective Date. 16-38 DRAFT Ordinance -A Page 5 This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon four- fifths vote. Presented by Approved as to fo= by hv, Alex Al-Agha City Engineer 16-39 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: I;¡-- Meeting Date: 5/10/05 ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: TO NOTICE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF FY 2004/2005 STATE COPS SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING $307,014 FROM THE STATE COPS SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS BASED ON UNANTICIPATED REVENUE TO THE FY 2004/2005 PERSONNEL BUDGET OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. SUBMITTED BY: Chief of POliJ! ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manage~to~ (4/5ths Vote: YesLNo _) The Police Department has been awarded $307,014 through ttle Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF). These State funds were allocated to the Police Department for purposes stipulated by the Citizens' Option for Public Safety (COPS) Program. Acceptance and appropriation of these funds requires a public hearing per stipulations of the State COPS Program. RECOMMENDATION: That Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the resolution accepting $307,014 from the State COPS Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund, appropriating $178,959 to the FY 2004/2005 personnel budget of the Police Department and directing staff to include the remaining $128,055 in the FY 2005/2006 budget of the Police Department. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The State appropriation requires a Regional Oversight Committee's approval of the funds prior to disbursement. In accordance, the Su'pplemental Law Enforcement Oversight Committee (SLEOC) was established in San Diego County. The Committee is comprised of the County of San Diego Sheriff, the County of San Diego CAO, a regional City Manager and the District Attorney. The Committee will review the City of Chula Vista's expenditure plan upon approval by the Council of the City of Chula Vista. 17-1 Page 2,ltem: 1'1 Meeting Date: 5I1õ7õ5 BACKGROUND: During FY 1996/1997, the State appropriated funds for local law enforcement services per AB 3229, Chapter 134, Statutes of 1996. In accordance with this Legislation, the State has appropriated funds annually to local law enforcement agencies. The City of Chula Vista's proportionate share of these funds for FY 2004/2005 is $307,014. These funds are to be deposited in the City's Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund and used for law enforcement personnel and equipment needs as prescribed by the original legislation (AB 3229). These funds must be used to supplement existing funds and cannot replace, or supplant, funds that have already been appropriated for the same purpose. A twenty-five percent (25%) in-kind contribution is required for these funds. The in-kind contribution will be staff time associated with procurement of equipment and training of personnel. The allocation of future funds is subject to annual state budget deliberations. DISCUSSION: The Police Department recommends using the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) for personnel and equipment costs related to the expansion of police services, as stipulated by the Citizens' Option for' Public Safety (COPS) Program. The Department proposes to use $178,959 of the funds during FY 2004/2005 for personnel overtime costs. Due to staffing shortages within the Department, more overtime has been incurred to cover the minimum staffing levels throughout the fiscal year. The funding from SLESF will assist in the increased overtime costs, minimizing the fiscal impact to the General Fund. The Department also proposes to use $78,055 of the SLESF funds during FY 2005/2006 for personnel costs of the newly-created DUI Enforcement Team. Federal funds have been awarded for the creation of a DUI Enforcement Team, and the state funding from SLESF will supplement the federal funding to minimize the fiscal impact to the General Fund. The remaining $50,000 of the SLESF funds will be used during FY 2005/2006 to purchase safety equipment to meet the operational needs of the Police Department. As the City continues to grow, additional resources are needed to provide the continued level of quality service to the community. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution will result in the appropriation of $178,959 to the FY 2004/2005 personnel budget of the Police Department. The remaining $128,055 of the $307,014 funding will be included in the proposed FY 2005/2006 budget of the Police Department. The funding from the State COPS Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund will completely offset these costs, resulting in no net impact to the General Fund. . 17-2 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $307,014 FROM THE STATE COPS SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS BASED ON UNANTICIPATED REVENUE TO THE FY 2004/2005 PERSONNEL BUDGET OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHEREAS, the Police Department has been awarded $307,014 through the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund; and WHEREAS, these State funds were allocated to the Police Department for purposes stipulated by the Citizen's Option for Public Safety Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on May 10, 2005, to notice use of the State COPS Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund in the amount of $307,014 for personnel and equipment costs related to the expansion of police services; and . WHEREAS, the Fiscal Year 2004/2005 Police budget will be amended to add $178,959 for personnel services; and WHEREAS, the remaining $128,055 will be included in the proposed FY 2005/2006 budget of the Police Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby accept $307,014 from the State COPS Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund, appropriate $178,959 to the FY 2004/2005 personnel budget of the Police Department and direct staff to include the remaining $128,055 in the FY 2005/2006 budget of the Police Department. P;øl~ Richard P. Emerson Police Chief Approved as to form by: . ,1-- pL.' 17-3 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item /8 Meeting Date 5/10/05 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to consider the adoption of an ordinance modifying the existing Transportation Development Impact Fee and amending Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code Resolution Accepting a report prepared by staff recommending an updated Transportation Development Impact Fee to mitigate transportation impacts within the City's Eastern Territories Ordinance Amending the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program, Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code Resolution Approving a $7 million loan repayment, plus interest, from the Transportation Development Impact Fee fund to the Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee fund Resolution Transferring the fund balance of the Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee fund to the Transportation Development Impact Fee Fund and forgiving the $3.3 million, plus interest, loan between these funds SUBMITTED BY: City Engineer~ REVIEWED BY: CityManager0t~r' (4/5ths Vote: Yes..x... No~ The City's Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Program was established on January 12, 1988 by Ordinance 2251. Since its inception, the program has been updated several times to reflect new land use approvals, proposed changes to the General Plan, and updated project cost estimates. The last TDIF update was approved on August 13, 2002. Tonight, Council will consider the approval of the 2005 TDIF update recommending an increase from the current fee of $8,825 to $10,050 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). The public hearing has been duly noticed. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1. Conduct the Public Hearing. 2. Approve the Resolution accepting the report prepared by staff. 3. Approve the Ordinance amending Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code (first reading). 4. Approve the Resolution repaying the $7 million outstanding loan from the TDIF to the Interim SR-125 DIF. 5. Approve the Resolution transferring the balance of the Interim SR-125 fund to the Transportation Development Impact Fee fund. 6. Approve the concept oftoll reduction. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None. 18-1 Page 2, Item ¡ ~ Meeting Date 5/10/05 DISCUSSION: 2005 TDIF Update New developments place demands on the existing transportation infrastructure, which can be mitigated by upgrading existing and/or constructing new transportation facilities. ChuIa Vista's TDIF program functions as a system to distribute the cost of constructing infrastructure facilities in an equitable manner among new development in Eastern Chula Vista. The proceeds from the fee are used to construct new transportation improvements or expand existing facilities. The 2005 update recommends a TDIF of $10,050 per EDU. Table 1 below presents the rates for the different land uses. Table 1. Proposed Fee esiª,~l!ti~_ ~º:!YL ____ ________Lª&~?_'_ºº p~!:º!L__t)º,º?º:ºO_p_er.º~_ _._ _ ______ ~idential (MED) ______ ______ _L-206.9-,-º-º-.£~EP_º____L8,040.00 per I?_tL________ .esi~enti.¡¡!.JH!Qªl___________ ____.__ $ _ 5,]..9.~.QQ.P.e.r..ºº___ !_§lQ3º:ºQp~PQ____ n_ e!J:i_()!:JIou~il!R_______ ____ .______l___~,?~º:ºº.P.e!__º!L__ _l__~º~º·ºº _Pe.r.)JT_________ ~~id.e.!!g~lMi_~e._d_llse.*______ _ _ ___ __________/'II~~________ _L _4:,QJ..9--'--OQ_perp!L____n_ Co.J!llTI:e.rcial1ii2Ced _"!d:~_e.:"._n_ _ ______ _____/'II/~________ g 60,8º0-'QnºjJ_~r}__º,0ºº .§gJt Q_el!~r¡¡I_Ç().IIlIIl~r(;i¡¡IJ~_(;r~) ____ __ ___ _ _ n_ ~_18?,~].~:ºQp~r.~c.r.e_$~§ºÆ)Q:Qºpe.r~(;r~ ____ R~,gioE¡¡!Ç_()IIlIIler(;!¡¡I__(^-cre.)* ___ ___ _ _ __ _ _. ______/'II{~____ _ _ __ ___$!_! Q,55Q:QOp_er.'\<;re__ _ ___ ªi.g!1!Us.e._ç()gIgI~rc!¡¡Ij~(;re.) _ _ ___13-ºº,Q5Q:º--Qper~.cre._~~ªI~4:QO:OQ_pe.r_~(;!"~__ ___ __ ºf~!(;e._(~c.r:eJ~_ ________ __ '_n __n_._n___./'IIl~____ ____ t 29,4:5Q·9º p_er_~(;_re._.__ _ _ __9ustri.¡¡! ~J!'J^-C!e.L_______ _ _ ___n _~_ XO-,-6.0.9~º-º-P~r..~(;re._~_~Q!j-ºº·º_º'p'e!.A_c!e. Un __ G()1!.Ç~urs_~n(P~_g()!f(;_()llrs.e.) __ __ _.$_6)Z'??__º·OQp~r_çou!!,_e 1?º.:3.2ºº:º-ºp~r_ç~u.~e.___n edical Center (Acre) $ 573,625.00 er Acre $653,250.00 er Acre *New land use classification proposed to be created via this update Basis and Methodologv The basis and methodology used in calculating the fee in this update is consistent with the basis and methodoJogy used in the "Interim Eastern Area Development Impact Fee For Streets" adopted in January 1988 and also the "Eastern Area Development lmpact Fees For Streets" adopted in January 1990. One of the primary assumptions in the formulation of the previous fees is that the need for additional public facilities is generated by new development and the cost of the facilities should be paid by that new development. The first step in this update was to determine which road improvements are required to be constructed in order to maintain an acceptable level of service on the City's circulation system east of 1-805. The improvements that are to be constructed will serve the entire benefit area by either providing roads for residents, employees, or customers to use, or by providing new streets for existing traffic, thus freeing up capacity on existing streets that can be used by new development. The next step was to determine the method upon which the costs for the improvements would be 18-2 Page 3, Item Meeting Date 5/10/05 lß spread. One of the most common tools used to equate benefit impact fees among the different land uses and densities is the "Equivalent Dwelling Unit" or "EDU". There is a clear relationship between the use of transportation facilities and the generation of traffic trips based on the land use and density of a specific parcel. As in previous methodologies, this update relies on the report "San Diego Traffic Generators", published by SANDAG. This report details the traffic trips generated by various classes of land use. This update has relied on traffic modeling techniques and technical studies to determine the percentage of industrial and commercial trips that originate from within the TDIF benefit area that are already counted as part of other land uses in the TDIF program. Only those trips which originate outside of the TDIF benefit area are recommended for determining the fee for the commercial and industrial land uses. The analysis recommends revision to the commercial EDU rates based on a tiered system similar to residential use. The proposed street improvements are based on an analysis of the circulation system for various levels of development within the entire area of benefit, which is discussed below. All of proposed street projects included are consistent with the Preferred Plan of the proposed General Plan Update and Specific Plans that have been adopted by the City Council. In addition, the street projects are required by the City's Growth Management Ordinance as a condition to all development within the area of benefit in order to maintain acceptable levels of service on the major roadways. The absence of contiguity to the proposed street projects is not essential to conferring a benefit to properties. The area of benefit is based on an analysis of impacts on the total circulation system east ofI-805 for various stages or increments of cumulative development within the total area of benefit. The circulation system must be viewed as a whole. Each of the proposed street projects will mitigate the adverse traffic impacts generated by new development; because every development will create traffic; which will utilize the entire system to access work, commerce, schools, residences and the many other land uses throughout the City. A failure in any part of the system will have a negative impact in other parts of the system and traffic from the development closest to an impacted segment of street will be just as affected as traffic from a more distant development. The analogy of a water system is sometimes used where constrictions or breaks in any part of the system will have significant impacts on the whole system. Area of Benefit The TDIF program encompasses most properties within the City's jurisdiction located south of Bonita Road and east of I-80S (see Exhibit I). The proposed area of benefit contains a total of 20,542 EDUs. Transportation Facilities There are 40 remaining projects within the proposed TDIF program (See Exhibit 2). The cost estimate for constructing these roads is $229.8 million, including soft costs. This update includes most roads in the proposed Circulation Element of the General Plan in addition to capacity enhancement projects. These additional projects include. : 1. Otay Lakes Road from Canyon Drive to East H Street 2. Hunte Parkway from SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 3. Traffic Management Center 18-3 Page 4, Item ! í Meeting Date S/10/05 4. Transportation Demand Management 5. Rock Mountain Road Overpass of SR-125 6. Otay Valley Road Overpass of SR.125 The TDIF program does not include those streets within the area of the Proposed University Site (Villages 9 and 10 of the Otay Ranch). It is anticipated that the University, once approved, would be responsible for constructing suitable transportation facilities. This report also excludes the traffic EDUs contained within the proposed University site. Interim SR-125 DIF Funds In addition to updating the TDIF program to reflect current land uses, projected development, and future program facilities, staff also recommends folding the Interim SR-125 DIF funds into the TDIF program. Since its inception in 1988, the TDIF program has identified the need for an interim SR-125 facility, and has included such facilities as projects numbers 1 and 2. In 1994, a separate Interim Pre-SR-125 Development Impact Fee (SR-125 DIF) was established to ensure that sufficient funds would be available to construct a north-south transportation corridor should the SR-125 freeway not be constructed in time to serve impending development. With financing now secured, environmental constraints addressed and construction underway for SR-125, Council tolled the fee in April of2004. At that time, Council also amended the Ordinance to allow transportation capacity enhancement improvements to be funded from fees already collected for the SR-125 DIF. Staff now recommends that the remaining Interim SR"125 DIF funds be transferred to the TDIF fund for several capacity enhancing improvements, including overpasses of the SR-125 at Rock Mountain Road and Otay Valley Road. Staff is recommending the addition of project number 66 to the program to improve traffic circulation and to relieve peak-hour congestion in Eastern Chula Vista. The underlying premise is that widening roadways is not the sole option available to relieve congestion. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is one strategy that promotes efficient use of our transportation resources. The following internet site: http://www.vtpi.orl!ltdml has extensive, pertinent information regarding TDM. The proposed project consists of funding allocations for two specific TDM programs to alleviate congestion by encouraging alternative modes of travel during the peak commnting hours as follows: a) $200,000 to suppJement the cxisting TDM program as approved by the City CouncjJ on July 24, 2001. Attached is Exhibit #4 with background on the subject program. b) $1.8 Million for "toll reduction" targeted for SR·125. Staff is only recommending the approval of the "toll reduction" concept at this time. Staff will work with California Transportation Ventures (CTV) to develop specific implementation strategy for Council consideration by the end of this year. Staff will be recommending an implementation strategy that is fair and equitable to residents whose homes have paid the interim SRl25 fees. Additionally, staff will ensure that the resultant benefit of the "toll reduction" is maximized by securing substantial "volume discount" from CTV for Chula Vista residents. 18-4 Page 5, Item I S( Meeting Date 5110/05 In December of 2003, Council approved a loan of $3.3 million from the Interim SR-125 DIF to the TDIF to fund a capacity enhancement project widening the westbound East H Street to northbound Interstate 805 on-ramps (STM-356). Tonight's action will effectively forgive this loan, as the two funds will combined into a single fund. It is staff s recommendation that the $3.3 million continue to be dedicated to the East H Street project. In addition, Council approved a loan of $7 million from the Interim SR-125 DIF to the TDIF to fund interchange improvements at Interstate 805 and Olympic Parkway (STM-328) in 2002. Alternative funding has been secured through a federal grant, therefore Council is being asked to approve the repayment of the loan to the Interim SR-125 fund with interest. It is staff s recommendation that this $7 million be used to fund a portion of the project costs for the aforementioned SR-125 overpasses at Rock Mountain Road and Otay Valley Road. Staff will return to Council with a request for budget amendments reflecting the allocation of the $7 million to these projects. TDIF Credits There are a number of developers who have constructed TDIF roads in the past and maintain a credit against future TDIF fees in the estimated total amount of $20 million. The credits are summarized in Exhibit 3. EDU Rates Government Code 66000 requires, among other things, that the City establish a reasonable relationship between the projects to be funded and the amount of the fee. The TDIF program uses the Average Daily Trip (ADT), which is converted to the Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) as the tool to equate impact fees among the different land uses. As indicated above, ADT generation rates published by SANDAG are primarily used to determine the impacts of the different land use categories on the transportation system. Each land use category is assigned a specific EDU rate. A single family, detached residential unit is equal to 10 ADT or 1 EDU. Table 2 presents a comparison between the current and proposed rates. Table 2. EDU Rates ~sidenti,!Jj!:º~L_____________ _______._ ____ ~º_1!!Q!J_________ esidential(1fEIJ~ I I 0.8 EDU/DU Residential (IiI(J.H) . . .. .. i 0.6 ¡ ÉDUmU 1_ 0.6 EDU/DU Senior Housing I. 0.4 l EDU/DU !. 0.4 I EDUfDU Office (Acre)* .. . . . . N/A t 9.~~DU/Acre ~!~¥;~j~~~ft~~~~~i~!~;--~~ *N ew land use classification proposed to be created via this update 18-5 Page 6, Item [e¡, Meeting Date 5/10/05 Following is a brief discussion on the EDU rate schedule: . The SANDAG Report ("San Diego Traffic Generators") identifies several categories of residential land use generating average daily trips (ADTs) ranging from 12 to 4 ADTs. The City historically had refined the SANDAG approach, identifying four categories based on the type of residential structure whether attached, detached, multifamily or senior housing, which also related to the density of the residential development according to the SANDAG Report. Via the 2002 update, this product-type basis was replaced with system based upon the density of the residential development, as a more accurate reflection of housing development within the Area of Benefit. Following this methodology, this TDIF update is also based on the density of the residential development. Staff, therefore, recommends the following: 10 ADTs generated from a residential unit with densities ranging on average from 0 to 6 dwelling units per gross acre; 8 ADTs from a residential unit with densities ranging from greater than 6 to 18 dwelling units per gross acre; 6 ADTs from a residential unit with greater than 18 dwelling units per gross acre; and 4 trips from a unit in a senior housing complex or mixed use residential with commercial. . As part of this TDIF Update, the City hired a traffic consultant, Katz, Okitsu, & Associates (KOA), to conduct an area specific traffic study. The study, identifying commercial trips origin, distribution, and generation rates, was performed for eastern Chula Vista. The consultant's analysis found that approximately 72 percent of the commercial trips are generated from within the City of Chula Vista TDIF area and 28 percent are generated from outside the TDIF area. Thus, the commercial trip rates for the purpose of the TDIF program were adjusted to reflect the study's conclusions. Environmental Review The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Although environmental review is not necessary at this time, environmental review will be required prior to the approval of final design plans and the awarding of construction contracts for facilities funded through Transportation Development Impact Fees. It should also be mentioned that the TDIF program includes funding for habitat mitigation that may be triggered by the construction of the facilities. Proposed Ordinance By amending Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code, Council will establish a new TDIF rate of $10,050 per EDU, will modify the number of EDUs for various land uses, and will amend the existing TDIF program to include all the properties and transportation facilities identified in the report. This ordinance will become effective 60 days after the second reading which will occur following Council adoption of the proposed General Plan Update. FISCAL IMPACT: 18-6 Page 7, Item ~ Meeting Date 5/10/05 The TDJF fee calculation, including the combination of the Interim SR-125 DJF fund and the TDJF fund, is summarized in the following table (in millions): otal TDlF Program Cost $255.5 ess Total Program Assets $48.7 uture Program Cost $206. This future program cost, when spread over the remaining 20,542 EDUs generates the proposed TDJF rate of $10,050 per EDU. The available fund balance of the Interim SR-125 fund after the $7 million loan repayment will be approximately $12 million. Staffis proposing to designate $IL9 million for SR-125 related CIP projects, including SR-125 overpasses at Rock Mountain Road and Otay Valley Road, and Transportation Demand Management. The positive fiscal impact to the TDJF fund is approximately $100,000, plus the $3.3 million related to the forgiving of the loan, which has already been expended on project costs. The transfer of the Interim SR-125 DJF fund to the TDJF fund, the forgiveness of the $3.3 million loan, and the repayment of the $7 million loan will all be effective June 30, 2005. Exhibits: 1. Area of Benefit 2.Transportation Facilities 3. TDIF credits 4.TDM Attachment: Engineer's Report J :\Engineer\AGENDA \CAS2005\5··¡ O-OS\200STDJFUpdate.doc 18-7 ~ III <I: ( ) ... £:: ð w ta ~ Z 1ft a:: ...J ( ) ..:'.!!!æ ..0 <I: IX) £:: Cii Z 0 l- I-- .... ta .;:: S'" Z III !; I-- ...J -ê :S",::! z <I: 0 .... 1-'" z w ::E w r-. 0 "" <I: CII. ~ti'" .d'!. í ~ ::E a:: ~ ( ) 1:5 .... ~ti O",:S iH!il ! 1" ...J .... ... <I: >. E 0 0 ( ) ta ( ) ..,..,u a. ç ta 'ãj' 'ãj' .;:: .... rn OC cO ,. It I 18 0 I- ~ .¡: õ ( ) £:: " -11.11. ::E~Z Ifiit! i l' >- c... ~ ~ ~ ( ) tIJ u¡III::E ...J U. (t Ü Ü 0 011.0 j'if ) P !i w ü w 3= rn ( ) ( ) ( ) < c::: a::Z'" z....1= .t Iii Ii I ( ) =>CI- ) > :> z ( ) .... £:: £:: £:: rn £:: ( ) \.:J~z c¡:¡:5 ¡I¡~L . ¡fj\ (t C) .... w w ~ a. (t j rn (t ( ) _I-'" !- ",,§! 1'&' 0 cj X ...J ...J (t .a (t .!:: IJ...c::E C::E::I I t5jl Iii' I:D u. W to Ü .... "'II.U to "" => :> .... 1-11. .. jl.' I it ..--.. I-I I 0 1110 ~O~ I i¡!; a = , , C...... , I I ...... I-"'U i mm Ilih; I I I I I >'" , I :5~ ...>:¡: I I I 11."'1- ¡__.J L..J I ::10 "'0... :¡: ¡:¡ 3= ! U ID :<= ~I ~~i I , I ,....~-, \ ,_.... I I ~...."i I I \ I I I I I I \ I , -; EXHIBIT 1 18-8 EXHIBIT # 2 TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES 3b Telearaph Canyon Rd 1-805lnterchanae 200' east of TC Shocc¡¡:;a Ctr $5,228,842 7c East H St 1-805 Interchanoe Phase II $3,373,829 11 Bonita Rd Otay Lakes Rd Central $1,304,121 17b East Palomar St Paseo Ladera Subdivision boundary $1,231,542 24d Olvmpic Pkwy Heritage Rd SR-125 $1,162,375 25a Olvmpic Pkwy 1-805 Interchange $3,510,807 26 East Paiomar St Heritaae Rd Subdivision boundarv $3,146,039 28b Otay Lakes Rd Lake Crest Wueste Rd $2,472,334 37 Eastlake Pkwy CWA Easement Olympic Pkwy $5,121,613 42 Birch Rd La Media Rd SR-125 $8,937,276 43 Birch Rd SR-125 Eastlake Pkwv $3,469,782 45 Eastlake Pkwy Olympic Pkwv Birch Rd $4,839,645 46 Eastlake Pkwy Birch Rd Hunte/Rock Mountain Rd $8,728,976 47a San Miauel Ranch Rd Proctor Vallev Rd (N) SR-125 $5,378,378 48 Hunte Pkwy Qiympic Pkwy Eastlake Pkwy $16,359,525 51 a La Media Rd Olympic Pkwy Santa Venetia $2,858,732 51 b La Media Rd Santa Venetia Birch Rd $2,335,669 52 La Media Rd Birch Rd Rock Mountain Rd $14,974,125 53 La Media Rd Rock Mountain Rd Otay Vallev Rd $8,875,075 55a Otay Lakes Rd East H St Telearaph Canyon Rd $4,921,095 55b Otay Lakes Rd ._ £~nyon East H St $1,578,208 56a Main St Nirvana Ave 1600' West of Herltaae/Rock Mtn Rd $2,451,931 56c Otav Valley Rd La Media Rd SR·125 $3,400,4~~ 56d Main St 1-805 underpass -L~,777,750 ~. Main St .._. 1600' West of I:!erit~/Ro~k Mtn Rd_ Heritage/Ro.ck Mtrt.£!~__ ,-__$3,247,813 57 Heritage Rd -+<2lympic Pkwy Main St T$20,649,250 58a Heritaae Rd Main St City boundary $6,564,000 58b Heritaae Rd Otay River Bridáe - $6,222,125 59b Proctor Valley Rd .. '3!:1R !!eiJ1.h 9_~~~t Entrance RHR Ne~9..Éast Ert.tra~_______ __ $1 ,234,8~2 59c Proctor Valley Rd.. RJ::!B Neigh ~!=ast Entrance City boundary $4,176,489 60a Rock Mountain Rd Main/Heritage Rd La Media $28,238,875 60b Rock Mountain Rd La Media Rd SR-125 $9,333,188 61 Willow St Bonita R2__. Sweetwater Rd $2,026,519. 62 East H St Buena Vista Otay Lakes Rd $2,001,758 ~3Br;~J~:~~~I:~~Ë!-==-=~~==~=':===r~iÎi~:~==~-=~=:===-=~=~======~E~~I~k,eii~:~=:=::===~~==~-~~=:=~L:J~~~~~t~ 65 ¡Traffic Manaaement Center ¡System-wide ¡ ; $3,080,406 "" ."~~.~ .. .,t._". .". .....~ ,.:.__<__._.._,_,.'oé"_'_'_"'._'M"___~"" _,,_ ...M_,_'__""_'" "·.·.m ,'''' ,.._ ,_.,_, _...... .., ___.."",__,_.. __,__.._,,_,._,__,,_.,._ ~__'.___ _~n. _"_~_'-"_"___"___"_'_"__" ."._..~,,_ ".._....._. _.., _._._ '. '.' ,-,- .. _"_'" _",_, ,,' ~".._..; .'< ""_,",...___ "-,~,,..,,-,"-,,~,~ 66 'Transportation Demand ~gmnt__~~~ì!.'yst~wid~__.____ . I $2,000,ooq 67 Rock Mountain Rd SR-125 $6,480,000 68 Otay Valley Rd --- SR-125----..·- - $8,424,000 18-9 EXHIBIT #3 REMAINING TDIF CASH CREDITS Estimated Sunbow Brookfield Shea Otay Eastlake McMillin Otay Ranch San Miguel Ranch $ $ $ $ $ $ 148,053.97 1,915,674.86 12,126,753.57 3,392,203.04 2,137,977.80 947,006.06 18-10 Transportation Demand Manal!ement EXHIBIT # 4 The Eastern Chula Vista Traffic Enhancement Program was initially presented to Council on May 31,2001 at the joint City Council/GMOC/Planning Commission Workshop. The implementation plan was then presented to Council on July 24, 2001. Development of the TDM program was funded through $98,000 in developer contributions and included a 400 household random sample survey conducted of eastern ChuIa Vista residents that had at least 1 peak hour commuter. The objective of the investigation was to identify potential Transportation Dernand Management (TDM) techniques that would be appropriate for eastern Chula Vista and to approximate the number of users. That survey was carried out in February 2002. Based upon the findings of the survey and with additional allied data, 3 TDM programs were recommended, that were identified as having the greatest chance for success. These include: 1. Financial Incentives, Marketing and Promotions, and Establisrnng an Implementing Organization 2. Express Bus from eastern Chula Vista to Downtown San Diego. 3. Express shuttle from eastern ChuIa Vista to the trolley. In July of 2002 the City applied for three separate grants from the County of San Diego, Air Pollution Control District (APCD). The request was for matching funds to implement these three TDM programs, over a two year period. All three grants were approved by the APCD on March 12, 2003. The TDM two year program is budgeted for $754,485 comprised of a grant of $414,325 and a $340,160 match, for a 55% and 45% percent split. The 45% match to be paid for by the eastern Chula Vista development community. The first years match of $157,183 was then gathered from equal contributions from the Otay Ranch Co., Eastlake Co., Corky McMillin Co., Brookfield Shea Otay, and Tri-Mark Pacific and placed in a City managed deposit account. On April 20 of 2004 the City Council formally accepted the grants, authorized the City Manager to sign an agreement with SANDAG to assist the City in implementing the program and allocated $414,325 to provide bridge funding for later reimbursement under the APCD grant. BUDGET SUMMARY TWO YEAR APCD TDM GRANT Year 1 _~___Year 2 Year 1 and 2 ----~- -~-_._-- _.--- Local Local % from Amount from Pro; ect Total Match Yr2 Match Total APCD Local Match APCD F ioancial Incentive $200,600 $80,240 $170,230 $68,092 $370,830 60% $148,332 $222,498 Express Bus To Downtown $103,285 $51,643 $166,570 $83,285 $269,855 50% $134,928 $134,927 Express Shuttle To Trolley $50,600 $25,300 $63,200 $31,600 $113,800 50% $56,900 $56,900 TOTAL $354,486 $157,183 $400,002 $182,977 $754,485 $340,160 $414,325 18-11 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPrING A REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF RECOMMENDING AN UPDATED TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITmN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES WHEREAS, the amount of the Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) has not been comprehensively updated since 2002, however during this time infrastructure and land uses have been modified; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code section 66000 et seq., the City has caused a study to be conducted by staff entitled "Eastern Area Transportation Development Impact Fee ("the Report") dated March 2005; WHEREAS, the Report reanalyzes and reevaluates the impacts of development on the transportation system for the City's eastern territories and further reanalyzes and reassess the development impact fee necessary to pay for the transportation facilities; and WHEREAS, the 2005 update incorporates the following major changes: · Addition of 6 new projects: 1. Otay Lakes Road from Canyon Drive to East H Street 2. Hunte Parkway from SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 3. Traffic Management Center 4. Transportation Demand Management 5. Rock Mountain Road overpass of SR-125 6. Otay Valley Rd overpass of SR-125 · Creation of new land use classifications: 1. Mixed use residential 2. Mixed use commercial 3. Office 4. Commercial High Rise 5. Regional Commercial · Cost estimates updated to reflect 2005 industry prices 18-12 DRAFT NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City CounciI of the City of Chula Vista does hereby accept the report prepared by staff recommending an updated Transportation Development Impact Fee to mitigate transportation impacts within the City's eastern territories. Presented by Approved as to form by Alex Al-Agha City Engineer H:\ENGINEERIRESOSlResos2005\5-10-05\TDIF Reso l.doc 18-13 ORDINANCE NO. DRAFT ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.54, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES WHEREAS, in January 1988, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted Ordinance No. 2251 establishing a development impact fee for transportation facilities in the City's eastern territories; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2251, the City has commenced the collection of development impact fees to be used to construct transportation facilities to accommodate increased traffic generated by new development within the City's eastern territories; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2251 as amended by Ordinance Nos. 2289, 2348, 2349, 2431, 2580,2604, and 2671 were repealed by Ordinance No. 2802 in January 1999; and WHEREAS, by Ordinance 2802, the Transportation Development Impact Fee was placed in Municipal Code Chapter 3.54; and WHEREAS, Municipal Code Chapter 3.54 was amended by Ordinance 2866; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista is placing this ordinance on its first reading which will increase the development impact fee (per equivalent dwelling unit) to finance transportation facilities within the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66017(a), the fees increased by this ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its second reading; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 66000, et. seq., the City Council has caused a study to be conducted to reanalyze and reevaluate the impacts of development on the transportation system for the City's eastern territories and, further re- analyze and evaluate the development impact fee necessary to pay for the transportation facilities which financial and engineering study prepared by city staff, is entitled "Eastern Area Transportation Development Impact Fee" dated March 2005; and WHEREAS, the financial and engineering studies and the City's General Plan show the transportation network will be adversely impacted by new development within the eastern territories unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new development; and WHEREAS, the financial and engineering studies and the City's General Plan establish that the transportation facilities necessitated by development in the eastern territories comprise and integrated network; and 18-14 Ordinance 2866 Page 2 DRAFT WHEREAS, the City's Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to amend or modify the list of projects to be financed by the fee; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2005, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly noticed hearing at which oral or written presentations regarding the development impact fee for the City's eastern territories could be made; and WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA, and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Findings The City Council finds that developers of land within the Eastern Territory should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of transportation facilities within the boundaries of the development, the construction of those transportation facilities outside the boundaries of the development which are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City standards and the payment of a development impact fee to finance the development's portion of costs of the transportation network; and The City Council finds that the legislative findings and determinations set forth in Ordinance N 0.2802 continue to be true and correct; and The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Eastem Area Transportation Development Impact Fee" dated March 2005, that certain amendments to Chapter 3 .54 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are necessary in order to assure that there are sufficient funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve the eastern territories by the development impact fee; and The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the meeting, the City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development in the eastern territories for which building permits have not been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare and in order to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and The City Council finds that the amount of the amended fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities; and The City Council finds that it is appropriate to refine the fees for office and comrnercialland uses, including high rise commercial, to reflect the findings of the analyses of the commercial trip origination and destination whereby only estimated trips generated from outside the Transportation 18-15 Ordinance 2866 Page 3 DRAFT Development hnpact Fee boundary shall be used in determining the fee for co=ercialland uses; and The City Council finds it is necessary to ensure the timely payment of the "DIP program monitoring" cost item, included in Table H "Program Funding Requirements" of the fmancial and engineering study, "Eastern Area Development hnpact Fees for Streets" dated March, 2005, to adequately fund ongoing and future administration activities and studies. SECTION 2: That the Development Impact Fee Schedule set forth in Section 3.54.01O(C) of the Municipal Code, and as adjusted annually by the Los Angeles Construction Cost Index as published monthly in the Engineering News Record, shall be amended to read as follows: C. The amount of the fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance based upon the following schedule: l _ ~=-~" I I~\ ~I-O; =-_ --~= --- '__ ,J ~', Residential (LOW) Residential (MED) Residential (HIGH) Senior Housing Residential Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use General Commercial (Acre) Regional Commercial (Acre) High Rise Commercial (Acre) Office (Acre) Industrial RTP (Acre) 18-Hole Golf Course Medical Center 0-6 dwelling units per gross acre 6.1-18 dwelling units per gross acre > 18.1 dwelling units per gross acre >18 dwelling units per gross acre < five (5) stories in height > 60 acres or 800,000 sq ft > five (5) stories in height < five (5) stories in height $ 10,050.00 $ 8,040.00 $ 6,030.00 $ 4,020.00 $ 4,020.00 $160,800.00 $160,800.00 $110,550.00 $281,400.00 $ 90,450.00 $ 80,400.00 $703,500.00 $653,250.00 perDU perDU perDU perDU perDU per 20,000 Sq It per Acre per Acre per Acre per Acre per Acre per Course erAcre The density of the development type shall be based on the number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multi.family residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development unless otherwise approved in writing by the city manager's designee. Gross acreage as it applies to the co=ercial, high rise co=ercial, industrial and office development types, means all land area that the city manager's designee deems necessary within the boundary of the parcel or parcels of the development project for which building permits are being requested. The amount of the fee shall be adjusted, starting on October I, 2005, and on each October 1st thereafter, based on the one-year change (from July to July) in the Los Angeles Construction Cost Index as published monthly in the Engineering News Record. For reference purposes, this update is 18-16 Ordinance 2866 Page 4 DRAFT based on the July 2004, Los Angeles Construction Cost Index of 7845.85. Adjustments to the above fees based upon the Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action of the city council. The city council may adjust the amount of the fee as necessary to reflect changes in the type, size, location or cost of the transportation facilities to be fmanced by the fee, changes in land use designations in the city's general plan, and upon other sound engineering, financing and planning information. Adjustments to the above fees resulting from the above reviews may be made by resolution amending the master fee schedule. SECTION 3: That the Defmitions as set forth in Section 3.54.020 of the Municipal Code, shall be amended to read as follows: 3.54.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined herein, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended. A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the Uniform Building Code. B. "City Engineer" means the city engineer, the city engineer's designee or the city manager's designee. C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identified for each planning area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or as determined by the city manager's designee. D. "Developer" means the owner or developer of a deveIopment. E. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of the city. F. "Development project" or "development" means any activity dcscribed in Section 66000 of !he State Government Code. G. "Eastern Territories" generally means that area of the city located between Interstate 805 on the west, the city sphere of influence boundary on the east and northeast, the city boundary on the north and the city's southern boundary on the south, excepting Villages 9 and 10 of the Otay Ranch (the University Site) as shown on the map entitled "Figure r' of the update of the fmancial and engineering studies. 18-17 Ordinance 2866 Page 5 DRAFT H. "Financial and engineering studies" means the "Interim Eastem Area Development Impact Fee for Streets" study prepared by George T. Simpson and Willdan Associates dated November 1987; the "Eastern Area Development Fee for Streets" study prepared by Willdan Associates dated November 19, 1990; the Eastern Development Impact Fee for Streets - 1993 Revision" study prepared by city staff dated July 13, 1993; and the study prepared by Project Design Consultants ("Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets, 1999 Update") dated October 25 1999; and the study prepared by Willdan ("Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" dated July 2002); and the study prepared by city staff ("Eastern Area Transportation Development Impact Fees" dated March 2005) which are on file in the office of the city clerk. 1. "High rise commercial" means commercial office usage five or more stories in height. J. "Transportation facility project" means that project or portion of project which involves the specified improvements authorized by Section 3.54.030. K. "Regional commercial" means any large commercial shopping center, larger than 60 acres, and containing more than 800,000 square feet of commercial space. 1. "Mixed use residential" means residential units constructed above a corninercial space. M. "Mixed use commercial" means a commercial project with residential units located on second floor, or higher, above the commercial space. SECTION 4: That the transportation facilities to be financed by the fee as set forth in Section 3.54.030(A) shall be amended as follows: 3.54.30 Transportation facilities to be financed by the fee. A. The transportation facilities and programs to be financed by the fee established by this chapter are: 1. 2. 3.** 3a.** 3b. 4.** 5.** 6.** 7a.** Th.** 7c. SR 125 frem SaB Miguel Road to TelegrapH Caayoa Road. SR I25 from TelegrapH Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway. Telegraph Canyon Road from Paseo Del Rey to east of Paseo Ladera north side Telegraph Canyon Road / 1-805 interchange, Phase II. Telegraph Canyon Road from I-80S interchange to 200' east of Telegraph Canyon Shopping Center Telegraph Canyon Road, Phase I: Rutgers Avenue to Eastlake Boundary. Telegraph Canyon Road, Phase II: Paseo Ladera to Apache Drive. Telegraph Canyon Road, Phase III: Apache Drive to Rutgers Avenue. East H Street through Rancho Del Rey East H Street / 1-805 interchange modifications, Phase I East H Street /1-805 interchange modifications, Phase II 18-18 Ordinance 2866 Page 6 DRAFT 8.** East H Street from Eastlake Drive to SR-125. 9a. ** Otay Lakes Rd intersection with East H Street 9b.** Otay Lakes Road from Camino del Cerro Grande to Ridgeback Road. 10. * * Central Avenue from Bonita Road to Corral Canyon Road lOa. ** La Media Road from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street. lOb. ** La Media Road from East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway. 11. Bonita Road from Otay Lakes Road to Willow Street. 12. :Benita Reaà frø1Tl CeBkad ..\'";eæe tø £an 1figuel Read.. 13. San Jl.figHel Rea¡¡ frem I!eÐita ReM te SR 125. 14. ** East H Street from SR 125 to San Miguel Road. 15.** Proctor Valley Road (East H Street) from San Miguel Road (Mt. Miguel Road) to Hunte Parkway. 16.** Olympic Parkway from Brandywine Avenue to Pas eo Ranchero. 17. * * East Palomar Street from Oleander A venue to Medical Center Drive. 17a. ** East Palomar Street from Medical Center Drive to Paseo Ladera. 17b. East Palomar Street from Paseo Ladera to Sunbow eastern boundary. 18.** Telegraph Canyon Road, Phase N: from eastern boundary of Eastlake to Hunte Parkway. 19.** Eastlake Parkway from Otay Lakes Road to Eastlake High School southern boundary. 20. ** Hunte Parkway from Proctor Valley Road to Telegraph Canyon Road. 21. ** Hunte Parkway from Telegraph Canyon Road to Club House Drive. 21a. ** Hunte Parkway from Club House Drive to Olympic Parkway. 22a.** Olympic Parkway, Phase N: from SDG&E easement to Hunte Parkway. 22b.** Olympic Parkway, Phase V: from SR 125 to SDG&E easement. 23a.** Paseo Ranchero from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street. 23b. ** Paseo Ranchero from East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway. 24a. ** Olympic Parkway, Phase I: from Paseo Ranchero to La Media Road. 24b. ** Olympic Parkway, Phase IT: from La Media Drive to East Palomar Street. 24c.** Olympic Parkway, Phase Ill: from East Palomar Street to SR 125. 24d. Ol)'HIfJie P6fk.way frem SR 125 te Bastlake Parkway. 24e. Olympic Parkway, Phase VI; from Heritage Road to SR 125 25a. Olympic Parkway / 1-805 interchange rnodifications. 25b. ** Olympic Parkway from Oleander to Brandywine. 26. East Palomar Street from Heritage Road to the Sun bow eastern boundary. 27. East Palomar Street 11 805 interehaHge. 28a. ** Otay Lakes Road from Hunte Parkway to Lake Crest Drive. 2Sb. Otay Lakes Road t"rom Lake Crest Drive to Wueste Road 29.** Olympic Parkway from Hunte Parkway to Wueste R'Üad. 30. ** Otay Lakes Road from SR 125 to Eastlake Parkway. 31.** Eastlake Parkway from Fenton Street to Otay Lakes Road. 32a. ** East "H" Street (westbound) from 1-805 to Hidden Vista Drive. 32b.** East "H" Street (eastbound) from 1-805 to Terra Nova Shopping Center. 33a. ** Bonita Road at Otay Lakes Road intersection. 33b. ** Telegraph Canyon Road / 1-805 interchange modifications, Phase I 34. Ota-y Lakes Read at BlæhaTst Drive inteFseetien. 18-19 Ordinance 2866 Page 7 DRAFT 35.** East "H" Street at Otay Lakes Road intersection. 3€). Traffie SigH-a! IetereÐBReeåea.' Basteœ Tefliteries. 37. Eastlake Parkway from CW A Easement to Olympic Parkway. 38.** East "H" Street from Paseo Del Rey to Tierra del Rey. 39.** Bonita Road from 1-805 to Plaza Bonita Road. 10. .'\læ. Reaà frem gR 123 te Bastlake Park.vay. 41.** Brandywine/Medical Center Drive from Medical Center Court to Olympic Parkway. 42. Birch Road from La Media Road to SR 125. 43. Birch Road from SR 125 to Eastlake Parkway. 11. Birsb.. Reaà irem .Eastlake Pa:rlç~~:a-y t8 HaRte P8.i'k:".~:a:y 45. Eastlake Parkway from Olympic Parkway to Birch Road. 46. Eastlake Parkway from Birch Road to Hunte Parkway I Rock Mountain Road. 47a. San Miguel Ranch Road (formerly Mt. Miguel Road) from Proctor Valley Road North to SR 125. 47b.** Mt. Miguel Road from SR 125 to Proctor Valley Road (South), previously named East "H" Street. Hunte Parkway from Olympic Parkway to Eastlake Parkway. La Meàia Reaà Briàge ~re5siHg the Otay RÌ'leí (eRe half the eest) La Media Road from Olympic Parkway to Santa Venetia La Media Road from Santa Venetia to Birch Road. La Media Road frorn Birch Road to Rock Mountain Road. La Media Road frorn Rock Mountain Road to Otay Valley Road. La Meelia Roaà frem MaiH gtreet te soüthem. eity beliRàary. Otay Lakes Road from East H Street to Telegraph Canyon Road. Otay Lakes Road from Canyon Drive to East H Street Main Street from Nirvana A venue to 1600' West of Heritage Road I Rock Mountain Road. 48. 50. 51a. SIb. 52. 53. 5<1. 55a. 55b. 56a. 56b. 56c. 56d. 56e. ~iaiB Street fFSæ. Reek ~fel:l.ntaiH Reaà t8 La :Þ.feàia Read. Otay Valley Road (formerly Main Street) from La Media Road to SR 125. Main Street at I-80S Underpass widening Main Street frorn 1600' west of Heritage Road ¡Rock Mountain Road to Heritage Road I Rock Mountain Road. 57. Heritage Road (formerly Paseo Ranchero) from Olympic Parkway to Main Street. 58a. Heritage Road (formerly Paseo Ranchero) from Main Street to southern City boundary (excludes bridge crossing the Otay River). 58b. Paseo Ranchero bridge crossing the Otay River. 59a** Proctor Valley Road from Hunte Parkway to Rolling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 west entrance. 59b. Proctor Valley Road from Rolling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 west entrance to Rolling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 east entrance. 59c. Proctor Valley Road from Rolling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 east entrance to easterly city boundary. Rock Mountain Road from Main Street I Heritage Road to La Media Road. Rock Mountain Road from La Media Road to SR 125. 60a. 60b. 18-20 Ordinance 2866 Page 8 DRAFT 61. Willow Street from Bonita Road to Sweetwater Road (including bridge over Sweetwater River). 62. East H Street from Buena Vista Way to Otay Lakes Road. 63. Intersection signalization area wide within the Eastern Territories. 64. Hunte Parkway from SR 125 to Eastlake Parkway 65. Traffic Management Center 66. Transportation Demand Management 67. Rock Mountain Road / SR 125 overpass bridge 68. Otay Valley Road / SR 125 overpass bridge ** Project has been completed. Current projects are listed in bold Dgktei proJ:aets 3l'Ÿ: in st-rilEethF3~lg,'1 !es SECTION 5: Expiration of this ordinance This ordinance shall be of no further force when the City Council determines that the amount of fees which have been collected reaches an amount equal to the cost of the transportation facilities or reimbursements. SECTION 6: Time limit for protest and iudicial action Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this ordinance shall be brought within the time period as established by Government Code Section 66020 after the effective date of this ordinance. In accordance with Government Code Section 66020(d)(l), the ninety-day approval period in which parties may protest begins upon the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 7: Effective Date This ordinance shall become effective 60 days after its adoption. In the event that the City Council does not approve the second reading of this ordinance by December 31, 2005 the first reading of this ordinance shall no longer be effective. Presented by: Alex Al-Agha City Engineer 18-21 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A $7 .MILLION LOAN REPAYMENT, PLUS INTEREST, FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO THE INTERlM SR-125 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND WHEREAS, the Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee (SR-125 DIF) was established in 1994 to ensure that sufficient funds would be available to construct a north-south transportation corridor should the SR-125 freeway not be constructed in time to serve impending development; and WHEREAS, in 2002, the City Council approved a loan of $7 million from the Interim SR-125 DIF to the TDIF fund to finance interchange improvements at the intersection of I-80S and Olympic Parkway; and WHEREAS, alternative funding has been secured through federal grants for this project and these funds are no longer required; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby authorizes the repayment of the $7 million loan, plus interest, from the Transportation Development Impact Fee fund to the Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee fund. Presented by Approved as to form by ~~ .{.~ Alex Al-Agha City Engineer Ann Moore City Attorney H:\ENGINEERIRESOSlResas2005\5-1O-05\TDIF Resa 2.doc 18-22 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TRANSFERRING THE FUND BALANCE OF THE INTERIM SR-12S DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND AND FORGIVING THE $3.3 MILLION LOAN, PLUS INTEREST, BETWEEN THESE FUNDS WHEREAS, the Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee (SR-125 DIF) was established in 1994 to ensure that sufficient funds would be available to construct a north-south transportation corridor should the SR-125 freeway not be constructed in time to serve impending development; and WHEREAS, in December of 2003, the City Council approved a loan of $3.3 million from the Interim SR-125 DIF to the TDIF fund to fmance a capacity enhancement project widening the westbound to northbound 1-805 on-ramps at East H Street; and WHEREAS, in April of 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2959 tolling the Interim SR- 125 DIF and amending Ordinance 2579 Section 1 (c) to authorize the expenditure of Interim SR- 125 fees on transportation enhancing projects or transportation programs related to SR-125; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) program includes facilities relating to SR-125; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby authorizes the transfer of the fund balance of the Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee fund to the Transportation Development Impact Fee fund and the forgiveness of the $3.3 million loan between these funds. Presented by Approved as to form by ~ 7. t..f--- Alex Al-Agha City Engineer Ann Moore City Attorney H:\ENGINEERIRESOSlResos2005\5-1O-05\TDIF Reso 2.doc 18-23 ~)g- CV City Council Meeting Tuesday May 10, 2005, Item #] 8 Page] of 2 Public Comment of David W. Krogh (712 East "J" Street, Chula Vista (619) 421-0254) Good evening Members of the City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you tonight about Agenda Item #18, Public Hearing about Chu]a Vista's transportation development impact fees. Recognizing the importance of transportation and traffic to the public, and that financial resources are key, I commend you for reviewing and updating the TDIF. Since I spoke to you and made a proposal on April 6, 2004 on the occasion of the tolling of the Interim SRI25 DIF, I particularly commend your adoption of Recommendation #6, Toll Reduction Concept. I see from subsection (b) at the bottom page 18-4 of the Agenda Packet that investment of a substantial amount, $1.8 million, is being contemplated. While this degree of support is admirable, I have a few concerns that I would like to bring to your attention tonight. I have mentioned to you before that after hearing many people complain about traffic, I decided to try and see what I could learn, and actually do about traffic, as an average member of the public. Seeing Recommendation #6 encourages me that I have been able to accomplish my goal to some small degree. So, I will now speak further about my concerns regarding the city actions being considered tonight. Whatever we do, admirable as it might seem, we must first and foremost be concerned about and careful to abide by the law. In my research, I leamed that Impact Fees collected and not used for the intended purpose must be refunded to current property owners (CA law, e.g. section 66001). I believe that a refund to current property owners via a "toll reduction" totaling $1.8 million would be legally compliant. &l~\''''''' 4uNÐ' !D However, sta rIJe6hlfl.eaåatioR #5 concerns me, that the Interim SR-125 DIF fund be transferred to and commingled with the genera] TDIF fund, with the consequent result that funds transferred will be dissipated in genera] transportation project expenditures and not refunded to current property owners in accordance with state law. Despite diligent inquiry of responsible city personnel, I have as yet been unable to ascertain an authoritative statement of a solid safe legal basis for that course of action. I noticed that on April 6, 2004, the relevant council agenda packet contained a section titled Fiscal Impact. I notice there is no such section this year. I suggest that Fiscal Impact should be considered and documented in the public record, specifically including not only (I) immediate general fund fiscal impact (which might be negligible), but also (2) fiscal impact on current owners of property for which Interim SR125 fee was paid, which in aggregate is significant, e.g. $15 million, and (3) possible adverse fiscal impact on genera] fund due to failure to comply with state law regarding refund of unused impact fees to current property owners (e.g. CA section 6600]). Furthermore, if the opinion of expert counsel is that refunding current property owners is not required, I suggest that that statement and the supporting rationale also be stated for the public record and for your explicit consideration before your taking action. File: CVCC_Mtg_20050510_18_Krogh_comment.doc printed: 8:47 AM 5/10/2005 CV City Council Meeting Tuesday May 10, 2005, Item # 18 Page 2 of 2 Public Comment of David W. Krogh (7]2 East "]" Street, Chu]a Vista (619) 421-0254) I observe that failure to refund to property owners, and to transfer to the general TDIF will have the indirect effect of taking $15 million from citizens who have constructively already paid the fee, and passing it along to the benefit of developers and/or different citizens who buy different property in the future, since otherwise the TDIF Future Program Cost of $206.8 million indicated on page 18-7 would have to be paid by a slightly higher future TDIF of $10,800 rather than the planned $10,050 per equivalent dwelling unit. I do not find it convincing that our city should risk breaking the law merely to benefit developers or one group of citizens over another for a relatively paltry 7% difference. Growth should pay for itself on an ongoing basis; it should not be subsidized at the expense of citizens. Furthermore, in my observations and research, I note that while Chu]a Vista is above average in making good provision for ]ocal transportation infrastructure required by growth, citizens' area of greatest need is for adequacy of regional transportation infrastructure. In the area of region a] transportation infrastructure, the region as a whole is not really doing as good a job as it should, and Chu]a Vista is doing no better than anyone else. I am very proud of our city and its leadership in so many ways, demonstrating to the rest of our county the right way to do things. Because of the confluence of events and state law, the need to eventually disposition the proceeds of the Interim SR125 as well as comply with state law, we have a unique one-time opportunity to take a significant action that will simultaneously benefit our citizens, and the regional transportation infrastructure, which will further benefit our citizens. For this reason I suggest that not $1.8 million, but the entire uncommitted balance of the Interim SR 125 DIF fund, $15 million, be considered for funding of the toll reduction concept. This amount will indeed provide a very substantial impact and long-term regional transportation infrastructure benefit for the entire citizenry of Chu]a Vista. It would furthermore make Chu]a Vista a demonstrated leader in addressing the shared regional responsibility for adequately providing for regional transportation infrastructure. Therefore, in conclusion, let me summarize by suggesting that council 1) DO consider and publicly document important Fiscal Impact of actions being contemplated, and ì (qVlVll,/ ~dJ'ø~ ) NOT act in accordance with ~taff f8GGH!fReud,'<!;on #5 at this time, closing out of the Interim SR 125 DIF fund into the genera] TDIF fund. 2) Thank you for your time tonight to hear and consider these thoughts. I am of course available tonight and in the future upon request to discuss these topics. File: CVCC_Mtg_20050510_18_Krogh30mment.doc printed: 8:47 AM 5/10/2005 ~If?- -t!- ~ - - cm OF CHUIA VISTA Executive Summary Section 1: Introduction A. Development Impact Fees B. Transportation Development Impact Fees C. Historical Background Figure I Chula Vista Transportation Development Impact Fee Benefit Area and Major Projects 8 Section 2: Development A. Revised Development Forecast Figure II Chula Vista Transportation Development Impact Fee Completed Projects 36 Section 3: Fee Methodology A. Average Daily Trips (ADTs) B. Equivalent Dwelling Units (ED Us) C. Program Costs 1. Proposed Projects 2. Additional Costs Figure III Chula Vista Transportation Development Impact Fee Current and Added Projects 37 Table A Land Use Summary 9 Section 4: Program Facilities A. Revised Program Facilities B. Project Cost Estimates 1. Direct Construction Costs 2. Soft Costs 3. Project Estimate Methodology Table B Assigning Average Daily Trips (ADTs) to Land Uses 13 Table C Converting Land Uses to Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) 14 Table D Facility Cost Estimate Summary 17 Section 5: Program Administration A. Fee Updates & Collection 1. Annual Fee Adjustments Table E TDIF Program Facility List 20 Table F Cost Estimate Worksheet 25 Section 6: Proposed Fee Summary A. Proposed Fee Calculation 1. Developer Credits 2. Program Funding Summary 3. Rate by Land Use Summary Table G Project Unit Cost Estimates by Street Profile 26 Table H Remaining Cash Credits 30 Table I Program Funding Summary 31 Table J Combined Fund Balance Calculation 32 Table K Program Revenue Adjustment 33 Table L Proposed TDIF Fee per Land Use Classification 34 Section 7: Transportation Facility Maps Section 8: Transportation Facility Cost Estimate Details EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report represents the 2005 update of the Chula Vista Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets, also known as the Transportation DIF, or "TDIP'. The report includes a discussion of the rationale behind development impact fees, a brief history of the Transportation DIF Program, an analysis of the proposed fee program including updates to the development forecast, the average daily trip (ADT) rate assignments for each land use and associated EDUs and the street facility projects. The focus of this report is fouriold: · To refine the current fee program to include changes to land uses and facilities within the benefit area; · To modify the average daily trip (ADT) rates for non-residential land uses; · To update costs for the facilities currently within the TDIF program, as weli as provide cost estimates for newly added facilities. · This update represents an increase in the cost of the remaining transportation facilities to be built from $222,807,379 in 2002 to $229,819,499 in 2005 and a decrease in equivalent dwelling units (EDU's) from 27,236.5 to 20,543. The resulting recommended fee increases from the current $8,825 per EDU to $10,050 per EDU. Pageii Introduction 13 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES Development impact fees are imposed upon development in an area of benefit, often containing a number of different properties, property owners, and land use types. Such fees are governed by the regulations and requirements of Government Code Section 66000 et seq. of the State of California. The Chula Vista Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) has two main purposes: (1) To fund the construction of facilities needed to reduce, or mitigate, potential impacts, including but not limited to, direct and cumulative impacts resulting from development within the specified area; and (2) To spread the costs associated with construction of the facilities equitably among the developing properties. In the environmental review process, such as in the California Environmental Quality Act process (CEQA), a project's potential impacts are identified and, where possible, a method of mitigating those impacts (reducing the actual impact to a insignificant level) is identified. In the case of larger projects, the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) usually identifies cumulative impacts resulting from the project, as well as direct impacts. Cumulative impacts are impacts created by overall development, of which individual projects do not create a significant impact directly, but contribute to an impact through additive effect. Since the individual development projects are not completely responsible for the entire impact on any single segment of roadway, for instance, they are required to contribute a portion of the mitigation based on each project's fair share of the overall impact to the roadway system. Each project's fair share of the impact is based on the amount of traffic as measured by Average Daily Trips (ADTs) that the project places on the overall street system. A development impact fee is an ideal mechanism for identifying the fair share distribution of the overall mitigation program. II TRANSPORT A TION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES (TO IF) A transportation development impact fee is a typical impact fee designed to mitigate cumulative impacts on the local transportation network as a result of development of nearby areas. Generally, development of property produces impacts on the local road network resulting in decreased available traffic capacity on the street system. To measure the effects of traffic, cities establish capacity or level of service standards that they each consider appropriate for their jurisdictions. Where potential impacts resulting from development are projected to reduce the capacity on streets to the point where the identified level of service will not be maintained, the impacts are deemed to be significant, and should be mitigated. Typical mitigation for cumulative impacts to the system would provide a menu of improvements designed to restore capacity and maintain the desirable level of service. Examples of capacity-increasing improvements include adding new roads to the circulation network, widening or improving existing roads, installing new traffic signals or improving existing signalization, freeway interchange improvements, and improving signal coordination (Management of traffic operations). In the case of transportation development impact fee programs, the accepted method of distributing costs in an equitable manner is to compare traffic generated by each project that will potentially affect the overall system. This can be done by establishing a uniform list of trip generation factors typical for the types of uses contemplated for the developments. Usually such an analysis is periormed when information on the proposed developments is general in nature. The actual number of trips generated by the final development of individual parcels may vary from Page 2 the projections, however with carefully seiected factors, the net effect should produce approximately the same amount of revenue. II HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In February 1986, the Chula Vista City Council adopted a schedule of development impact fees (DIF) for the Eastlake I development. Eastlake was the first major planned development that added significant traffic to the street system. Fees were established to ensure that Eastlake contributed to the cost of certain street improvements, including a four-lane interim facility in the State Route 125 (SR-125) corridor. Also included in the development impact fee was the cost of constructing a fire station and a community park in Eastlake I. While the fees were imposed as a condition of development on Eastlake, City staff recommended to the Council that a development impact fee ordinance be prepared to provide for the financing of transportation improvements by all of the developments that would benefit from the improvements. In January 1987, the Council authorized the preparation of a development impact fee program for the financing of street improvements in the area east of Interstate 805. In December 1987, a report entitled 'The Interim Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets"was completed. The "Area of Benefit" included all of the undeveloped lands that benefited from the proposed transportation improvements, within the City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego, east of Interstate 805. Because the Eastern Territories General Plan Update was in progress, the Council adopted an Eastern Area Development Impact Fee in January 1988 by Ordinance Number 2251 (TDIF). The fee was established at $2,101 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). The Eastern Territories General Plan Amendment was later completed and adopted. On August 8, 1991, the City Council authorized the preparation of an "Interim SR-125 Facility Feasibility Study." The purpose of this study was to identify an interim SR-125 facility that would meet the transportation needs of the region until a permanent facility could be constructed. The interim SR-125 Facility Feasibility Study report recommended the establishment of a new fee (separate from the existing TDIF) to specifically finance the construction of interim facilities that would temporarily postpone the need for a permanent freeway/toll road facility. Consequently, projects dealing with the SR-125 construction were excluded from the TDIF program and were included in the Interim SR-125 DIF program. In October 1993, the City Council approved the General Plan Amendment for the Otay Ranch. As a result, the TDIF program was updated in December 1993, including the first phase of the Otay Ranch. For the first time since the adoption of the original TDIF in 1988, a comprehensive general plan of land uses and circulation system requirements was in place on the Otay Valley parcel. The TDIF program was subsequently updated twice in 1999 and 2002 to reflect changes to the circulation element of the General Plan, land use changes and to adjust the construction cost estimates. The purpose of the 2005 update to the TDIF ("Update") is fouriold: first, to review all previous projects and update the costs and land uses which affect the adequacy of the current fee to construct the facilities previously included; second, to evaluate the current costs and credits as several TDIF projects have been completed; third, to re-evaluate the average daily trip (ADT) rates for commercial land uses by considering only trips generated outside the benefit area and to introduce office and mixed-use residential as separate designations; and fourth, to comply with the Page 3 2005 General Plan changes including the revised Circulation Element and related Land Uses in Eastern Chula Vista. Since its inception, the amount of the TDIF fee has been revised several times, as follows: January 9, 1990 December 11, 1990 January 4, 1994 November 30, 1999 September 10, 2002 October 1 , 2004 2349 2431 2580 2802 2866 ENR Index $2,850 $3,060 $3,998 $5,920 $8,180 $8,825 This report recommends changing the fee to $10,050 per EDU. This report represents the 2005 update of the TDIF and, where appropriate, makes adjustments to the development impact fee based upon completed street construction, revised development projections, modifications to the ADT trip rates for commercial land uses, changes to the categorization of residential land uses, and revised project cost estimates. Page 4 Development 13 REVISED DEVELOPMENT FORECAST A fundamental principle in the formulation of a development impact fee is that the need for additional public facilities is generated by new development, and thus the cost of the facilities should be paid by that new development. Generally, existing facilities have adequate capacity to support the existing state of development, and any capacity that is added to the street network is in response to the need for capacity and other improvements created by subsequent development. It is, therefore, incumbent upon new development to fully mitigate these impacts, where possible. The street projects proposed in this Update ("Proposed Street Projects") provide routes to the regional freeway system for the developing portions of Chula Vista. The proposed boundary identifying the "Area of Benefit" for this Update is illustrated in Figure I. Interstate 805 is used as the western boundary for the proposed Area of Benefit, since: the vast' majority of new development in the City is occurring east of Interstate 805; traffic studies indicate that only a limited percentage of vehicle trips from the Area of Benefit are anticipated to travel west of this freeway; and the roadway system is essentially established in the area west of 1-805. The northerly boundary of the Area of Benefit begins in the vicinity of Bonita Road (the precise boundary is shown in Figure I) and 1-805 since the area to the north of Bonita Road is essentially developed, but the developing area to the south will still use Bonita Road. The northern boundary of the Area of Benefit continues in an easterly direction to encompass the developments of Bonita Long Canyon, San Miguel Ranch, Rolling Hills Ranch, and the inverted "L" parcel of Otay Ranch. The easterly boundary of the Area of Benefit encompasses the eastern portions of Rolling Hills Ranch, Eastlake west of the Otay Lakes reservoir, and Otay Ranch excluding University Villages 9 and 10. The southerly boundary follows the southern alignment of SR 125 and the Chula Vista city limits except that it excludes the western extension of Otay Valley, the entire Otay Landfill owned by the County of San Diego, and those properties within Assessment District 90-2. The proposed Area of Benefit is the area served by the proposed street projects that are necessary to maintain an acceptable level of service on the City's circulation system. The need for improvements is related to development through changing traffic patterns on the overall system. Once constructed, the proposed street projects will serve the area by providing a system of roads for residents, employees, or customers to use, or by providing new streets for existing traffic, thus freeing up capacity on existing streets which can be used by new development. New and future development in the City is generally described in adopted or proposed specific plans. However, there are large areas of land still vacant or currently used for farming or agriculture, and which are planned for development under the General Plan of Chula Vista. Table A identifies and forecasts all of the "Remaining" future development within the Area of Benefit (Eastern Territories) of the City of Chula Vista as of January 5, 2005. The development is identified by property owner/developer and is segregated by residential low density (0-6 du/acre), residential medium density (>6-18 du/acre), residential high density (> 18 du/acre), senior housing units, mixed-use residential, general commercial acres, regional commercial acres, commercial high-rise acres, office acres and industrial acres. In the columns labeled "Proposed", the table lists the number and types of development proposed in each development area based on a General Plan designation, Specific Plan, or Tentative and Final Map. The columns labeled "Built" identify the units and acres that have been issued building permits as of January 5, 2005. Those figures Page 6 are subtracted from the "Proposed" columns, resulting in the "Remaining" units and acres required to obtain building permits and pay fees within the Area of Benefit. The "Summary" columns convert the individual units to EDUs for direct comparison of the impact on the roadway system. "Remaining EDUs" are found by subtracting "Built EDUs" from "Proposed EDUs." Some EDUs are within an assessment district, etc., that has built, and received credit for, a proposed street project eligible under previous versions of this Ordinance. These "Less Credit EDUs" are subtracted from the "Remaining EDUs" to give the ''Total Aggregate EDUs" that will be required to pay the fee. Finally, the percentage of total EDUs is calculated for each development project. With this 2005 Update, the proposed Area of Benefit will contain an "Aggregate Total EDUs" of 20,542.6. Page 7 . i ._---" : I I I I - ¡ ¡ ¡ i ,-----i I I I : I I I I ~~r \~,\ \ , \ I I I I I ~--i-- I I ........-, L_~""'" I I I " I ~~ ~"" ã~ ~ m II 9 ~ ~ æ-~ ~ .!In~E;I Z :~ ~H~' Q) 0 :I. 0 ~ -. .. '¡ii 8.~ . ~irã···g ~ III _. Q ... 3 ." ;.Q ~""!~ Z ( ) . (' .... ßI g,-:<g a..¡¡r ¡jt'llaOa..; 0 . ~ ~3 q ~~;!~~~ It nI~ 11! ii m.:::J::T:J. ~~~~æ~ ,<,<11)\11 ~8'~~~.~ ~ ::r~·;J.~ 3 -1II::r: c.:J o"'C c..o .. _.~:::n !!I. 8 õ¡¡rg ; m = !!I. :J S':=¡. II!:::J::TII) = .. :! Õ'ª"III 2- S' 5f Eo1} ' &!. II! 5':::1 ~~ Ž 3 S'II) 0 r.c ~ !!' :e!!!.r.cÕ'<II ¡¡I!.";~¡. ~ ~~-g.3~ :ïg Š''K'::T~ ~:rg-_5'~ 0 {C~ So"'C ~tñæõ8!ã In ~o8;;!iiI ... 0,< a. ~~~~~[ .. i'~~.~ ~ ~~ ~ ;;- Q~IC~ 3 ~R æ ~ 9~. .. -<!!!.~ m~ ië:@ ~ Q ~g. . ~~ c.~ g s. ~á:~:S;:::J $ " - . g gf!!:r¡.2. n ? ~ "'CII~' 0 ,. ... Z " ~ 0 .. ,. -I ;! -I '" c 0 ~ "'~ Z '" m (11 .. ~ 3: !! r- m , i ,- IØ ~ ; ....Cm -Im"'ll ::1:<.... nm-l ....r-:Þ ::aO::a n'Vm C3::Þ r-m:þ :Þzz ~-Ic O'V.... Z::a.. n°:Þ WW 5=mO (l)n::a (I)-Ir- m(l);Þ (I) Z C . II . , I--~ I I I I I I ------ n ::I: CC mr- <:Þ m< r-.... 0(1) 'V-I 3::Þ"'TI m-lC) ~~c: ....Z:::o 3:(I)f'TI 'V 'V- :ÞO n::a -1-1 "'II~ m.... mO Z II ~~_____1 J ,,.....,_. I _ ,.. I -' I .-----, I , I I I ï1 r--, r- I I I I I I I (1) I I I I I_I I I I I ..__01 (1) 0 <; C () .þ.. 0> 0> m ï1 OJ () 0 ::::s - ...., x CD m m ::T c- O) r r r "'C :< c. CD 0) 0) en 0) 0) 0) ...., CD Z < ...., co ::J en ::J ::J ::J CD ~ m () m CD CD CD CD en AI » 0) ï1 r 0 () ::+ () š: š: '1J ~ '< -i ~ 0 0) CD CD 0 ~. ~. ~. '1J a. ::J 3 0) » en - ~. CD 0 0 '< AI r š: CD 0) Sl ...., ...., CD - š: m ...., '"'-I m » - 0 » -i z .þ.. ...., 0 -i ::+ ...., CD r 00 » ~. 0) 0) ::J r AI CD 0) m -- ::J » CD -- . 5"OOOOJJJJJJJJJJm a.:::::OOOCD(þ(þ(þ(tl ~ õ' 3 3 3 ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. c ~(t 3 3 3 g-g-g-g-g-:æ' -·-co CD CD:J:J:J:J:J!!. eLD,n ò ëì !:t~.!::t~.~CD :Den i»·ö)·j1)·~!E..~~~a --1- - - -S:::' I , I -0 g. ±:a G> x' en I :;:: 5 ~ 'Ø)CDICCDgJCDm¡;;m""/D O.!!;,::rcg.CD a.~:t:CJ<:= ëi)~~g ß) ~ O_œê3::ï -(")cnØ)-mJJV:...a.' ..,CD_~ ....I.'O>c: CD_--- (X)......a. -$1)_0 v . (XI ::J (") s» m...... ...... 1::_. ...,,(")_0) -c..ì»'Cñ 2.Cò a. ~!2.. ~ c '" Dr ~ E. 1m 1\)............ C !»~?=':-"?>!=>~!='~:-"'c; OOOOQ,þ..þ.O>CDOcn 1 co co . 'en ''''1 enl JJ IJJ § I~ ¡~! 1° g I~ II~I ~II~I ~. I. !gll~ll~ I~I II - - Iml I I I IJJ. ~. ¡JJ I II II~II"=II~ I I II""! I i 1,,"1 I I· Ii I1III I I ., II 'I ; I '! i i ~ I 111 iNllN I':... I~I "'1''''1"0 . N ...., '" I.... I'" ~?=' ¡!=II p>. ~¡.~ o ,o! 0 0' ¡Q t- ~-t- --J-r"1-t..J , I I, I I I I II 1 i . I', II Ii I l¡g 'I litJl I II I I...... ¡ . .þ.1' . ¡... I t· . " o OJ \ ¡ "1-1' "\'--1. ...¡--+ I 1 II II II I , II ! I i ,~I. I'" Ii 111"01¡H !~I! ! I' ! ~ ~! 10jl I 110[.0' I. -fi·.--T·.I.. -111'ì.I..... '-'r' , I': I I' 1~ i I i I I i~ '" I Ii" .~ !" , I! ! I!?> o ,¡" ¡o '-+1"-. '~-'H-r"-' I' I I I, Ii ·1 I I' " ¡ ! í I, !! ¡! ! III1I I i III t~I'r+ ~" t~~'T'T I 'I I', I ; 1 I ,,! I I ~¡;;' I i 'I~ III I . I I' I ' _ ~c_+.~I_Ll~,_L I I! II 'I Ii II II Ii , ¡ ~ I! I ¡ ! I I II i! II II . '-T-I·,_..4-J.,_LL·I..J...~ ¡! ! 1 ¡ ¡ ,¡ < II! II1III I I! ¡¡I' 'I +_jJ..1L)..t-JI-.. , II 'I. " I' , ,I I' I I III!! I i II Iii ! II '1'1 II' , 4' I II t I-'"T'''.'' .....lIlr- I I'", , 'I ! i Ii I I , " I .' ~,I ¡I 1'1' Ii 'I' . Ii' I II ···.·~t+l"rl..ll I::: ! 110>11~11'c;;1 [~ !"! I!ªII~I I~l 9 ,~.+...t. S>Jt2+Js> II II I ì I ~",llli~illllll :-" I!'" ,0 tl~o+-r."M-- 1. ¡! ¡ 1 II I ~. '" 'I I "0 I~ '" .,0>0> 0> ()1 " 000 I m ~g¡g¡~~::E:5~¡;!!.'~ 0000 00--0 OOOJ::::J (þþ) o -. -. ~ ~ 0IS = ~ (þ ~ (þ::::J::J ~ 00 "'" =CDCDCD(þ0000 cn::JCD OJ 00 00 I <.001 :J m m QQ I õ5 ¡¡o ~()()..,.., I ï c: (þ CD mz 1 Z '" ,^ ::J ::J ¡ ::JI V'(þ'(þ'< ¡ .00. ~ ~ 0 CD I ISo enl IN~~~II! I ~i ~ I I ì' ! . I , ~ I I . ¡ i X¡! "TIm I! I .".·'-01 ¡¡o o c:¡ I! i I r~~ ~ ,91 II II II ,.I.·.æll· I II I I I 1'. I ! I~ I I I ',;. I' 'I " I I '1''''I,I~I()1bl'''l....îi II"I~~ ....I. ,0> 0> l\)ïCD tn ~~ 'Oi~ J I~ Uc.nc.nCD¡OÚ)'~; I"''' 10 0001010:-' 00 -"1 "1 ..... IT-r-- ,Ii ·1-...· 1 - , 'I I I I 'I\! I 1:::1' 1"'1"'1....11;;1 ~ I'c;; I, ,0 I" "1....,.... I·'...'..·.'·. '°1 .",. ,0> ....¡"'IN' ,~ 11. I 0 L~2+Þ..¡þ+ë?l...i;. ..-Lo I -"'1--- 1 I' I I' I".".' I..' " "1' Iii I I I 11." i iN +'" t' J ' ¡ Y, . , .... -01 , 'I i I I I I.'.' I 1Ù1 N ~I I ¡ !C',,"""'¡ ?'?' I. I i j 1) i :-" ·f!I-"'-\---I-+"rr+,-.i ..+·to- i II i I I I I.. I ii..... !.I· ! ! I! I Ii, ,;, . I I I Iii ii' 1'1.'1.' i I~ ¡ ¡ \ ! ¡ ! ~ ¡ Ii,;,;, ! . -¡-it'j..-t,-l-I-'Tl1tr ° I .. II I~I I~~~I I i ¡~~.' il' i I INI ~0",1 ¡ ! ,1., 1 11 ~o 001 ¡ ! Y" ¡ ¡Tl'l-rrrîITìl 1- ! i I I I I Ii I I ¡~lol Iml~I"I",li !:::I~I -ri'Þr·tf"!f.ìl.:.¡.i..¡-·. 1.~rÎ- "I ! i I I I ! I ì; 1 I I ~, , J'! !' ,': , . I O>"lt 1....II...t..l..ll"·I~rti·TI ' I I I I ! ' I ." ' I I~I I i I I I I .~ I I..L {TrLI-WiTrrl TTJ' ~~+-i I !..~ .!.!·-H.. I I I ! I ! I I! II I I i I I I~I I I I.'¡.i.·~! ¡ II I I i I PI I I ¡i,!"1 ¡ --I-+I:ir-r"j'2rtffit-\~ ~tll--' ....- I Pili ¡ ¡Pl·....'! I .... I ¡o¡ I I i 1°1 i, I ~ i ì ' I I I I .i!' I b i"-r-t"r"r-h"I;i-"!""" .... I II I I I I I ¡~ I I N1 I I ' .."1 ",1. I.. I c:.c I ! ¡ c:.c ¡ :)~::'j ! 161 ' I I I~ì',. I I -1'=-111-1 .~ -TÎ~ Ii II¡; t ~ I! I:"~ ú) I -rj _~_I_o , ! I ,~. I I I! ..[.'.'.... I ~ I "++H¡ : I~ 'lO I I I '!il.' I I, ! I I ! Iii I I ¡ I I I ' i I I ' : I I tl'tl r -rlr ¡ -,j-rt,- 11 I Ii, t .~ -1-'--1 tti+: ~ I 01 I I -!-I ti I L I I ! !: I " i Þ I ' i I j' j' i I INI 0>,"1"'· :...1 )"--, ~~~I~-..;', I IIII II~II I ~I ....I .1-+ '-I- '0 i 01 Ii II I í ~I ~I H+-~ I~·~I-·!I lil1!11 T Iii III I . + ~4~..J- - : I I I I ,I ! i ! II I I -UJ.J I I IIII i Iii I I I 1. L _J..~'_I_" 1...1.. I I:' I i I I I! III I - -t' ."+rl'l + , III I +i- t -t I ¡ I I í ;~M!I±,,: ~ I NI'" 01 01 ¡ 000> 0 I . .. . I II1I I N ~ 0> 0>'" <D "'''' '" 00 b , I II ~ II' ..~ '" l l ,~ N 10> .,,? i-c ~.."- t- ! 0 .. I, I . II I II I I II II II L I ¡ I II j 1 '"D-Tn/H·- I'~I~ 'I!~I I ?' I!" 1....·'-t,~k I ! 'Ii II ~¡ I I ¡, , , '!, ¡ I ¡ 'HH+" ' II illl~' 1..tit.. . I1II1 I I I II I II 1'" -1_Lt_L -1-+-" i II i II II I ¡ II '" II' .. I I' I I~I'! Iii ,,' ·1' I I ..... 1 !!! " III \ I ¡ ¡ +rF I .! I I ¡¡~ " I tm- ~ I", Irh , , . II 'ãì)o-I\).... III(t Q;þ' en Q a. 0 UI Q: O"T1 r- " ""1- :0 '" .... ". CD .. "" O::,-;þ. ii)"o ." a. ~ c::: ~ 1\:1 "tI i' ~ I::J ~ III )0- en õ: ""I ~ 111 Ii I::J ;;: 111 C 0::: ... 111 ii' r- CiI' 0 en III "tI ã. !i: :0 111 :: ::æ: 2= ""I " ;t ,., !!. 0 :!I 111 (') ;þ. (I) ""I )0- ::æ: I::J 111 I::J c::: (') o ::æ: 0::: 111 :!I (I) ! Q, i en ~ i o ;:!. i ~ ~ ~ - o ::æ: . 5'OOOOJJJJJJJJJJm a.::tOOOCDCDCDCDCD c õ· 3 3 3 ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. c ~(þ 3 3 3 g-g.g-g-g.:c:o -'-CD CD (þ:J:J:J:J::J!!!. ~D,o a ò =-.~.=-.==-.CÞ :DC/) ö5·þ)·ø5"~~~~~a --I----s: I I I I "C g. ;!; JJ GJ x' en I š:: Or 51 -cocc(þCÐ m-m..... ¡¡¡ ~ ::r<Q. ¡¡¡ ~ ~ ~ o:!E ~ -'_JJo""" c: 0 ---. CD 1)-':JD>cn _0>0:::::J -oVJQ:I-roJJv:"", ..., CD --I» ~, "'c CD_- .-. CD-""Q. - 1)_ov . co :J (") D> CD...... ...... c:__ .....n_CD -a.Ø>üt ~CD a. ~.2. - C I» ØJ .2- ~ 1m N.......... C ~~~~9'~ppp:-"c:; DOaOQ.þ..þ.O)(X)ocn ;;? cg .... o I~II~ I~I~ 01 Iª-I _ I IJJ 1'1» - I~ - I II ,I II I' , ì I 'i . I í I! ! 111~11",1 11"'1 I ¡""I i"'l ~ j'" 10>; ~.þ. CD CD , II 'I' ! H'iH'?+ - i·- I III 'I I I 1 ,I '. II I I ! I 'I I l-~·-·-~'-~+-·ï~f· I I! II i I i I I ! II II I I II I I I Ii! i II I . ¡! ,.. " ¡! ' r"trrTr-l,-r ¡III ¡¡I I i I Iii II it I I I ~f+·+t... -! -.+- , I I,! I, I i Iii 'I' II II I I I I II I! I II i!! ·I'! I j iI' l ' r,'rTT'II'-IT"¡ I I' I! II I' ! 1111111111! -1-1-ri-+t* . i II I II ~ i-fHIt' I! I I' 'I I I IIIIII II -r..j..¡-t+-ti-tt- I II j II i I ill I¡¡¡ I I i II I I 1~j'1-T¡"TTJt- : I 'I I! " 'I I' !! j ¡ iN ! ~ 1......1 W IN INII~I ::,..1 -:,.. IN I'" .þ.11 1""1 '" 1"'1 '¡.>\ [9 I"'· ?>, 191 +~ll)HÇ?M'='lfl I I II I' I 1_'" I I' :;-<1-", 1';-< I~ I ¡~ ¡§) ~ 1$'1 r""11'" !o '" f"l~rrl·o'i ~ ~~I Ig¡ ~ g¡ CD m 0 to Q) . b b (:) b 1111 I , I i II II Jill i II II +t-'rl"'¡-\"'n- I II II II1I I !~¡·~.¡~41 I ! ¡ ¡ I ¡ I !191 1:-"11 11911:-"1 "I '" ~ '" '# cf. cf. cf. i ¡ 0 ~I'~~,f I»I»»:D ml(Qlm - I» ~::¡ '" N~:: g. ~i·. R<> »1 01 ml wI I I ¡ , I I I I' I I .~ 1 ' i " ¡! :;,: ¡ ! I I! 1 I !_~i Iii 1 I ! I +~t ''''rlol~I.þ.lf' '''I I I .0 1m 0> 1\)10 01 :!.~..::. !O ' 9 .~ ?11~9 ~ p,- !~ -'f'- ~·,IÇ? ~tc::>tc::>IC::>!.¡-}'?J-~·- I I ,II I I ! 1'1; IJ I I' I¡""I' '" ",'.þ.!.þ.l' I;,. 1001 ...... .......¡ """-J'..þ.!..þ. r/ iO' : I :-J. ,?> :Þ-i?>l:Þ- r( 1:-"1 I o 0 O,OiO I¡;:::: ¡O . ¡--Ll15, -~"j-1"" -'''11 -r2{'-1 , I I .,,' 'I' I' "1111'1.'.",\ I. ( ..þ. ! j '~'.! .þ.IIO II,' ,,' I I i.'I.·.··.11 I'" f\)......! ¡ i .. ~".' ! N 01.01 I ¡ ! I 1"1.' I '" bib j ¡ ,~': ¡ b Jw+T-'-I'-'!I...~-+-l ' I I II Ii' ,.' I , I.. I "'. 1..·..'."···:.1 I I ' ¡ I. ,¡ i ) !,'> I: ¡ , I I I I ¡ i I Jr., I ! I I I I I' I I I , I' ,",,' I I ; , , ! j" <i ¡ . ._~. "+'''j,,-t ."'.'.+.-,.,.1....,........'.[.. ..- '-r. --,- I I I ' Iii I íi. I i ¡ I ¡ i I~I I I I F ¡ I I ! 1 ¡ ~ !, ¡ f" ¡ II I~I I'·~I~'I. ! I ,..'...............! i I I", 0'" I I ., ¡ ,. I"'" I I ~, ...1.: c?lx: '=<tì° .J.-.. 'j.....·....·.·..·....·.....IT.. +. -I-. r I I I "I I"" I I I I! I i I . t I I I I I ¡ i k i I 'I"'I~I ~f 'I ¡" I~l ~!~¡ ?' :-"!:---J¡~ ~~:: !;-" ._.¡.~+c::>.¡... 01 <:O'+"!.fc::>r~'.¡¡.· +<e '-1'- II ¡ I'. I I ¡ I i.f. i I . I I . , F' ¡ , ,, I I I I Iii \...... I I I !OI +11 'I' ,p i If "'t......-Lt·TI.¡- ~··..·...·........·.·....·1..+ , I I 'I >!' . I I'¡ '.. I I ! ! Ui ! I I' I I. i I I..,....' I I I I~ i I I I '¡........... I ' . , I I ,¡, I ~..~ 1---D. ,.--I....!.,...,. 1-1.-.- I I I'" I I I I I f~ : , i, I, ,1. I , i I 'I I I ~.'.'........ I. I "'I I· I I .' , . " . '..~ H . I I ! I' I ......t I '! \ ¡ -r"+. -T... -ì_L -+. -·t·..l...·.·..'..·.'...·.·..·.'...... -r·. .... I 1 I ,I 1 " ' , 1 I ¡ I I I I'! , I I I I I I"'! i I ~'l.'.i. ",i I I I ' , 01 ' I· ,,,"'I ¡ . 0 ! ' "f\)¡ . ! I ! 0\ I" ,,¡ I . ;-t+¡---r-r+" j[ ·r,j-.. I I I ' 'I ! I ì;! I I· I I ' I I I, ¡ I ~.~'_NI I.."'L"'I_~I_"'£_~·I_"'I~ ~Iwlo 0 ~ ~·o ~;0m ú)'w úJ "-.J .þ.! ~U'1 .þ. o!w 01 :"~ c.n ..þ. I\) 91:-<h9 91",1:-"1:-" ¡.> ~':-J919 9 "'"'~~r''? ~ffi~~ I '" c::>¡!~~..~C:? c::>. I i I I' ,j, i 1 . I ì 'I i I ,i.i....·.. I II II ¡II i I I.¡,c ·1' I I I~~ I" 01 "'I 'I'" ~ :.., .þ. N,c, CD o alN 0 0 0 0 CD' o~, 010 ú) 0 ~ ° bier T¡"" Q ~I"'I~ '" '" ~ !i~ '" :....ëo:.... !Ö':....Jtn01.þ.JWë:oW...... "'r" 0 '01 .þ. 0 0 01 1.. 01 .þ. '" p :--JI~ PP!'>:-'" ~ ~:..:(",.:--J P ~ mw.þ.oWl\)o)No~ml\JQ) T I,! I 1 " '~I II II.. I I I.' I ....'.'..... I II I j " I I 1 I i ,1 I I "'1'+ L._,J"....- ..-! r . I I I I i I' , , I I' I . I I I I ¡, I' I W"'~ ",I",I~I i~", :.... (a :.... '"0 '"....J!tn¡CJ1 .þ. ~ O:)W ...... úJ .....,¡ 0 U1 .þ.fO 0 U1" r.n ..þ. ú) o ...... f\) 0 I\) ......,eN úJ ...... 0 C» '" ~':"'ì ¡., ~~~Io!.",,, a, I I I i II ¡ , I I I 'I i i ;. I , ,....&.! ......J! ¡ 1-" 01 '" 011 I", '" "1"",,,\ "'I~ 01 ~~~ ~~~I~~~(~I~~ 000 0 000 0 . 0 0 0 "I 0 m '" en w .- - - -" m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :!E':5 :;i ¡;;- G) f! (I) - - 0 en DJ ....- O ~I~ I» I» 0 - -. ~ m m -.-. l)-Q.CD;1\ æ. :J ::J (þ (þ a. en en ":J CD ørmm en row ¡¡¡ ~ ~ Q~O I ~ ~ oOOm~z"" "'0;: em m I Z I» cn$$< os. ........o~ S:-U> N....I.I\)" :e š:: I» I- I! I ! _-i I~_~..~~·I!"..Ltl~r i I I I J ' I' ':.''''1 I I I· I I'" , '++-h'-P=:+ t+ I III 1111"" I I III I I~I -+H+tl-~-h-'" ! j' ï I I II! ! I I I ! ' I I I I . i I I I , I '" Ir- I ..- ..·H-+-~~ ¡;j-rl--¡ I I I I i II I. Ii I I I I I ++1++_ 4~ ï I I II I II " I i '11 J II ! ! ! 'T+ ++1+ I I ! I I I I I lit' II +1 11 -T', I I I I I' , I~IEII~ II II rtìi'" i -+t'T-t- i 'I I i' ; I jl~, I~ ~ '", mO............,CDa,o"'èo (,¡Jú)010 cnmco(Ø 9"''''~:-"9~.I.:-"!O!O:Þ-1 o ~ C11 ~ CXt O,I\>.þ.I\)~_ I . i I I I ~ ~ '" CD""" 01 O)OÒ......ÙI com01IDN......,c»Otn 0"""'''''''''''''''''''' 0 oco.þ.. 0) b en ëo N in b~Í\) ~ b èD I , 01 ...... 1m ...... w "''' O.þ.~ "'''' .þ.CD 0 tù.þ....... 0 01......, ~ênbwbbbNm , , I ----L I '" ~ "'~ .þ.~ COe,,) .þ..- ?1:'1 0,0 ,,'" '" . I U1",1 oj I~~ ~~I II ä¡~ = III !to g "11 :n0 <II .... ~, I~ 'c:: ~ '" '1J :::. ° ::b ° t:J <II CII ~ '" "'i if hi :::. ~ t:J ~ hi 1:1 '" "'i hi &' r- éit 0 '" AI '1J 5. !i: ~ ~ Q; "'i !g it ." - 0 r- :tI ¡ hi ¡: (') :: :to. C/) ~ "'i éit CQ :to. ~ :t Ii: t:J Q, ~ hi t:J r c:: ~ g :æ: '" hi :tI III - 1\1""1 Q:to. :;:IXI r- "'i111 t:J -:to. "11 o :æ: cm OF CHUIA VISTA O~3 Fee Methodology 13 AVERAGE DAIL Y TRIPS (ADT's) One of the most common tools used to distribute the benefit of traffic related improvements among different land uses involves the use and assignment of vehicular trips, and further equated to the equivalent dwelling unit or EDU as described in the following Subsection B. There is a clear relationship between the generation of traffic trips based on the land use and density of a specific parcel and the use of transportation facilities. In the report dated July 1998 and titled "San Diego Traffic Generators' ("SANDAG Report"), published and continually updated by SANDAG, the traffic trips generated by various classes of land use are detailed. For example, the SANDAG Report identifies several categories of residential land use generating average daily trips (ADTs) ranging from 12 to 4 ADT's. The City historically has refined the SANDAG approach and has identified four categories. Similarly, this report also aggregates residential land uses to utilize only five ADT land use categories and recommends the following: 10 ADTs generated from a residential unit with densities ranging on average from 0 to 6 dwelling units per gross acre; 8 ADTs from a residential unit with densities ranging from greater than 6 to 18 dwelling units per gross acre; 6 ADTs from a residential unit with densities greater than 18 dwelling units per gross acre; and 4 trips from a unit in a senior housing complex and mixed-use residential. For commercial development, as in previous updates, the "pass-by" trip phenomenon was included in setting the generation rate, Pass-by trips (also called undiverted linked trips) are trips in which a stop at a retail commercial facility is one part of a linked trip to or from home or work. An analysis for the commercial trip origin and destination was also periormed as part of this TDIF update process. The analysis found that approximately 72 percent of the commercial trips are generated from within the City of Chula Vista TDIF area and 28 percent are from outside the TDIF area. Thus, the commercial trip rate for the purpose of the TDIF program could be reduced by up to 72 percent. The traffic analysis concluded that the commercial trip generation rate varies depending on the type and size of the commercial land use. The analysis is supported by SANDAG studies and verified by an independent Select Zone(s) Analysis forecast for a representative TAZ that had a commercial trip rates range of 575 trips per acre for general commercial and 400 trips per acres for regional commercial. Therefore, the recommended TDIF commercial trip rate is 28 percent of 575 trips per acre for general commercial use equals to 161 trips per acre or 16 EDU. For Regional Commercial, the trip rate is 28 percent of 400 trips per acre equals to 112 per acre or 11 EDU. Regional commercial use is defined as large shopping center larger than 60 acres and containing more than 800,000 square feet of commercial space. The same process was applied to High Rise Commercial and High Rise Office use based on the high-rise office commercial uses proposed for the Eastern Urban Center in Village 12 of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. The initial trip generation rate of 1000 trips per acre was multiplied by 28 percent to conclude a high-rise rate of 280 trips per acre or 28 EDU, The 2005 TDIF update includes three new designations based on the 2005 General Plan. The standard Office use (less than 5 stories) is based on SANDAG's trip generation rates of 90 trips per acre or 9 EDU. Since similar offices are constructed within both Industrial and Commercial zones, this rate applies to the standard office use regardless of the underlying zoning. This update is also introducing new mixed-use residential and mixed-use commercial designations. The mixed-use residential rate is based on SANDAG's trip generation rates of 4 trips per unit or 0.4 EDU. Mixed- use residential is defined as residential units constructed above commercial space. The general commercial rate of 16 EDU per acre shall apply to the commercial portion of such mixed use by the following formula: 20,000 square feet of commercial use underlying a residential use equals 1 acre Page 12 of general commercial or 16 EDU. This ratio is selected to account for the internal capture of trips and to the corresponding reduction of pass-by trips for such use. Table B identifies the ADTs assigned to the various land uses. TABLE B ASSIGNMENT OF ADTs (Average Daily Trips) Residential (LOW) Residential (MED) Residential (HIGH) Senior Housing Residential Mixed Use" Commercial Mixed Use" General Commercial (Acre) Regional Commercial (Acre) High Rise Commercial (Acre) Office (Acre) Industrial RTP (Acre) 18-Hole Golf Course Medical Center 'Based on gross acreage "Project is considered commercial mixed use only if qualifying residential mixed use is located on second floor, or higher, above commercial project. 0-6 dwelling units per acre' 6.1-18 dwelling units per acre' > 18.1 dwelling units per acre' 10 ADT/DU 8 ADT/DU 6 ADT/DU 4 ADT/DU 4 ADT/DU 161 ADT/20,000 Sq ft 161 ADT/Acre 112 ADT/Acre 280 ADT/Acre 90 ADT/Acre 80 ADT/Acre 700 ADT/Course 650 ADT/Acre >18 dweiling units per acre' < five (5) stories in height >60 acres or 800,000 Sq ft > five (5) stories in height < five (5) stories in height Page 13 II Equivalent Dwelling Units (ED Us) One of the most common methods used to compare ADTs among the different land uses involves the conversion of ADTs to "Equivalent Dwelling Units" or EDUs. Residential dwellings of 0 - 6 dwelling units per acre (LOW density) are assigned 1,0 EDU and become the base for assigning EDU factors to other land uses by comparing the relationship and nature of traffic vehicle trips generated by those land uses to the ADTs generated by this residential density category. The difference in the ratio between the land uses and densities reflects the benefit or amount of use that each particular land use receives from the circulation street facility. The basis and methodology used in calculating the fee in this 2005 Update is consistent with the basis and methodology used in the previous TDIF reports and TDIF ordinances as amended. Table C identifies the EDUs assigned to the various land uses. TABLE C CONVERSION OF ADTs TO EDUs Residential (LOW) Residential (MED) Residential (HIGH) Senior Housing Residential Mixed Use" Commercial Mixed Use" General Commercial (Acre) Regional Commercial (Acre) High Rise Commercial (Acre) Office (Acre) Industrial RTP (Acre) 18-Hole Golf Course Medical Center 'Based on gross acreage "Project is considered commercial mixed use only if qualifying residential mixed use is located on second floor, or higher, above commercial project. 0-6 dwelling units per acre' 6.1-18 dwelling units per acre' > 18.1 dwelling units per acre' 1.0 EDU/DU 0.8 EDU/DU 0.6 EDU/DU 0.4 EDU/DU 0.4 EDU/DU 16.0 EDU/20,000 Sq It 16.0 EDU/Acre 11.0 EDU/Acre 28.0 EDU/Acre 9.0 EDU/Acre 8.0 EDU/Acre 70.0 EDU/Course 65.0 EDU/Acre >18 dwelling units per acre' < five (5) stories in height > 60 acres or 800,000 Sq It > five (5) stories in height < five (5) stories in height Table A identifies the EDUs assigned to the various future dwelling units and acres of non- residential development. The total number of EDUs is 20,542.6, II Program Costs 1. PROPOSED PROJECTS The next step in developing the fee was to determine which Proposed Street Projects are required to be constructed in order to maintain an acceptable level of service on the City's circulation system east of 1-805, which are not included in normal subdivision exactions because those segments lie between two or more major developments, rather than running through one development and the impacts are either cumulative or below thresholds. The Proposed Street Page 14 Projects that are to be constructed will serve the entire Area of Benefit by either providing roads for residents, employees, or customers to use, or by providing new streets for existing traffic, thus freeing up capacity on existing streets, which can be used by new development. After reviewing comput~rized traffic models, a system of roads carrying traffic primarily regional in . nature was selected as the Proposed Projects for this Update, as shown in Table D and Figure III. The computerized traffic models reviewed were those generated for development in the City, and were from environmental analysis and impact reports, General Plan and specific plan traffic studies, and studies on future connections to SR-125 and 1-805 based on input from Caltrans The Proposed Projects are based on an analysis of the circulation system for various levels of development within the entire Area of Benefit. All of the Proposed Projects are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plans that have been adopted by the City Council, and are required by the City's Growth Management Ordinance as a condition to all development within the Area of Benefit, in order to maintain acceptable levels of service on the major roadways. The absence of contiguity of the Proposed Projects to a particular parcel in the Area of Benefit is not essential to conferring a benefit to all parcels. The Area of Benefit is based on an analysis of impacts on the total circulation system east of 1-805 for various stages or increments of cumulative development within the total area of benefit. The circulation system must be viewed as a whole. Each of the Proposed Projects will provide a benefit to every development, because traffic from anyone development will utilize the entire system to access work, commerce, schools, residences, and the many other land uses throughout the City. It is difficult, if not impossible, to isolate the value of any single street to any particular development because of this nature of traffic. A failure in any part of the system will have a negative impact in other parts of the system, and traffic from the development closest to an impacted segment of street will be just as affected as traffic from a more distant development. The analogy of a water system is sOmetimes used where constrictions or breaks in any part of the system will have significant impacts on the whole system. The Proposed Projects and the Area of Benefit are determined by an analysis of impacts on the total circulation system east of Interstate 805 of cumulative development within the total Area of Benefit. Therefore, the cost of all the required Proposed Projects has been spread equally to all new development, regardless of the location of the improvement relative to any particular development. Therefore, the recommended fee is based on an even distribution of the estimated cost of the proposed program funding requirements, divided by the number of future EDUs in the Area of Benefit. 2. ADDITIONAL COSTS Often developers will elect to finance construction of facilities through use of financing districts, such as assessment districts or Community Facilities Districts (Mello-Roos). Formation and administration costs for such districts are not included in the project management or DIF project administration costs. The developer must pay these costs separately, because the formation and administration costs are not considered to benefit the Proposed Street Projects. The sum of project costs, including "soft costs," for facilities proposed in this update is $229,819,499. In addition to the sum of project costs, an overall TDIF program-monitoring factor of 3% has been added. This factor represents the estimated cost of monitoring and evaluating the overall fee program, including traffic monitoring and growth management studies, as well as costs associated Page 15 with periodic updates to the TDIF program. The proposed 2005 Update monitoring program cost is $5,040,401 or 3% of the program's direct construction costs of $168,013,396. Page 16 . . . ~ ~ ... "I ~I~ì~ ffi ~ ~I~ ~'I~ ~I~ ~I~ I~I~"'" ~ ~II~I~ rn rn!I~I~ ~ ~I~I~ ¡§; ~1l;1~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ =I~ ~ ! ¡ ¡! C- ø:I¡o O'"!O'"!Q)¡ (þ a.¡o¡OJ O'"OJ1 i C'"¡OJ!--L- I!! CT¡ ~ a.CT¡ I oj;¡jU¡-iI=-t :Ï:~..::¡t:rñ ::ï:w-~~ "IJ'-~-d=+~II ~~I~òTI~-1otrl¡;;'+=iI ; tß'h'en m m C:i1OJ m+õ rñ ° 0 m OJ rñ -i 6> g þJ 1Ø3 I:: ø; Ø) = 0 10 0 a CD CD CD :1) $I) IS' 1) JI~ II::!Q) þ) Ø) ~:!::;. OJ S" þ) - 'S OJ 0 þ) ~ ~ ~~ g. ~ g. i ~ ~I~ ~ ~ S' S\~ ~I~I~ ~I' ~I~I~ ~ ~I~~~ ~ ~ ~II~ ~~~"C : ~ ~ i ~ !!!. 0 lõ I~ "IJ !!!, en en 0 0 <~ ~< m m 1m - -I!!!.¡- I» I» 19, 9, 9, 9, "IJ -¡~¡~. a. a. ~ I» !!!. õ' õ' !!!. :IJ en I» ëD c: 1::1 Q) "'~ .-+ ""c: c: I ! - @ ffi OJ þ) þ) þ) '" c: "0 "'0 ""C 0 a. - '< ~ ê',.'læ æ! ~I~~= ª,Iæ æ¡æ I I~II'" "'I:IJ:IJ :IJ1:IJl:i$,!!!.;g;g I "lJ1~ 3~ '" 3 ~ :IJ!!!, 0 <0 '=11 !!!. !!!, '" '" I ¡ I ':IJ :IJI:IJ 0.10. a. 0.1~ I:IJ ::;: I :IJ !!¡ !!¡ I» a. ~ ::J CD I 'I ~ :J ::J I ¡ ¡ a. a. a.¡ ¡ !: ØJ"'¿ I a. ::J læ il~1 Ig¡ æ¡ælæ'læ¡ I' 'I II I: I I I I I ! i ~I 'I I I ~I 'I~ g , 13::> ::> I ' I I I I I I II' , I I I I» 1- , !! I ~ ' ¡ \ JJ ! I ¡' :IJ I ~Iil I! I i III i i II ¡ II i! i i ¡"I III I, III I" ltJ.lJ-I- .L+-.~_LtJ .+J~-'r- L+ '-r+-W--- -.i--U i -j-i,Jml J_j1' ! J-rt' - " I 1'1 I I I "",:t I I J I ' ! ,-T I I I I I : ! ! I i I i~!! I I ! ! I ! ! ¡I: i I lilli' J I~ I I I ¡ i : ,#11 I I I I' II 'I I I I ì III I II ! I i I' I II I ¡ 1#111 ! I 1 ' I , , I I I I I . . 'I I I I I I 1 I Ii ¡ ¡ ¡, ¡ ! ! ¡, ¡ ¡! : 'I i I I I~I I~ ' I ! is! : I ~'I~I , Iii,S! ' II I ~ I I~ 0 I ; 'I 1';", ,;¡:: III i I~ ¡,I ;¡::;¡::I I I I I~ I ii, I;¡::II ;¡::-:< ! ¡ ! ~.~ ¡ I ~ '; ¡ffilffi: ¡ ! I ¡g! I ! 1?3 ! Iffi 0 en en enlen enlen,OJ OJ ; ~I:IJ :IJiO ~,Olm ¿;;' ; Z 0 ml:IJIOJ'enIOl!? "IJ OJ 0 en ;IO 'II" I "IJ 0 .. .. :;UI:;U - ~ :;U'I~I¡¡¡ Ig ~ ~ ~ ~~I~,~ gloi~ ~' ~ Ig¡ Ig Iii' ~ !~I~ig ii'l~ :;ul~ ::ï: ~rn~ Ig¡~~ g¡ œ g¡ g¡ ~I~ ~ I~ ~ ~ I~ liS' ~h~ Z'I;!1i~If§, ~I~~i~ ~ ¡g IÏI~I~ ~I'Q. 'Q.iIQ ~æ, ~II~ ~ ~ S' ~ S' ~ ; ~ ~ ':EI:E :E'I$:IJ ;;'I~ !!!.!!!, <I "m 5.1;;' len'o a. ml" " < o.!~ ;;, I» ¡¡¡ m - '" '", -~ II Iã: ã: 1ã:1~ 0.1:IJ1.§' ::r¡<g.r-~ I ,~!!1. ~ ¡:IJ ~ I' -Iå ¡¡¡ II~I~Iª' ~"IJ I:IJ ¡¡¡3 !!1. æ ~ æ ~ m ~ ~ m,,,, 1m I o.~ ",I;;~ -< 0 1»10. I 'II» ",,~~,m a. l::r ~ :IJ::r::r ! I I II I I I 1:IJ1m '::ï: ã:1 Ii g¡! I ,S', !I» I i ~ II ~ , Fml» I» a. ~ ~ I 'I' II \ I I 10.1~ m "', ~ I i II 1@II'llo.ll'I'lmmm ¡} , ¡ I - I ~¡! I!!! I >= "IJ I ! I I I Ii, I I~\~ I 1», I II:! I ! r I I I I I iif¡ i ! i 1I11I i I! I~I¡I i I i!l! III j ! II !II IIIII II ~II 'I i ¡ Iii ,¡III i II' 'III~I! III! I I ! I I ~ I I' I I', I I I ì , , I I:IJI ' J I ¡, 1, ! i I I I , I L I J' I' i I I 10.1 I , : I I i L L -¡'-¡-'+-liT¡I--rO'ënlcñtr-+O¡:DTtòLI,¡:~r-1Cñ¡-:;tiñT::¡r6TJJ OJiü>1mlen ':J::~ m en ° ::ï: en en~ 0 - N : ' I 1»1 lœl:EI:IJII»~ I'I '~I» m¡ I:IJ ~ I» !!!.1iiJ'lo =;',1» 'I» ¡:IJ cl~ I» :IJ - c C :IJ C '" g ¡ ¡ ! ¡~I 1'< (t) ~:S::¡ :D : 1:;- 3:¡ !~ \10 ~~ r< ~~ g.¡al2l ~ alg. ~I~ CD C" I~ [ a - i i ; I~¡ I~,il~ ~I~~I i~ ~~! !~ ~ ~~I~I~ æi~ ~1~'~læ ~ ~ õ· * t ~ ~: ~ ~ : ! II;gi I~ I~I II ¡¡},::rl I¡}II~I : ,1RI-'~~ Ilål I¡[I~I i~, ~! ~'" æ¡g Ig 9- I I ~ I' æl:IJ1 1-< "'I ,-< I~I I 19- II» læ !!!.I ,¡;;.~ I I~I I 18' 18' -i I 0.1 m¡ I ~I' I 'I I~ I I·::> I I I I 0 Ice 0 i Ii I I g¡, i I 1- I 1m OI:IJ1 I I § 1 I ¡::> I~ en I 'I II I I II I !~I ¡ ! ~I i Œ II~I 10.'1 I ! ! I~I II I! I~I ~ .g I I I' I I 'I~ I ! ' I ! 'lit " I i I I:IJ¡' I I, S' I I I I I I II II I I~ I I illll i ~I Iii I ¡ I i 110.11: : i \' ~ I:! II1I I I, II I ¡ ~ I ¡ II ! I II 11 IIII II __I L 1_ J-_,I :-1 Lh-lli-Lb! J-J~tu J Lh ILL ___LL.~, - 1 -LL - ~~I~~ ~~W.t~~I~I~i~¡~I~I~i~ ~t~i~ ~'~i~r~i~II~I~TIfi~l~ ~I~I'~ ~ ~I'~i~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ :E':EŒ~I:E :E ::> g'18 :E :EI:EI:EI:E g-I:E :E1g.1:E g- g-Ig- :E',:E :E :E :E¡:E,:E :E :E :E :E g-:E a,:E :E g- 9, g- g-Ig-~!ør a ê: ::J!::J a ÒIØ:I a g-¡::J Ø) al:)!ò :J :JI::> '¡ØJ.Ø) Ø> P> PJ!òlò alØJ a þ) :J10 ~ I» a ::J ~::J ä:ä: O~ Ø>!N CÞI2l Q) Ø) :4 Ø)r-'ICD :4. Q) <ÐIPJ CD CD CD ::11;:¡'1::1::1 ::111» I» ØJ ::111» ::1 CD¡Q) a. ::1IØJ CD a. CD = a.1S» Co!..... a. a. (1)~ a. CD a. a. a. a. a. C.lro (þ CD (þ CD Ie. a. a. CD Q. CD a. a. CD a. a. a. c¡s~ liiJ "":E g. I» l?i :E :E ¡¡]':E m I» ¡¡]':E a :E -" 1»'1» ¡¡]'¡¡¡]'I¡¡]' ¡¡]. ¡¡].~ I:E :E ¡¡]':E ¡¡]. I» :E a ¡¡]':E I» a I» , 131 I» !::> ;:¡. - I» II» ,- I» ,;:¡. _II» I» 10> m ;:¡. ;:¡.¡-,- - -1- I» 10> I» I-II» -;:¡. I» m - I» ;:¡. m ;:¡. j ! ! ' : ~ ~¡'< '< ~ 1 i~·! '< ~r ~ )~. ~.¡ ! ! ¡ ! ! r< ~ r ~. ~ g. ¡~~. g. ~. I J I I i I-Ig-I I I, '-I I 1'1» I 0'- -, I I ' : I I I 1- II» I - I» - I , I ' I 1ã:1 ' i i I l' '< I II» I ,.! I' 1 I ' J I I k?1 ::> ! Ii' I I c¡s I I I ì i i i: I~! I I ; I, I I' I III lãi I m I JL i ¡ I, I 1 ,,: Ii; ~ I I Iii I I L, 1 ~tff- ~t~r~I"~t""t-~1:':UI TT·~rl-I-:~rTr-¡~il-Jlfll"-·tl T- en g- g- g- g- g- 5. 1~1-g,rn"Š' I I' 1=:11 -g.jg-II I ~ -g,¡ I , I I '- a. a. a. a. a. ~ - -1-1-1 I ' - I - 0.1 I 1-1-1 I I ' ~: -- ~ - ..... :L"'I:'~~ ~I",tl'" '" L '" ::bl:rl:!",'",íl~ '" ~ "'I'" '" ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~"IJ¡ "IJ"IJ ~"IJ"IJ ~ ~"IJ"IJ"IJ~, i~ ~I"IJ "IJ!"lJI"IJ"IJ"IJ"IJ 0 ~ ~ "lJ1~"IJ"IJ ~ "IJ ~ ~ .- tt- 1--'- -- . - -: _~' tl- ! 11-' I i·-t '" "'I' I ~ ~ b t: ~ ~~~ dl~I~~;;j il~ ~ ~ ~11~1f; ~~;:;I~I~ -~..... ~ ~ ~ ~lili~lt: _2g__~;;;Cj "'g j; 00 0l.þ. 0 0 0 01 W ....,¡ ~ w 0 01 CD J;: C5 ......I~ 0 01 C!!I? ...... ...... CJ1 0 W CD ....,¡ CD J~()TI'-¡ ÎI'~ï"-I"!ll£: o¡tn"glil': ~ -"I~YI-"-n~[1019-0° ~(010 "'r·N ,tn fh fhlfh fh fh fh fh fh N fh fhlfh...... fh œlfh fh fh fhl...l...... œlœ ......Iœ fhl'" ...Ifh fh fh œ œ fh fa ~ I~I~II~I~~~I;~g~~I~~I~~~I~;~~'~I~;I~~II~~I~~I~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ° ° "'10 ° tn ( ) N tn,( ) ( ) tnIO!O ..... ° '" ° '" .....1'" tn ( ) ~ ~ '" ..... ..... ON( ) ~ ° ~ tn ° '" '" N ~ ~'~f~ ~I~ ~~::::I~ ~ll~ ~m~ ~I~ ~ ~I~ :':I~ ~1-gO _gO b: -.....~Û1illl~rr~ ~ ~ ~ t; Û1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 0 N 0 0 ....,¡ moo N N 0 010 0 0101 ....,¡ CD 0 0 01 0 0 01 CJ1 CJ1 O 0 CD ....,¡ CD 0 ~ 0 CD c.n ° o~<:? '" 0IOltn ( )liOIO,"?,tn'IO,ol."? ° Or tn ° ° ¡o 010 01010 ° ° ° NO..... ( ) ° '" ° '" ° 1 I I!!!! ¡ I ¡ , ~, !! I I ¡ I I: I I I Iii ! I I I i j i I I i I I I II ...1... 'I ... ... I ... ... ... I ...'... ... I ... ... ... I I... '... ... ... ... ... ...' ... ... _N~""" fh ~ ~...... 0 0 ,!') _....,¡ _...... fh ~ ~...... ~CJ1 0 0 0 ih 0 _...... _I\) ~.þ. ih 01~,f::.. ~...... _I\) ~...... œ _I\) _...... œ fh ~...... œ œ ih ~ _...... ......0) ,f::..OW01......c.nc.n......wm....,¡01CD.þ.CDm.þ.l\)ú)om....,¡01,f::...þ.wCDCJ1CD....,¡CD......W(..JWO.þ. CDCD ,f::......,¡I\).þ.WOCDCD.þ.....,¡m.þ.~....,¡m01.......þ.CDI\).þ.CD....,¡,f::..01U1m......WO.þ.m......w..........,¡o .þ.o ....,¡CDWCDCDCD(J)OCDI\).þ.CDI\)....,¡W............I\)CJ1.þ.CDWc.nCJ1I\)CDCD.þ.CD~01WI\)O......CDc.n 00 ~oo~~~œow~oNœ~m~woo~~wo~~œo~~~~~~wmo~ 000(J)....,¡oœU1(J)....,¡m....,¡l\)oc.n......01CDCJ1I\)CD....,¡l\)o)CDI\)~I\)CDW....,¡......c.nml\)....,¡mI\)WCD °90poow~œCJ1WI\)c.nooWOl\)mœ0101CJ1~Nc.n(J)mc.nl\)m......~Noc.nw~W~ I I ' I... ... 'I'" ... ... ... ... ... ~ ... ... ... ... ~ ... ... ... ... ... ... ...' ~ ... ... ~ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... œO)I\)WW.þ.NNIDœ.þ.......mmOw......WI\).......þ.œ.þ.l\)l\)mc.nCD.þ.wœCJ1I\)Ww..................Wc.n ~~OIO~WOO~N~NN~mN~~~~wœ~~œ~~~œ~w~~~~~N~~N Nœoœ....,¡I\)ONWW....,¡wNm.þ..þ.....,¡oc.n....,¡N....,¡....,¡Wc.nCJ1....,¡I\)WmWN....,¡.þ.......mWO~N .þ.OO·OCDW......mWœO).þ.N.þ.CD....,¡....,¡o......œ......01.þ.CJ1œCDœœCDCD....,¡......I\)O)ON.......þ.Wœ ooo~oo~~~œ~œ~ONœ~~~NOO~m~m~Wm~Nœ~Oœ~~~œœ 00 0 0 ....,¡ 0 c.n ...... CD ....,¡ CD W f\) 0 01 ...... 01 .þ. úJ 0 CD ....,¡ N m W I\) ....,¡ ....,¡ .þ. CD!...... ...... W ú) 0 ....,¡ .þ. N N .þ. ooomooCDCDCD01CD....,¡c.nOOWON......CD01c.n01~I\)01CDm~NmW.þ.~......c.nf\)......CDN .".... ~~ 001 ;::r- -111 .... -<0 o o CI) .... hi CI) .... - II i: ~ .... hi CI) c:: i: i: ~ :1:1 -< Program Facilities 13 REVISED PROGRAM FACILITIES The public facilities, which are the subject of this impact fee, are identified in Sections 5a and 5b. They include 40 street improvement projects. The Proposed Street Projects in this 2005 Update are included because of the regional nature of the traffic they carry, as discussed in Section 3B. A comprehensive listing of all deleted, completed, current, and modified (split) projects is provided in Tabie E. This listing also includes all new facilities to be added to the program via this update. Page 19 - ~---_._._--- .., - (.) "'I: LI.. ::e "'I: IX: (: LLlO LLI: .., Q: LI.. - "'I:Q ¡..¡.. .... C/) - .., >- .... , I~I~¡ ¡~j~I~I~I~1 ¡~J~I~J~j~I~I' I ¡ I I~'~I~I~I 1~¡~I~I~j~I~ ~I~'~ ITIIU' ¡I,) ~"IDi_e".~'I~I~lœiID!I_I~I~',m¡ø¡IDI~ _1)'¡')¡Ø!~I.~",'~I"_el~¡m¡ID¡ID¡$ím¡WIøl,~1 I,~ ~I ;......._, ....... _._'_1_ c:............. _,_.""'" .......c: . , ,,_,.................... -¡_._j-\-.......,_............. ......_1 I !ÆiI2;W1Æi~!2¡~¡Æ œ¡~12¡ÆI~~$J$¡m' ! ¡ )~jÆ¡$~Æ!W¡$j~!ÆjÆ,Æ¡Æ;~!Æ¡Æ¡~i1Æ!Æ¡ ¡ CI... 0..; t: f 0.., 0.; 0..: 0.., 0..1 t:: ¡ 0..1 0.. 0.10..: a...¡ QJ t:: j ¡ " ! 0.' oj Coo' a..¡ I:: ¡ a..: 0.1 Q-j 0..' o...j Q) Q.j a.. CL¡ ¡ ~ 0..' ¡ ¡E!EI~¡E!ElE!E¡E:~¡E¡E!E E!E]E¡~\ ' , !EIE¡E1E¡~jE¡E!E'ElE\E¡E¡E1E¡ØjElE¡ 1 ¡olo Ü¡,O!O¡OI01,O¡üJO¡O¡o!OjO¡O;Ü¡ 1 í !OlO~OiOiÜ!O¡O!ojo'IOiO¡O\,O¡01 ¡oro! J.::iÜ¡ (O¡O¡ü¡üjü¡ ¡Ü¡ü¡ü Ü¡ü¡ü¡ ! ~ !ü~üjü¡ü¡ ¡Ü!Ü¡Ü~ü¡ü!ü!ü;Ü!ü¡ !ü!Ü¡ -,~~"; "t-~r-1"--i~-T"-!'1-~rr-1'--t'--r-:-r-~-'t-r-+'-i"-t-'r"T"-'~I"-'"'¡-'-r--t'--t-t-1;'"r-'-"!1--'r~-1 , ¡ j ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ 'I ' I ' ' ¡ i ' ; ¡ ¡ , ¡ j j [I i 1 1 , j , , ! I ' " ' ! I I ' , ; " I I I I ' , I i I' i I Ii' , , , , , I ' , I I I' I I , ¡ r ,\ "\ ¡ I I , I ' J ¡ ,¡ ¡, ¡ (I ¡ ¡ ( ¡ i r I ' I I ¡ . ( ,¡ ,¡ j 'j I ¡ , j II " \ 'I I I I ' I I I ': I I ~I I , I I I I' I I' I I' " I 'I I II I I I ! ! ¡ , ! 0)1 ,j ,'I ¡ ¡ ,,¡ j J,,! ¡ ¡ ¡ "I " Iffi II ¡ ¡ ¡ 1 ¡ ! ,¡ ¡ ¡ 'I ¡ ¡ i ! ,; t! 1 ¡ ! , t-¡: ,¡ ¡ )-', ¡, I I ¡, 'I' II I 'I'~I !! ¡ ¡"º! I ! 11 ! ¡ ~'~I ! : ~ ! ¡ I ¡ >J ! ~ 1 II : ! : ! I ! i ! I I 1:: I 'I' ,2 I I I I 11::, I I I , , ' ,"', I ' " I II I' : ,co ¡ ì : 1.£, , I ! ~ ¡ ctI! I ¡ ¡ ¡ , ¡ ¡~j ¡ ¡ : ' ! ! I !' I i II~II II I ! I~! : ! I ! I j~1 i II I ¡ ! I lêi ; I Iii! II ! I I , I ' lø, I 'I UI ' " ,Ø, I' I ' '~' I II ' " I I ' I .11 I I :~I I 'l' 1.>11 I II I ·1' I I~t I 1 I I 'I I Izøl 1 I I' t I l' \ , ,> "'::1" I>' ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ , ( ~-'"ll~'" t-' j--., ,-'¡--r--r---1'---';'-";:- -"--r-¡-" I-¡ "-1'+ l"¡-'r-+-I"+..I.- -.,.. "-'j I 'i, ì ' I ' I ,I !' I !, I 'I' I I I I II I I , I' 'I ì i I i I I ¡ j 1 I 1 I " I i I ¡ I' I I I ! , I ! I, 'I" I I , ¡ ! ¡ , I I I ¡ ¡ ¡ 1 I "'I ! 1 ¡ , ¡ I' 1 I I I' I I ¡ ¡ ! j f t l I ¡ ¡ 'I 1 I ! ¡ ¡ ¡ , ! ¡ I ¡ !, !!: j I ." I ' , I . . I' I 'I' I " "" I I ' I I , I I I II I I ' I I' I 1 I ' , I I I', I I 11:" I , I I I II \ ¡! ¡ \ .....1 ,j I j j ; ¡ ! ! : ! J ; \ I 1IIIðll I : I II ! 'I~i I i I III I i II ! ì I ! !j! ! I ! ¡ ¡ i II I, ' I, I "'I I I ,I I (f), I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ,01 I I I : I I ,I I I I 1£ I I 'I' I I I II I' I I' I, I I I ,I I' ¡CO I ; I' I I' I I I I I ctI 0..; ¡ ~ 1 '_ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ! f ¡ ) , ¡ j 0 ¡ ¡ !' !'! 111.g¡1¡ 1~11:': I i I I I iÆi II i ! : III i II : i : if¡ ,~I ¡ i : !~. II I I I I j, I(f) ¡.¡§ I I I I I i 1£1 10011 I I I : '12 151 I(f)i I i I I Ej 1 I ' I I 01 j~~§ ¡ ¡ I ! ¡ §i-o § '- ! ¡~ "OJ ~1(t\..8: I-§,¡iêi'-! ! !35;_ >- I- I ~I i~Iá5lðl~i i II I Igl~1 §'i¡ÆIE: II I I '~!!'I §!~i ª1$I~i~i~!EI$I,~'~ £1 ¡~ ~I (/)¡~j Q)! ill, 1 1..0' Qj (I;Ijü ('0 (.) _ ::I¡íl.. CC,-II.~ a..! '- ('OJ;:', ü íl.. E U'LO "6 E I ~~ l.æ¡-2I{j1 ~ ¡ I bl ~1~'êI~i~lgl¡¡' i 1~211 an :¡;1~i21~1;",2i ~2'''''1.21 ~'I~II øl.21 ~ 10 ~¡ ~¡'5¡ : ! ¡ci:l.sn"~n 01 ~I~¡ æ¡ : ¡ 1...,;1 § ~"~~.g¡ §¡ ðL~r~¡~¡ §!8 æ .2"- d:!~¡æ! , W '¡;¡,w'<la:: ! I !(f)IE'a:'ür1wIO,ül I ! ::;:IIICLICLI(f)III(f)t'0IüI0III(f)IW1'QI(/)I.::JIWI -1~-r---¡" ,·...~-'"t--......,-t- -¡-'t-+-'+-'+¡-'''+ 4-"~- i-'-- ""-4---r-,-r+-- "" f-¡ I I ' I I ' I 1 I I I I Ii. 1 I I I 1 , I , , I 1 I ' , I I ì' '1 I I ¡ ì ! ¡ ¡ ¡ j ¡ ! ! ! ¡ ; : \ ¡ I ¡ ! ¡ ¡ ; ¡ ¡ ! ! ! , ¡ : ¡ j ¡ I I ¡ ! ! ! ; J " : I ¡ ] I' ¡ ! ! ¡ ! I: ! ¡ , ,. I' j ! : : I' , " I I I I I j , ,¡ I ' ¡ J ; ! , ¡ ill i ! Ii' i II ¡ II i i i I II I' I' I I I I 'I II I II I I I 'I 'I I I I I ¡ I ~ ¡ ¡ f " r t , \ 1 ! ! ,~ ,I" !' ¡ ¡ ! I II I ¡ I : i I I 1 ' II' I i II I ! ¡Ii Iii I' ! I 'I 'I I I I ·1 'II I I' 'I I 1 I ,I ,,"., .= : ! i-I= -( ¡ ¡ j ! !! '!! !tiP ¡!! ~! II ~II ! I 'I i>¡~' ~I I(/) i.g¡ 1 I I I ' I 'I I! I: '-gl I II I I III ' I I I ! to¡ , j j CI:' (I;I! ml I¡ æ! Lul ! ¡ I ¡! ¡ ! ~¡-o "01 ~ t"O! ! ! ¡ ¡ i 1&1 I I I ¡õ3!&I&: !~Iðl Ia:! I II 'I I I ¡ 11á51a:!1 1a:1 1-'1 1a:1 'I II I I ¡'g£!<D: ! ¡ i~jai!,m~ Iwle~ ¡5¡ ¡ ¡ i I ¡ ~ð IE'5I"Od51! ¡WEe 51 011 I v¡¡~ ¡ '!O'JC>! J"cI'- " 'I 1(1:1 >-a:: >. >- l....' Ii> ~I~¡ !~I igl~I~: Ijlð ¡ffi!-lit I Ilul !~I~!~lældælði~1 ¡æ1ool 11!'ul ~I ~1~1~1~lðl~I~I~I~I~I~I~i~!~EI~"':illll II i~1 ~!~:I~I~!~I~I~I ~I~II I~! "'EI~i'~I~ c c: (/) : Q) c:' c .x '"' 0 j ct:I! ¡ L() ¡ t, ,.;;t; ('0 '- ro lO ('0' !"Çj 01-1-11:;;1 o 1.1:1 ¡ ~-H52! ~!''''Iji¡1 o,¡.2I-'1 ' I' I'''''I~I~ ~ 0'521 g,I£! 0,121""''''1 0,1.211 "'I 01 ~ (\.111.0 It) O)l (I), 0 0 L(),LO,_' '-I E - 0)' ro¡· ...... ..::::. C:¡-o Q)!......, Ø! ü! ( )!..o oIT.... an (tj =- <0 1::2: ! ~¡glg!'5~ ~¡,' 111.c¡á5¡g¡ ~~* ('O §,ã,¡jo..!l$ d:!~1 ~¡~I~! ¡g¡ã)¡ 21"Ø!.2,!o!ci:!ø¡a..! ð31 &JI¡ '" Q..t' I d:ría.. <{II- ',' w1 'üdXJ\I-'W 0 U)¡...::;¡eo,...:: a..!W!I-!o.. I-,ü W W!I-:W¡I CL...J I' " ' , 'I 1 I' , I I I ' , ; ! j ¡ I if! ¡ ] !', f ~ ' I, ! I ¡ ¡ II Ii I ! !! Iii II i I ¡ Ii ¡ 1IIIIII ki 1III I II ! III1 I, 'I:' 'I' 'I I I I I I I 'I I&J' I , I I I I II I I i I I ': i I I 'I II ; ! I' , , 'I 'I 'I 1 I I &'1 1 I 'I: I I í I I '¡ ¡ ¡ I ¡ I 'I ¡! ' : ¡ ¡ ! ¡ j ¡, ¡!! u ul'C U:U''C' I' ¡ I 1 'I I' Iii I '-01 I , 1 , 'I I, I I ,a:ia:la:la:la:!a:¡ I I 1 : I I ! II! I! I I la:, I I 'I I I I I I ,,: lei e' e, C:' C:' , , . I 'I" I I II' 'e' ¡ 1 I ¡ 'I' ~g.¡g.;~¡gJg,~ ! ! ! ¡ ! ! ' I' ¡!tÈ !-¡-j~l~ j ! ! \ 2 e¡ ¡ ! 18 8181818181 i : ! !~I~i ~1'C!ui II II I~I ~~i~18i!, J I : ~I ~WI'~i¡! ~I ~I 1~!£¡~!~I£:~)_!_i_!_¡~:æ!~¡~¡~¡~¡ ! ! !-I~i~I§¡§!~!Q...!~¡i!~~¡~¡æ æla..'~I~¡ I I "'I 0., s-¡o..,o..,o..!Ø'(I)!OOH·j) -æ -a¡_"-'.-!lJ:' " : ¡U)¡ tU -roJtij!o..¡W!o..:a..'Q... U!Ü¡a:¡a:¡ul" "I I I~ ~~;~¡~~,J:!I¡I!IJ...J~-I!~:a;!~¡,.cg¡ II ¡. \1J:!g1ã)Q...Ia..I~¡~¡lw!C1J¡( )¡q..(ã..¡0!or-¡oJõ..! , wi Q), Q)! a:d Q) Q)ii;}!d:í~êi):ü)¡ >-, >-'ë,~;~]'ë¡ . l en! Uf Eh;;;(;)[ Q)!ü) ë'ëlë¡ E¡ ~~i $1 E¡ E E! ¡ tã5!w;ã:i:13¡ã:i!ã:i¡ ('O~ ro~ co: roIO~¡oJBI "'I OJ, OJI 01 111_ j ('OJ 21-0>-1 ro! ctI!Q51 ro¡:::1' ::JI :1'-0"1-0>' ct\' m¡-o'l-o"II-O""l , !I- I- -¡¡-i¡- !-¡W,W;W Wl ¡ Ü -1'-1 II} I! wa... ,W,W¡!- W¡III I' , Q... a.. )1 ..,...:!J-q ,.. i--r-·,.....,.·'+·_~- I-"'''I-''f::!¥~-=~''¡''Î -, '''-~··r""f'''¡- 'ml~· '''~'~;-'+::1 ; f ¡ j ¡ ¡ :" ~ "rtjl.c¡ I !! j! )ct\!.c', \! IctJ~(t\j..o¡('OI.QII"'I.Q ~ M!('O,.c¡v)~,~~ro'.c,O¡ro¡('Oj~ O'o!o'~ ~'~!~i~ ~!~j~¡~¡ro'lmfO¡~ ~\~,N!MI~ ~l~~' ! ,M M, ,~j~l~ ~¡~I~,~t~,~¡~'~¡~t~\~¡~'~,~¡~ ~I~¡N N'INjNiN¡N!N N'~! ~ , I' ' ,¡, ,¡! ¡ j I 1 1 , ,! ~ j, - Page 20 .., - o '« II.. =æ '« cc (,:J 11.10 cc 11.10.. .., IXIII.. - 'o:tCl ....¡... ¡... II) - .., ).. ¡... - '~lj'l !-¡~¡-¡j¡ !~! ¡~¡~!~¡~!~¡j¡~!j¡~!I!_!~¡~lj ~f_I_¡j!_!_¡_I~!-ij! ! ¡ 1-1 ]!I ;::~I 55 I]!',' 55,1 1;::~I]!',';::~I]!,i~i]!I]!I']!I"i]!¡.' ,]!I 1551]!1]!1 I]!I 55 , 55 155,' 551 55,i]!', 55, I;::~';::~'I.;::~I 551 0) t::;o.t:, I Cl..J \Q..¡~o)o.,cu leJ ¡o...¡ !:=tCUü¡ ¡a.!t::'t:::\ 1t:t:!·t:roJt:¡ ! ! [ it:! E ø ~1IE¡~¡ OO!E!WIEiE¡E!EJEi IE; <E! f~¡E!E¡ ~Ej~(~\ ¡~~~¡~¡E!~! ¡W¡OOIW!~J 01 1 !ü O'I~Ü!" i ¡ o( ¡ 01 o¡ o! 0\ Oi, \ o¡ i 0; ¡Ü, 0; OJ ~,' O!ü1ü¡ ¡ü¡ü¡ü! O¡Ü¡ ¡ \ ¡Ü! ü " ¡ü ; ! ¡OJ ¡Ü¡Ü¡Ü¡ÜiÜ~ fÜ! 10t i 10IÜ\, ¡Üj ¡ ¡ i 'j ) ;ü~" 1 i.1 ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ '-+-"""'-_'¡'-_."-'-'-''i~.._L_.'4---A"--~--"",,...\._,,1>.,-L,.......!--'-r-<-f-r--+"--"¡--r.".""\,-"".¡.-~,.¡.-~,-,...¡..,"-".¡"."-~J-.,';~'<'-r-.--.,,,~,-¡,,-'-+--1' , " ¡ ¡ I ! 'I ! ¡ ! ¡, 'I' I ! i ! ¡ ¡ !, ¡ ! ! j ¡ j 1 ! ¡ j ¡ ¡ ! ! ¡ ! ! ; ¡ ¡ I I " ,,¡ ¡ ,"" i Ii' I , , i , i , ¡'I, , I . I I I I ! ¡ ¡ I ! \ , ¡ I t ~ ' \ ¡ i ¡ ¡ If j \ ¡ [ ~ ~ ¡ ! ¡ ¡ ! ¡ 'I' I' II' Q)! ;,' ! II ¡ II" ~ ¡ !,; I j ! i,' ! I ! ! I ¡ j ¡ ! ' ' ! ! ¡ ! !,' ¡ ! ! ! ! ! C); ¡ , 'I j' i I ~ ! , "I 'I \; j" I ' , I . , j I I 1 I ¡ C:! ¡ ~ ' ¡ j '!; 1 .. ~ ! j j ! ¡ \ ¡ í ¡ ¡ ¡ ; j: ¡ ¡ .. ! ¡ ~ ; ¡ 'I ' L~I ¡ ¡ ¡ \1" lëã! I ! ¡ ] ¡ ! ~ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ! ¡ ¡ \ !¡ ¡ ~ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ! ¡ ¡ ¡ 1 I '" ' i 1 1,-1' Iii I I 1 ' , , ¡¡I I 'I " I ' , i Ii ,,' i , I 1-¡Q5~ !~i i ! ¡~¡ ¡ : ! ¡ ! j \ ¡ ! i_I! \ I' Ir;._! !~,r;\r;¡~!,-I ¡_¡_i_II ''''1_' i~'1 I , I_I ' I ' , i',' , ¡,"" , ' , I~'I"'I I~I~'~~'" I ''''1''''''' I ,.;:::.£! I> ¡ ! !'U ¡ î! j! ¡ ¡ i'r:::' ! r ! ¡> 'r:::, ,>,>j>j>!';:::! ¡·¡::,·r:::!'ï::1 I ¡~I~II i~i 'II I~II I1II I II i I~I ¡II I~I~I !~I~I~i~I~1 II~I~I~I I i~ ~ I~I II !~I I I 1 I II i I I I~I 1 I I 'I~I~I !~I~i~I~I~1 I 1~1~I~í -"1'-F' ~-I--F'f'h-rT-++rt-j-I-+++'¡Z +, +H-T~r?+'~FI~+~'ìi~+-+..-+?=~, ~~~I I II i II I I I I I I II I I I I II Ii! I I i 'I i ! i I 'I i i ! ! I 1 , 1 I i I II I I 1 I I I I I I I I II i II I I : I , I ! I I I I 1 I I I I III i III I I' i I II!'!! I í I Ii ì II ! i ¡ I II II i II I i I I ¡: 'I i I I I : i2!' ! I I ! I ! ¡ ii, ! : I ¡ I I I I I I ! I I I 11111~18i I I1II I ! i I II ¡ I~I I I II I I I i I II I I~I I I : I I>I", i I I : 'I . ,I i I,sl 1-' , ! ! ¡ I I I I !.jg I I i I ! I I §lê.I I i I I I i I : ! !~I i~! I I I ~ 1",1 I I~I~I i I I II ~i 1¥ll! I I! ~IÆíf;~! ! ~I ! :~I ¡~:~! ! I,~II~I I I ~¡ co! !-el,! w -c!,v!rfl Õ1 ro¡ ! !¡ìla:I~¡ ¡;;'¡ !c£lfl 'I~I, :~!ifl I I~! ë! ¡ ! ,,-~._¡ ,C( øjC('([¡ ! ,......1 >¡ I ,..... -, I ¡......! ' ! ! 0 t>, I r ¡ Q)¡ ~! g}1 ¡æl' !~I:~! !*¡ü¡*!·~d~¡ ð!æ!~il II !'~I!I~I \1' ~;æ!~¡ ¡lÈl~;æ¡ o;.¡ Itê!~¡tê,~1 ~, I~II <:''''1 1(1)\ Q)l 0)' WI:;::;:-· ! ro .! E:...1 "', E'......J'+:: ¡.I::. .......'......¡G'... ,..c:'.... ..1::1"'1 r±\,. d: ! ~I.g ;~¡-á!~I~! ~¡ á3!§;¡ ~I ! ¡ 'Õ>i ~\¡'~! I-O~d:¡ ~¡ ¡J;¡ §¡d:! e~ ~I p;! æ! gl g'l (/) ¡en (0'001 !;>'....J-;::::..¡;:> IW,LL ,...¡-Jf-J " j'".Iit- ú-V ~ ,]Cr.HW !c:::I,I.,Cf.) CLrW"..¡ 4CD¡CJ)~1D a: -~~r1-·t-t!-·r·tî-f'r~~¡ ¡ i-1!l-1-¡T1-rr!i-"r~t-r" (-I : 111 ¡ I ! . ! ~ ! ¡ ! !! ! J ¡ ¡ ( I I ¡ ¡ ! ¡ ! ! ! l' ¡ ¡ ! I I ' ! , 1 i II i 'I I ! i i! I ! II I Iii II11 I I ¡ I ! II I ! , I I', ' I 1 , . , I I . I il, I I ' ! ill! i! Iii I 'I' I I' II 'I II' i I I Iii 'I 'I I I ' "I' 1 i i 11<:1 I I , I ' ' 'I ' i I I!! I· I 113i I I! I I I I i I I I I I I I , I Iii Iii I \ji, I~I III i I I I ¡II I i II I II , i I II!! 1I1I I':: I~i ! I I I U 1111' i I' I~ i,.II¡1111 II ~ I I I ': " I (J) 'I'~! I_I' ! :0' I I 13'21 i 'I I! ! _ 'æ'""" I i I I I~I I I~i ""I ,55 itl I '$1 I II' I 1';,1 !., I I",' I ill~iI1Ii!~ ijiliðllU~1 ; I I~I 1~IIJi~11 !~I~U i~I~I~U~ '~i'o..jJl~' ~!¡I~ ~I æl~i 1~1~1~1~:,'~I~I:gi:g1 i~1 1,61 I~II ~1:g1¡:I~I~I~I' II ~i3i.~I;;:i,' ~II,' 'Ell' EI~lli'êI' I Q) co _! CD! I "1::1\ «1' ::I,CC,-¡CX)Jccd ¡co! !......1 > (,:Heed CDI ctI c:: ~.=, ....ICC'- .-,-1 ctS .- UJ I~' !OJ:¡:¡ I)I _dI U)¡O, " " ¡" 1«J fü,Q...)'! ::2 ....JC/), 0 cclQ...(f)!O! 100!cn¡a:1! I I I I I : I 1 I' 'i' ! Ii! I I I 1 I 'I' 1 I I I I I, 'I I I I I I I I !"" ! \ I ! ¡ j '! t! ¡ '!!!' '! ill I 1 I I I I I ' i ¡ i I II I I I I I~ì II Ii: ' ! i " ! I I ' I, I I I 1 ' , I 1 ' I I I 1 1 ,I I ,,~I . I I ' , ,. " I I' II II ! I i II : II 'I' I I I' : I I I II! 1 'I~:I I II II II I' i I I: I I II . I ' '.: "I" I " I w I I 1 I I ' I '! j I ! I ' ] t ¡ !û'--! j j ¡ J !Ü¡ ¡: ~ j ! I : ¡ I i 11I1 Ii! I ¡ 1IIIIj!)¡ I '~i I ! I III I~i II I i I ! I I ,II III I I ,- I I, , ,-,- >-, I I' I I "'I i I .. "I ~'lji~'~!'~:li"'11~ "'11~I~i~I~Ig¡! :Üæ!IJi i ~I I I I~ i i 1~I~i~I2è1 I II",!",'I", "'I '" I~ .:£ E! I (I)¡ CJ)\ en I..::.::: (/')1"::':::::'-1'- I \~, ! ¡ W ¡ f ¡.s;:..::.::¡ ~ '~'i a:'c: a:la: ~\ ~f~ ~¡01 lø¡ID!m!~¡~!~:_"_fl¡~¡ ¡I~¡ I~!-J~¡ ¡c, ¡ ! ¡~,~¡œ!~¡~¡ ~I~¡~ ~¡ "I "I "I ",<ii' ~1-æd¡¡1 ", "" (J) (J)I(/)· ¡ ¡¡.' (/)1 ,(J).(/):CI:' ¡ ~1"'1""li' "'I "', 5> :;)'0.." 1'-1'-"- '-1 3.ï ;.-¡.¡:::::¡¡ fwc..¡ !...J _P...JI õ.....)¡~¡I 3:; \ ,-I Ii !7á!J:1 rol¡: ¡a: a: ì7ái7á!.-¡ Q1f ! !~ ~~~¡~ E! E! Ë1 Ei-I I' ! >.1 , E¡ >.I;::¡_I_¡. j ~ 1_,- !:;:::'I_I"!::! ¡-g¡.cl..c¡ !:;:::¡:;:::,~¡:¿j~¡ I~!~I:;:'I:;:I >" !>-1 len. l"CS'rtS\l"CS >.,{t\jf/) U'J'U'J, [..::::1 1"'( ¡t/J U'JIC' !ctI (,) ~ 1"""'1 '....¡ , _01 _0 0""'-0>-' "'I '10-'0- 0-1-0'0-1 "" "" "" '''' "',' "" '" 0. ~I,= '-'1' "" '" ~i",1 ", I ""~'" "'I ! ,W j, r !UJ,w,w '11-1 ....¡w r:J.!!l'W~¡CD,Cr:HID ¡W1W¡"';:;j..::::::,J:¡ ...),...J...J ...J¡ I! ¡FT~f-i--}'-"I'~T~î-j-~1-~~~-¡·""1-¡~ ¡ T,¡~!~fT-t"I-·r··t^-t;-ii·j-ï·~-1 "'I¡-'~II ' ~j~ :!~~@rco N-1(1)1!~:g¡(j)!O¡,,-¡~¡~ ~¡<o;t,LO!(d);""";CO,O)¡O~"-:C\I M'<o;t:U')tCO¡~ ï2,(1) 'O!""'I ,....¡;e,t\I¡ ~!~!t\I!C\I¡~!t\I,~!C\lIN¡C\I!N;M¡M¡M¡Mj ~M~~~M1~!M\M!M;<o;t!~~~!~¡~;~!~¡~¡~~V¡~!U')'U')~~1U')! Page 21 .... ( ) - ..... >- .... - ..... - o q: II.. :::æ q: 0: CI ILl 0 ILI~ ..... IQII.. - 'lll:Q ........ Jj'gII_Ij¡¡jì IjU_1 U_I_liJi 1 ! I 'I ,1,_1,_1 ~I E c<~J_: IC¡Cí_,CtC'C¡-'_ _)_\_ _ c c~ "I ,,;, "~j' "I "'~j' "',' "I "I~'~j'~j'~j'~jl~jl "" "', t:, rop::' , ~ ·1 tol:::! ! t:::¡ 1:::, t:, c..1 ! ¡ ! \ t:::! t:¡ ~! 7¡~ Wil ~,~!Ø'~!~!,~jE'IØ;Ø¡W¡Ø¡OO~¡~j (.)1" "r'(.) ,'(.)'(.)' 1(.)1(.)1(.),0 I , I , ,(.) ¡(.) I ",_~,_+-':. -J,-t--,,f--L.- ,_t-J_¡,~.,J.,_l_l_J_J_~.~_ ! ¡, ¡!, I ; ! ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ~ ¡ I ¡ I j ¡ I ¡ I 11 ! !, I ¡ ¡ ! Ii !I ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ! 1 I' ctI ¡ ! ¡ \ ! 1 !' ¡ I' ¡wi! I I, ~'I Iii I II ! I I I ' IQ>J ! !!1 ro!\I>.!!' ¡1!¡I'¡~:g¡! ¡ ¡Cõlc¡; e¡ ¡ ¡ro¡ j ha J ' ¡ \ , ! j.c¡-an .,11, I'~I~ ~I í~lliì", .,r~I"I~III"III!IIII~I~I~ '~''''I''' 'I~,~'~ '~I""C>Ì~!~P= ~1~1~lo¡"'I.. Q) !-c""C "'01 !"'CJ-CI'O" '01",(01"0· Q)¡"'C~I"'O "'OJ .....'"01 t IQ) Q) Q) "¡ctllQ) ctI¡~!I'Q) ·clm mlt¡ctI ctI ctI'~iQ)" ctI C C c e¡C e1ct1c¡.c¡2 2¡ctI¡e 2¡2IC¡C¡" == ~!~ ~¡ '3!~'3¡~¡~ ~~:S;!~~i~¡~ ~!8!~ " I'~II"- '-1 I, ",1,-1 i)¡11~I'-1 "I "I~, "'I '" ", '" "I ""'-I, ~ -"l'¥~+,', "+~~+,:2¥-¡'~:¿¡::+'~¡3=T';;¡~F~.µx:f· I ! 'I i I II II i ! I I i I 'I 1 I -C ¡ . 'I ,r ~ I ¡ ¡ 'I !! I! ~I I II' ¡Ii I ì ! I I II ! ¡ I 1 I ::¡I I , I i I í I I I Ii! ill II ¡I I II I I I 1~lgl, III I ! ! -ì ¡! I ¡ ¡ !~!~I ¡ ¡ , ! ! 1 ¡ tê tê :, ! ltê¡ ! ¡ ILTIljj¡ i ¡ ¡ Ii! , Ice -E¡ I, IS! I ! ¡~I1i)! ¡ Ii ! ¡ 1 ! 'I 0 0 "" I 1:21 ' I í "I "" 1 I' I I i!È 'II iij¡ iij ~! I i I~! 1<:-1 !~I~¡!! I I i!ÈIi!È! >-, Ü',Ü _Iii I ¡ 01 'I "'I I,'<:I.~! "'I II ' '~",I ""I' "I .r..r. (J) ¡ ¡a:"O¡ "I"" '0 I!+-, f Q) = Q)i· I·· ¡ !"'a¡!+-" §! 1'(j)j·¡u1 3-+-' -~ ! <oi~\ >"'1 ~ e ~I·I.O¡ I 00101 '12"Z! O!U)j"'Cil.O\!1 ~~ _ jC\l; <0, ! ,Q) C\I -' ( ~~' ~ ~ 81 1'71' !'EI.s,'I~1 1a:1, a: 1,"'I.s I:2 1'7 1 æl ~!. 0+-'.· œ! Q) CC¡ ¡([I ¡ Q)(~¡:!::¡ ¡I!J:¡._¡~! ctS¡a:¡ ~Io+-'! f:' 'I- ~ , , "2t._~~...¡2t-,¡Ef·IE4C¿r' -!¡='Æj.,,"'--4 I , i I II! I 1 I I ! I I ! .! I II I I ¡ 11 ! ! ! ! ~ \ ¡ ! ¡ ¡ ! ! I ."~. 'I j!!! J ' , , ï ¡ " ¡ 1 II I, 'I" 1'01 I , i ! I I I I ¡ , , 'I II f~ I ,I~III! 'II! I ! i I I I , ' 'I I ~ ¡ :::2: ! ¡ ¡ I : ¡ ¡ ! : ¡ ¡ ! I ;;~ I I"", I I I "'",\ ' I ' 1 ! I I !r, I I ,81 I I I g!o, I 1 I I : I" ! ! 1'~?i""'!'i ¡ 0:1' I! ! <O¡ 51 ¡ ¡ ! ¡ ! I . '¡ I '- I,' ~I 'u I 'I' _ 'S~ ¡ ¡ œ¡ ¡ 1IE¡;:;! ¡! ¡ ! I I ¡"~ ì ¡ ~ ¡ <0 ¡: ¡ W ~ IÍJ ¡ ! ! f , , ~II i I;' I, i ; ~¡!: i Iti i~:~1 i~1 ¡ I i 1:', 'I I ~I¥!,þ¡,~!, g1i 1i!È1 ~i1iíl!1 I~! ~i.<::.<:1 '1.!!!1i!È! I.!!!'I'~ :::q +-,+-,,\';'10«( I '-C1œ Q,., !œ~ \ i _I ¡"'C¡~ ~ 01 ,(1),(1)"",",," "'! '~I <:":;::1 01_' 20 '6: ¡ë¡¡ï¡¡; ''''1' 0; ,~ a:,>1 ' :2 i'¡:I:j:I:IP . ~I ¡'gl°l- ,"ë.iUJIa:I "ì2IZ'INI~I'g!.!!!1 "'I E ~I' 1ií1û)~"~>j <O! ,:::2: U') O¡ E¡!;j >-ft:¡a:,a:¡'"7J.::¡::E ·ë æ¡- o '" "'1",,),1;1 1",1:5,151-0>- -"i,.!!!' o,IIIIa:! "'I ",I OJ 0; a:! W,W-';:,ZJ ,....J¡ "T"""[ )...:;,0 I a:'a:¡U)'::2: ...J'aJ [Dt . i ~ç \~ ! I ¡! I ¡ ì ~ j ; ! ¡ I,,';! I I ,I' ,I ¡ , , ¡ I ~'d ¡ ) 'I! j ¡ j 1 1 " ~ ~¢ ¡ I \ ~ j 1 ) ¡ I' j "a) ¡, ! ¡ ¡ j I ¡ I'~ :' !,' I , I II I I I I I I'! ,I 'I"" I ii' I '" ~1 j ¡ ¡, ¡ ! ! 1 I I' I I II I ' I, ,I i , ' ,I ': i I I r:~ i 'I' I, i Iii I I I I I i ¡ 'I ' I I : ! ¡ ¡ ! ¡ :"'C!-CI"CJ ) J ¡ I I';'} I 'ii I l'OI'OI'O'a:Ia: a:1 I I' 1 l'Ol-Cf1ÐÆ I ¡''OJ I ~ j p:r:îa::a:¡ c c! c:' I '0' Ia:¡a: 1!iII!:1 ¡ ¡a:' ì ' I I I ¡P, ", ","iil iil'ii! I' a: '1'1 II ~j $f¡"li ¡ 1 ã); ¡ !têì~¡~¡~riO:=桧: "§¡"§! ¡ j .~. ~!~ I~ ~ ,=:;¡¡ j œ: Q)l œ~> >;> 01 O¡ 0¡êi5¡û),· -' I'" "'I" ,+-, ,'u +-' +-' , ,'"""'''-i.......... OO:::IOO::::::-=:' à:)t ....JL.J, JOO¡ !>,OO¡(fJ; g>; g1 (61£¡ 0; ° \"':;1.0::: I...:: ¡ ~¡:I:: :21 I ",: ~I",§:'ll r;:.§!.§ !~:~¡:ël g,g¡g,~!!""@,~¡~¡oor <0\ - +-"a]'u,~ _'W 'U¡Q) œ,œ\>-).....'..... 0 O,~,<O --=449tº.;..,~ ~::æ: !__ ¡º-t ~ ~~~Œ~.;E-J-C:;~.e:-_I~ a: a:J~ _~L , , I ¡ ! 1 , I ¡ I I , j 1 ¡ ,¡ l ¡ , M'<otILOI m:!æ~ ctSl'Æ' () "C œlh....; a:s¡.c¡ ro¡.c , 01'011 "'I "'I;..... !C\I'MI U')~~¡~,~!~~~!~!~j~¡~!~¡ffi!ffi]~lffi¡ffi!cc!g!g:CCJCC¡CC 'J.s åí~ - a. 'g::;) '0", æg ¡¡.'" '" '" ~~ a." ~'O _'0 1~'õ(.J~< a.. œ œ·- I ·0·- 0 +-' "'C ,;- e c: ~ Q)..... a.. .- åí"O "Oe "ã..sä3~a.. E ..9:"! t::: :a 3: o Q) :J 0 œ (')Oü:22 Page 22 II PROJECT COST ESTlMA TES 1. DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Construction costs for individual projects in the 2005 Update were estimated by applying an average of actual unit costs from recently completed street projects. These projects and their associated unit costs are shown in Table F, The costs of grading, drainage facilities, and landscaping are all estimated according to project length, These costs differ according to the scope of the facility. Table G shows the unit cost estimates depending on number of lanes and whether the project is a new facility or improvement of an existing facility. Estimates of direct construction costs for the purposes of this 2005 Update were prepared without benefit of detailed construction drawings. For this reason, the estimates are considered conceptual in nature and typically include a 15% contingency factor in addition to the estimated construction costs to cover anticipated minor engineering issues that are not quantifiable at this level of study, 2. SOFT COSTS In addition to direct construction costs, the following "soft costs" associated with construction of the projects are included: Civil Enaineerina: Reimbursement will not exceed 7.5 percent of the TDIF eligible improvement cost or actual cost, whichever is less, Civil engineering includes the cost of preparatory planning, survey, and design of a project. Soils Enaineerina: Reimbursement will not exceed 15 percent of the cost or actual cost, whichever is less, of eligible grading as defined in the directive. LandscaDe Architecture: Reimbursement will not exceed 10 percent of the cost or actual cost, whichever is less, of eligible landscape and irrigation within the TDIF improvement. Survevina: Reimbursement will not exceed 2 percent of the cost or actual cost, whichever is less, of the TDIF eligible improvement. Utilitv EnaineerinalCoordination: Reimbursement will not exceed 3 percent of the cost or actual cost, whichever is less, of eligible dry utilities within the TDIF improvement. Environmental Consultina: Reimbursement will be for the actual work required to conduct, obtain and monitor all necessary environmental clearances required to construct the TDIF facility, In addition to the above-identified "soft costs" associated with construction of the projects, the City imposes two other costs of the TDIF program as follows: TDIF Proaram Monitorina: Three (3%) percent of the program's direct construction costs to fund activities related to general administration of the TDIF including the following: · Strategic planning & funding advocacy; · Staff time spent in administering the fee program and the various credits of each developer; · Growth Management Activities; Page 23 · Geographic Information System (GIS); · TDIF program updates; · Supplies and equipment used to administer the program; and · Feasibility studies. TDIF Proiect Administration: Two (2%) percent of each improvement project cost to fund activities related to the City's administration of each TDIF project including the following: · City supervision of developers' contract administration; · Periorming an audit of the project to determine the eligibility for TDIF credits; and · Any other task related to the administration and coordination of a TDIF project by City staff. 3. PROJECT ESTIMATE METHODOLOGY With this 2005 Update, the cost estimates of all projects were reviewed and updated with current cost estimates, based on recent local experience, Table D presents the projects and costs being funded by the fee. A complete description, cost breakdown, and location map are included in Section 6. With many of the new projects included in this 2005 Update, topography from the GIS database was used to provide conceptual-level grading estimates. In other situations, grading was approximated by comparison with similar projects. Landscaping costs were included in the cost estimates where appropriate; since review of similar projects indicated that this was a very significant component of the overall costs. Page 24 . . . II '" :.: () r "U Z () r "U Z () r "U Z () () r "U Z () r "U Z () r "U Z () r "U Z () 0 ... i3 ~ ¡;; 5' .2. '" ¡;; 5' .2. ~ ¡;; 5" .2. '" ¡;; ¡;; 5' .2. ~ ¡;; 5' .2. '" ¡;; 5' 0 '" ¡;; 5' .2. '" ¡;; ~, .. en '" :E en '" en '" :E en en '" en '" :E en '" ~ :E en '" :E en 0 ~ " iiJ en !'; '" ~ !'; '" en !'; '" en en !'; '" en !'; '" en !'; en !'; '" en -", ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ( ) OJ 8 .. õ' ;!' ... õ" ;!' '" õ" :!! '" õ' f? õ' ;!' '" õ" ~ '" õ' ~ '" õ' ;!' '" 0 '" Cl !!< " !!< '" !!< .. 0 !!< !!< '" !!< " !!< ... !!< ex> !!< ... .... !ñiiJ õ' 0- õ' II> õ" õ' õ' II> õ' õ' 0- õ' õ' CJ ~. ë! ë! ë! ë! ë! o ë! ë! ë! ë! 111 111 iiJ'" ... ... ... ... '" '" '" '" '" '" ( ) ::f ctI () ;;:: ;;:: ;;:: '" "U '" "U "U "U "U '" '11 '" 8 " 0- '" ... '" ... '" '" '" " .. ¡;; '" '" '" " '" '" '" - g <a '" '" 0 ~ 0 " " == '" '" " '" 0 " -(j¡' 0 0 0 '" '" 0 '" )0, '" iiJ » () » () » () » » () » () » () () » O'~ <:: 0 <:: 0 <:: 0 <:: <:: 0 <:: 0 <:: 0 c: 0 c: ... ~ " a. ~ 9, ~ 9, ~ 9, 9, ~ 9, ~ a. ~ 9, ~ 9, <3 .. _, Cl æ= 1:J íD 1:J íD 1:J iD íD 1:J íD 1:J æ= 1:J íD 1:J íD 111 Õ ~ a. !!¡ a. !!¡ a. !!¡ a. a. !!¡ a. !!¡ a. '" a. !!¡ a. ~ 0 - ::e " ~ íD r is' r íD r íD is' r is' r iD r íD r is' 6:Cb 3 5' 3 5" 3 5" 3 3 5' 3 5' 3 5" 3 5" 3 0 ~ " '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 3" ~ () !'; () !'; () !'; () () !'; () !'; () !'; () !'; () :n '" .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" ~ ~ :!! ~ :!! ~ :!! ~ ~ :!! ~ :!! ~ :!! ~ :!! ~ ;II¡ 'ª 1') ( ) ~' t: ii> '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ::t ütã) :¡;Cl '" 111 '" t: 0, '" ëc t " ~ '" '" '" 111 ~ 5' '" ... '" 0 " '" 0 '" 0 ... " 0 ex> '" 50 ... -'" 0, ëc '" 0, '" ëc 0 " '" '" '" '" !;;.o '" '" '" ~ '" ... '" " 0 0 '" 0 '" :; '" '" '" ex> '" " '" '" ~ '" '" " ex> ,,~ ¡" " w W êo êo W ¡" êo " W " ¡" .Cl .. " ~ " 0 '" 0 '" '" ex> 0 ~ ... ex> ... '" " '" '~"~_'~_'"__W' ~--~._._~.~~ -"_.~~--- ~ " - '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" Cl g <;;' '" <;;' 2 0, " " ... ... '" '" '" '" .Cl ~ '" '" '" ex> ex> ... 0 ex> ~ ~ '" -" ... ~ '" -'" ... '" '" ... ~ ëc ... ¡" ~ ~ ~ '" '" " i!J '" ~ '" :1 " " '" ~ ~ 0 ex> '" ex> '" '" '" " '" Cl 0 '" ... '" ex> '" '" ... " '" f>' iiJ <3 0 :". ¡" ¡" ¡" :.... êo '" 0 :". ¡" ¡" :". ¡" :". ~ (b~ 0 ... ... '" 0 '" 0 '" '" '" '" '" ... 0 ... '" ~ Q" -,,~~.._.- ,-~._.__._, .---,.- .."-_...~_. , ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" " ~ ... ~ ... '" ~ '" ~ ~ ~ '" 0, ~. :1 ex> 0 ex> ~ ... '" '" '" '" '" '" '" f>- '" '" ¡" '" 0 '" ~ " 0, '" '" ... 0 ~ ~ '" 0, t: '" '" ... '" ex> 0 '" " '" '" " '" '" 0 9, ex> " '" ~ ... '" '" 0 '" 0 '" 0 '" '" p " " êo ¡" '" w :.... w " :". :.... ¡" ¡" 0 " ~ ~ Cl '" '" '" ... 0 " ex> '" ... '" ex> 0 '" '" ex> --,..._-~ ._-~._.~--_.. ,..._-~---,~- -.--....-.. ~~-,-,-- --~~~~..-. '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ~ '" '" '" ... '" ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" ~ " '" 0 ~ '" ~ ëc 0 0 " '" '" " :1 '" 0 ex> 0 '" '" '" '" ~ '" 0 0 0 ~ w w '" 0 0 w 0 ... 0 " 0 '" ~ '" ex> "-~~--_. -,,-..--.-.- ----- .-----,.-- '" '" ~ ~ ~ " f>- '" ~ ~ ex> '" '" '" " ex> CD .---..-.--'" '"""-~--~._. ~ <3 . '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ~~ :.: 0" ~ '" " ~ .. 0 " iiJ '" ex> ex> ... '" " ~ 0, ~ -,'" ... '" '" '" ex> " ~ '" ¡¡... ... '" '" '" ex> 0 '" 2 ~ r- 0 '" ëc 0 '" ëc '" ¡" ëc '" ¡" Q. ::ì Qo ex> '" ... ~ '" ex> '" '" " CD '" '" '" ex> õ'~ '" " ... ~ 0 " f>' ... '" '" ex> '" CD ~ '" " 0 " w :.... ~ :". ~ ¡" ¡" '" w t " '" ~ g 0 '" '" CD '" 0 " ex> 0 '" ... i3Cl_ ----, ~ <3 '" ~. 5" <a '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" fiiQè' ~ ¡¡¡ " iiJ ... ... '" '" ... ex> '" '" 9 C/) -. :) ¡" '" 0, ~ g.2 ~ ~ ~ Cl ~ 0 ... ~ '" ~ g-~' ~ " '" f>' ex> '" '" '" " :". :". ~ " " '" ¡" êo :.... i'i)rD° CD '" '" ... '" ... '" CD 0 ..... c: (§ ~~~ '" ~ ã) Cb :;:¡ Q..(ij '" 0.'" ~ <;; ,ª, ¡J. ~~g 0, CD ¡g:;;ii> " . g ¡g: êo '" ~~c:: .,-----,_.....,-- ..~._-,_._..,"'~. ..._-,_.~.__. ---- ----- ------- !J t:J ~, "'~'" ~~f.C:I g¡ (þ ~. 0- C" ~ ;l)g. r-5O ''''". .. ~ - ... ~ .. '" ~ ex> " '" '" ~::::: W ¡;; ... ex>~ ~ '" 0' "'-~~_.- ..---.- ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0> g ,. - - '" - - '" '" ., 0 ... àø ., '" àø ... 2 '" ii> '" '" '" ... ... '" '" '" ex> ~ " ... 0 - '" '" 0 CD '" '" " ~. ... '" ... ... ., -:.., ., ... àø -:.., ... :.. -:.., '" ex> ... ~ '" ... '" '" ... 0 '" '" OIl ex> 0 ex> ex> iJ" '" '" '" OIl '" '" ex> '" OIl '" 0 '" '" '" '" 0 :.... iD w N êo ¡., :.... ¡" :.. ~ ... W iD " iD .. 0 '" - " 0 0 - - '" ... '" '" - ... ... i ~ :æ: <:I:;:) .... LuO ...¡III IQ'"> o ~II: "'0.. III ..... - LI... o II: 0.. .... III III II: .... CI) ).. IX! CI) III .... "t ::¡; - .... CI) III .... CI) o o .... - ¡ ¡ ! ! , , ! I ! , ! i , ! i, f !-¡ î fD[ ! ¡g! ! ¡O~! ¡ !In! ¡ ¡,....! ¡ ¡-OO-! , !-¡ ! !1i51 1 fO! ' ¡u¡ I,' I !~ I !-¡ñ¡ I" 1 I I I ì >1 ¡! 'I ¡ i ¡ I '1;>1 ¡ ,¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ III i ,gI, 1 ¡ I I; I I ! '-I I ' I ¡, ¡ j '10 j .' I j ¡ j I I' I' I 1 ~j ¡ ~ ,¡ , I ¡~! ¡ ~ ¡ f j I j ICDI ' 1 I I: I I I ! I ã3¡ : ¡ ! I! ¡ j I I ¡]j: I I I I I I! II 1",1 I I I 1 'I i : 1]1 í I I I ! I II I l' 1 I "'I 1 I 1 1 I I 01;; II ° 1~1~-t;-L~l;;t;lof~" 011';;+-1' ° 010 0 0 010¡01010,0 0 0 0 o 0l~ ojo,olo 0'10101 1010'1'0 M C\I C\l <0 D!O¡I.() ,.... 0 0 O;M 0 I INI ICCI°.l~1 ICCIN1 CCI~,o. I ~O¡O¡! ¡Ol f 0) ¡O I I 1~1a:>1 j ¡gl I 'I"": IS¡ <FH'7~t:¡~I~ "'1~I~l~L.:':¡± ° ° 0101~10,;;r010101 101010 â âl~'I'â'lâllâlâll'âlâlâl lâlâl¡â m M ,.... (0 O,DH.f) ,....¡O 0 101M 0 .,... or- M q¡q~T""", !O~!C\I o~~,....¡o~ I ¡OjC! ¡ fa, I lo! ¡O ~! l~ia:>1 I ¡Ig¡ 'I'''"; is¡ I I I I I I! I I ¡! ¡! ¡ !' ~! wwWIW!W¡ffl¡ffl!ffl¡W¡W~ IW!Y7¡æ- ° ~,.;t; t; I;;T;;11 ;-71' ;;11 ;ll;~1 ;;¡; o o¡o¡olð!OIO 00,01 10 0'0 o 01~jO'IOIOIOIOIIO'IOi 01010 I.() M C\I!<O.'O.Oíl.()j.~ 0,01 ¡IO¡MJO N ~~! lo~!qIN! ¡O)N O_I~IO_ I 1°10 ¡ 101 I °1 ° I '~Ia:>i I Igl I 1""1 s¡ Y3ïU7¡U7!U7IU7!U7jU7!U7!U7í.U7! ¡U7iU7!U7 +1-++1 ¡-¡-t"T41--t·-iT..L1 _ _ _ _I i E1_!_ E¡ I I - -'-1-1- ':J1-1-1 :J" ·1 ¡-j ~I~ ~'~i£!oo'~I~ 0014:: '~'~I~ '" '" "'I"'I<"~'''''''' I'''', "'~"' "'1",,"'1 "'1",·,0.10001 5',""5 ~ ~ ~ ~iWjE ~I~'E ~I « ~I« :::;1:::;:::; :::;'1 ¡::>P,:::;'I'::> II 1:::;1 ¡ ¡-I¡ ¡ -I, ! j 'l' I rrll'-·¡-r·r,.,'trr III I ! ! I I 1 I I II' I ! ! ¡ 'I ' , 'j j I ' i I i~11 ! I II: I !I' I I I I ¡ I;;> i If ¡" ¡ ¡ ¡ J"CI ¡en ' ! I \ ! I I I I ~I O¡I 'I,gi I ! i ! I I I", II'~I~!~"~I I I i II I I 'E (,J' ~I O! 0 -\ I I I "' ;;::1::> "'1-'1 ~ ! ~I I' ¡·-¡O·CC <1> ' 10 E ¡"C!~¡~5!E ! "'¡::;1_, "'I 1°10>,';::'''''"'1 ! 1~1ëi31 '" > ,::i:IEI=' 01'" , '!,!'I;:I E 0ê1 I-I'-I'->III:J, CUI i en·'t:: . "CU CU ~~! .; ! j~ ",IÆ E ~! ~I ~ ",lgj'l g¡ 1ö¡ ~,~,,~ '" ~I ~_I'-I'~'~ a., oWl 0.1-1 ",I ~'..;: o <1>læ[OOìOO¡~¡O!<1>,en!=jl~l¡j¡~ l, ê ~'5l"gt·g¡ en[ J~I ~.~ CU¡ <1>¡~ t:h;¡ 't:1 ~'!ijl'!iji-gl f¡¡1 "',:gi ~1J:Ia:i'§, ~loi~!oJt:-i:J~J~t~t~_t" iëf ~ N¡M!..q!¡j")jcorì'F¡m!~¡~1 ! !~ I i I , I I II I , ! ¡ I ! , 1 , I I í ,í ': 1 i I " i~1 ! !-f,J, , ¡ j --I ! I ¡ I~I ¡'I I I'" 'I I' ¡5! ¡2J1 I ¡ ¡:B¡ ¡! 'U! I' lëi3i 1 I I j 0, 1'-1 ¡i I I I gJ II I~I i I I II~! Ii 'wi ! I I 1£ , ! '1;:.1' i I ':>.Id:>. ~:>. II "'~~I l~i~I~I~I~ õ 911 I '9 lõ¡¡õ¡I~¡Õ:c5 ~ - - i..,!....,!.. ..,!..,..,!..!..,!.. .r=..r=. j .r=. .r=.,.r=.¡.r=..r=.¡.r=. ,- I .- '0)I!"'n)n\iC)jC) ,- ~ I ~ "_":",:,,-,.- ~ ¡ !~~¡~¡~;..... ,!;; o§ I 'I~ !,!;;,i'~I'~'~'~ 'C::> I gl ~"C"C "C""C¡"C ::> - _I i~j:J':J!:J!:J U x en 00 x en'lololui(,JIU ~ ~ -1: ~!OO!~ ~ ~;~¡~ oo oo ~I(,J enr 0o¡ en en en) en 00 1i5¡W.(,J WI !oo'oo!ø!WEOO o 011"'1~ ol~lololoiOlo (,J¡ (,J ~I a. (,JI (,J1 (,J (,J¡ U'I ° 'CI'C ~ "'0 'C'Iª'I'C'C!'C'I'CI'C ~ ~ il~ ~ISI~ ~~~I~!~ ëi31ëi3 "'I.æ ëi3 ~1ëi3 ëi3 ëi31ëi3.!ëi3 õ õ ÕIÕjÕ õ õ..:9 õ~'§~c; , I' I ì ¡ ¡ , 1 I I I °l;:)! 011 ° I I 01 1ifi.1 I ò' 0 ò' ò' ~ ~!ò' ~d() ~¡..;£ ¡j")¡~ ~¡O ~1~i~!~I~ ~¡~ ~!" ~!~ !~!"":I ¡ I I I I ¡I, I -rrr-n-11tlT"·· ! II III I 111:11 i I . I I,I¡§I' ! "'I II II! '-¡¡¡, I ,~ . I, I 1 I·!;; I ~!t:11 151 c> 1 "E 10 O"'¡::;¡~ I I ~I 81 r-¡¡¡hã'1 ens ! ¡~i I¡ü L-m .iJ·~!"~o C)j:t:: _ '~~"-! ã> <1>1,:rl' mIl ã:>j"C!"C~«1 E ° "'I gll "' ,!;;,~",!~I<lu,e ~,!;;!'-j Q.1 e>I §>Ie,¡ ~¡ wi"" c> ~~~ ~I'~ILÍi:1 ¿i'~!~:?1 [ "'I I "'!'CI ,>,þ·i2'I"' ",I~ILL. ~ = =) ~ 1:..':.= en 0., >~ >-1- ol'~1 01 '" ::>I,.¡:: ""~! "'I""IC tJltJ100;-'.,001=' C' ~9tJlf- ~ ~ CO¡"I~ m;O!~¡N!M¡~ ~ ~î~¡~ ~ ~ NsN,N!N!N Page 26 Program Administration II FEE UPDA TES & COLLECTION The fee shall be collected as a condition of building permit issuance. The fee is subject to an automatic annual adjustment based on the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Index each fiscal year. Fees may also be adjusted based on updated information regarding land use or the type, size, location, or cost of proposed facilities pursuant to City ordinances and policies. All fees collected shall be deposited in an interest-accruing fund, and shall be expended only with the approval of the City Council for the Proposed Projects listed in this Update. 1. ANNUAL FEE ADJUSTMENTS Starting with the 1999 TDIF Update and Ordinance, an automatic annual adjustment to the fees was included to reflect any changes in the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index. The amount of the fee has been adjusted each October 1, based on the one-year change, if any, from July to July in the ENR 20-City Construction Cost Index, These automatic adjustments do not require further action by the City Council. This update proposes that effective October 1, 2005, this annuai automatic adjustment will be based upon the one-year change, if any, from July to July in the ENR Los Angeles Area Construction Cost Index. Page 28 Proposed Fee Summary --"---"._-~-- - -_._.__.__.....__.~---_._..~-_._.- -- -...-"-"--.--~-.-.-.-----.,,,----,,..----~,,----..--.,-,-~ 13 PROPOSED FEE CALCULA TION 1. DEVELOPER CREDITS As specified in Section 4(c) of Ordinance 2289, which amended Ordinance 2251, a developer may request authorization from the City to construct TDIF facilities, If the total construction cost amounts to more than the total TDIF fees which will be required for the developer's development project, the developer is entitled to receive TDIF credits in the amount of the excess of the Proposed Street Project costs over the required TDIF fees. The same builder can use this TDIF credit to satisfy the fee obligations for a future development, or the developer will receive cash reimbursement when funds are available, as determined by the City Manager. Table H lists remaining estimated credits for faciiities constructed by developers. The amount of these accumulated credits totals $20,667,669. This amount has been added to the proposed overall program cost to obtain the total project cost to be collected through this Update. TABLE H REMAINING CASH CREDITS - ESTlMA TED Sunbow Brookfield-Shea Otay Eastlake McMillin Otay Ranch San Miguel Ranch $ 148,053.97 $ 1,915,674.86 $12,126,753.57 $ 3,392,203,04 $ 2,137,977.80 $ 947,006,06 ~ Page 30 2. PROGRAM FUNDING SUMMARY A summary of the program funding components is given in Table I, including the overall funding requirement. TABLE I PROGRAM FUNDING SUMMARY Program Costs Total Improvement Cost (Table D) Total Soft Cost (Table D) Approximate Subtotal Facility Costs (Table D) Credits Due Developers (Table H) TDIF Program Admin TOTAL PROGRAM COSTS Program Assets Credits Assigned to Developers for Current Projects Funds Appropriated to Current Projects Revenue Adjustment (Table K) TOTAL PROGRAM ASSETS Future Program Cost Future EDU's Program Cost per EDU PROPOSED RATE PER EDU $168,013,396.17 $ 61,806,102.88 $ 229,819,499.05 $ 20,667,669.30 $ 5,040,401.89 $ 255,527,570.23 $ (19,879,661.63) $ (9,304,915.00) $ (19,528,418.79) $ (48,712,995.42) 1¡1;".tlll$Z¡~ ~"i"\ It "'r4"~ :;~tpj~8t~!L;i:;";~,~;!:r:."..;,-;~&m*;; ~I The Revenue Adjustment referenced above is detailed in Table J and Table K, Page 31 TABLE J COMBINED FUND BALANCE CALCULATION Fund Assets'· $ 9,536,850.77 $ 15,736,733,62 $ 25,273,584.39 Liabilities Accounts Payabie $ (126,416.00) $ $ (126,416.00) Deferred Revenues $ (85,098,60) $ $ (85,098,60) Total Liabilities $ (211,514.60) $ $ {211 ,514,60) Budgeted Expenditures CIP $ (4,895,454,00) $ (312,358,00) $ (5,207,812,00) Other Expenses $ (446,490.00) $ (100,749.00) $ (547,239.00) Total Expenditures $ {5,341 ,944,00) $ (413,107.00) $ (5,755,051.00) Available Fund Balance "As of January 26, 2005 . Available Fund Balance reflects forgiveness and elimination of both $3,300,000 loan and $7,000,000 loan from SR125 OIF fund to TOIF fund, The total amount to be forgiven and eliminated is $10,300,000. These actions will require Council approval. Page 32 TABLE K PROGRAM REVENUE ADJUSTMENT Combined Fund Balance (Table J) Future Revenue Adjustments Auld Goff Course Revenue Total Future Revenue $ 221,400.00 $ 221 ,400.00 Program Revenue Adjustment Balance $ 19,307,018,79 $ 19,528,418,79 rf~~ Page 33 3. RATE BY LAND USE SUMMARY Applied to the EDU rates shown in Table C, the proposed fee per land use is shown in Table L below: TABLE L PROPOSED TDIF FEE PER LAND USE CLASSIFICA nON Proposed TDIF Fee per EDU: $ 10,050.00 I Residential (LOW) Residential (MED) Residential (HIGH) Senior Housing Residential Mixed Use** Commercial Mixed Use** General Commercial (Acre) < live (5) stories in height Regional Commercial (Acre) > 60 acres or 800,000 sq It High Rise Commercial (Acre) > live (5) stories in height Office (Acre) < five (5) stories in height Industrial RTP (Acre) 18-Hole Golf Course Medicai Center 0-6 dwelling units per acre* 6.1-18 dwelling units per acre* >18,1 dwelling units per acre* 1,0 EDU/DU 0,8 EDU/DU 0,6 EDU/DU 0.4 EDU/DU 0.4 EDU/DU 16.0 EDU/20,000 sq It 16,0 EDU/Acre 11.0 EDU/ Acre 28.0 EDUI Acre 9,0 EDU/Acre 8.0 EDU/Acre 70,0 EDU/Course 65.0EDU/Acre > 18 dwelling units per acre* $ 10,050,00 per DU $ 8,040.00 per DU $ 6,030,00 per DU $ 4,020,00 per DU $ 4,020.00 per DU $160,800,00 per 20,000 sq It $160,800.00 per Acre $110,550.00 per Acre $281,400,00 per Acre $ 90,450.00 per Acre $ 80,400,00 per Acre $703,500,00 per Course $653,250.00 er Acre *Based on gross acreage **Project is considered commercial mixed use only if qualifying residential mixed use is located on second floor, or higher, above commercial project. Page 34 ~If?- --- ~-~~ -...... - cm OF CHUIA VISTA rS~7 Transportation Facility Maps ~ i "':-'--1~ c~::~,:,~)1,J/ ,;< I ",:1,C:\ : ¿,,(I ; t\\\\ . '<L:'jj)'k I i i I' j , /', I ' "J' ~"*L ,J"' 1 \/ i ir~--·.b:i ¡ ,:r,;~f¡ --- j ,1/ ,",' ("*'" .iJ1tj / l ! \ ~;..";'" \ \ \..~ \ \ , \ \-....... \ \ \ \ i ... - \ "'---, \ ' \ I . i \ i \ . . *""-" , ~;,,·;t·· ~. Ä;,,·:,L,' " g ¡ ~ II i ~ª i~ ! :5:~ ¡ I~ ~~ ¡ .. m ID !!' ~ o In g!!! ñI!tal ~ IL~R.~- ~~1iIS'2;i . _a.~a¡¡' .'. 8.,,"'" -, 3: ~&J~'..ê-~ ~~_.:¡!; I» ~~ò6[ii ;2.-<,¡¡Q~-8._, ... ~~3~1£ Iii -..... Z ;~¡JJii< GI:ã:....g~=j" 0 -<~;;~ g,~Sž.~~ N "'C S" 2. 3 Z :7111 C"J (II 0- g_,"_o=o iii~~3i~ :::I s;¡ 1II"'C Q..:::I 0 - - ~i 5'~~ æ-g Õ~ ~~ õ.~:Jo _i::7ID!:!'<O :ï; ~~; ~:¡ ~ g:!ß ~S'([J Õ'(P' ~~S;~ i;- ª'~g3 ~ ª'g ~B::T:. 1:1' GI 8" ~"O iii'S:a.~ :ï!! ~Qo~~ i3..iii·æõm~ iª-::s! mill I: ~:::I O!!!. ~ ()¡¡¡.3'~ S" ~,., s¡ im 1ii ;::;: < ([J 3 c..I»IC&J 3 a. '< !2. g: ~ III g à. ffi ID C':I.{g g,~ a.~~ ¡¡¡:o iIlõ~rr ø cnlD oll!:J"'iiì"'" [- ~ãif~sg _ ~ :T 5!!: 1;- g, (IIZ' .. ;;. .. . o 'õ' n lit -- ... " M .. -- ;! .. C ¡:: .. 3: )( " z o -4 -4 OJ!: en ~ r- m ~b::: z n o ~ 'V= r-m mZ -1m m"ll 0104 -1-1 O:Þ 104;:a "11m 'V:Þ ;:a:Þ OZ '-'0 m n -I III II , . , \ . .. \ ~\)\ \~ "C\ U ~\ , ',1\ x;¡;. , '\j~ . \\ '\) .,\?', ,- ~t~ ..at ,~ 'Uff ,\3;\[' ¡¿r4\ ~~, ,~ ~ , n :r: oC: mr- <:Þ m< r-104 0111 ï- 'V-I . ! ~:Þ" I I I ¡ r- m-l- z!:CI I I I i CD I -I c: I ! Io4Z;::tJ L_I ! ~IIIITI (j) OJ CD 'V 'V- () :ÞO- m m ~ n;:a . -1-1 G) Z \< C. ;;:~ ~ m () mlo4 m ï1 0 - - -I Z Z -I -I -< » ;C r - m ~ » - -I . '~<'Ir..__r;\{'~'~ "L, 'Y"r"'" '. '~.~--l ., vi />". i /' i i lit' <t;, ! ~;~;'~j;.: " " ¡ ¡ , it' ;,' I "II I ,..f~~---~·';~.J , ;, "J : f . ,,:,: . I I ,,' ' i JI"L ßi;} \ '\ f~.iqC; \.;';,<ÞJ... _\ ...\. \ I 57--" cg\ '" \ \ \ ~~ . ~ \ ,... II " ~.<~!/<f..~/ ..0'"~ u"" ..,~"\ . 'i/:;'~ -7·~~rY "; '. f ~ ~J..f !ç:::::? ¡ "i ~t r/' ~;j ~~}\0h v ~_ u'';;:-frr"y-. /[ ;¡J v', jV.<':< , L_ ~- 1 r--' LJ"' I , 41- , ... 4I-1..~ " 41- ''i.~ \ \~ "If.", . __ en' i .-\00 I \ \ I '__6V4 \'~ ~' . \ ~ ...' \ " ___ ___\ ~'9 \ ----,~ \ ~ \ ~~ \ I ~ \ \ I ' ¿, d\~'!l \ \ '. .L('1<> <?J!~j;:¡¿; .'" \ '(It) ;J,~'"Iti1/;!';~0":¡ r:":3 ;ti,;f<>t~ ,jF:'6~:i,>t;,;;\;ì \ ¡'/;Fj~' C,)"" ç,¡,:"l'¡' ,HI' ~" <'i ;::? ;", $i" ((/(/ it .. 0--"'''-----~ ",," N' , ';j;- ø ,I>: ~ ., , §!r~" '. c/~ c~' V~~~ ~:. ~~'~ j , , ; "~ " g ;g ~ >~ ¡~II~ I ~~ ~I~ =$1 ¡;I '" .. m .. !!' " o o VI ~~~~~~ ~ .-._.~'" .1i1i~2;i , 'QdQ"'1O ~'r::;: 'O:::: -' .. S:m:i:)ê";:r \l>m8.~~3· .. ~(I)!=I6¡~'" ;ojim- 'a !II~~~a.¡¡¡ 1II~-<8'!!!.@ Z iiI cr3 !iiI!G Ii::' :J c. ¡¡; ~~~~~ œa-;!~S:~ g. -<~II.>;:!J. Q.3ø..æ~ ftI ~ s·~3 z ~~-Q~ ii· Q'II.> a ° <I> 0.... Iii c. ª.3~!.i c.;.'I Q." a:õ iiæ.;.'Is.;:1 ~8n0·!"2 c. _. a. 0 ;.'I J II.> C!: d s.g á.g:..... s·g~ur~æ <I> 5·'< g: 3;.'1 III ° <C ::I ~õ<C õ'0· 1!!.~! i; s.a"S-3 i ::I ° ¡¡j.2:g:::I <e'g 2.0" ~:'c.~ _.= C"o!i(:.....~ lI.>=:o.....::Iæ ~¡¡¡èS~c. ð..~$~!Bã i.....~.II.>~ æ II.> g, i!!!. 0". Q~..s~ (þ~<c::I~~ ~~g:; ~ ~iS.æ'g 9~ SI,~ c.~~ i{TIi! i»O¡;; 5· ¡r .<1> CD g.s.~~ ¡¡ g. .3 !'> g. ~~.:5::1 U> ;;¡- _. ~ SI, lIIi· .. ;;. .. " ,2, ~ n ~ o ,.,.. -I S .. ,.,.. ;! ., C .. m !" J: S z o -I -I Or (I) n þ r- m ~~ z n C ;:a ;:a m Z -t þOI Zm C~ þ"'ll C.... C-t mÞ C;:a m -IÞ SÞ "'IIZ "I:IC ;:a o ""' m n -I UI n :I: CC ml'"' <þ m< 1'"'.... OUl "I:I-t :J:Þ"TI m-t- Z ;:a C) -tÞC: ....Z:::c :J:Ulf'TI "1:1"1:1= ÞO- n;:a -t-t "'IIÞ m-t m.... o Z (j) m G) s:: m z -I I I I I ï'" I I I I L_I OJ m Z m ï1 - -I » ;U m » ! i i ! i () . :< () - -I -< r - s:: - -I r- (þ (þ ~ c. Transportation Facility Cost Estimate Details CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 3B PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TELEGRAPH CANYON INTERCHANGE WITH 1-805, PHASE 1/ (CY-l02) FROM NORTHBOUND ON RAMP TO 200' EAST OF TELEGRAPH CANYON SHOPPING CENTER WIDEN TO 7-LANE PRIME ARTERIAL (LENGTH = 1.885') ~ SITE ~ \ ) TELEGRAPH ~ ¡ ~ ~ '''0' ~ 76' 64' 8' ~i-~o~------ -r--Y:5~- I I [~S"NG ;T--' "~l' -'-'-'--'L ,--"-'H- , ~ 12' 12' 1-1£1-1£1 52' [XISTlNG 2:1 MAX. 5' /2' 7' 56' 12' ." P.C.C. SfD[WALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB &' CUTrER 7-LANE PRIME (SECTION A-A) NO SCALf ....____un _.~.___ ".~____.___~__._...______,._ .--- --------------- ------- "-.----- --'--"-'-'-"-'-'--"-'---'---~-~-------' FACILITY 38 Telegraph Canyon Rd (CY-102) 1-805 Interchange to 200' east of TC Shopping Ctr Widen to 7 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 1,885 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL 1 Construction cost - Phase 1* 2 Construction cost - Phase 11* 3 Landscape & Irrigation 4 Right-of-way Linear jt 1885 $ $ $ 150,00 $ $ 788,951 1,651,949 282,750 1,100,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 3,823,650 '(Source - The Otay Ranch Co" awarded contract documents) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6%) Developer Administration (1.75%) City Project Administration (2%) TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 573,548 $ 458,838 $ 229,419 $ 66,914 $ 76,473 $ 1,405,192 $ 5,228,842 PROJECT COST . CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 7 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: /-805 /N T[RCHANGE MOD/FICA nONS EAST 'H' STREET (STM-J05) W/DEN & IMPROVE ON ANO OFF RAMPS ~ " ~CHULA lo7STA CiTY LIMIT .{'''''s /'. .ý. s~ 1:".{'/, ~ ¡ 9;-' <:¡ ~ k! <t ?J ;¡,¡ COST ESTIMATE I FACILITY 7C East H St 1-805 Interchange Phase /I Interchange Modifications (STM-356) 1 Construction cost 2 Special Items Habitat mitigation Acres 2.79 $70,000 2,100,496 195,300 $195,300 $ 2,295,796 TOTAL HARD COSTS (Source - Public bid results, City of Chula Vista) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Inspection/Administration (6%) City Project Administration (2%) Caltrans COOP Agreement (not to exceed amount) $ 344,369 $ 137,748 $ 45,916 $ 550,000 $ 1,078,033 $ 3,373,829 TOTAL SOFT COSTS I PROJECT COST I . CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 11 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: BONITA ROAD FROM OTAY LAKES ROAD TO ~LLOW STREET WIDEN EASTBOUND DIRECTiON A T THE INTERSECTION OF OTA Y LAKES ROAD FOR AN ADDITIONAL LEFT TURN POCKET ONTO SOUTHBOUND OTA Y LAKES ROAD, (LENGTH = 300') ~ ;/ " '\ If;; " "" ! I ~~ , ~~ J) ~ ~ BONITA ~ ;J ~ ~ /' - '-, "- .-J-- - / \ Q 4' '-. Þ , ~ / t I<i Clyu(-4 ;¡ '" Qß <tJfT.4 ( "," ~//' ~ ~ / / () 20' e 100' e 29.:.- 50' 50' 32' I I I 32' 5,5' 10' TYP. EXIST. ROAD TYP, VARIES I c¡: 16' STRIPED MEDIAN 4" P. C. C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "G" C&G 4" P. C. C, SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "G",C&G 4- LANE MAJOR NO SCALf __..._________M.______ ________~__.____ ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL Bonita Rd Otay Lakes Rd to Central Widen to 4 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 300 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Traffic Signal Modification 6 Landscape & Irrigation 7 Misc, Construction Logistics 8 Special Items Retaining wall Habitat mitigation 9 Right-of-way Linear It Linear ft Linear It Linear It Each Linear It Linear It 300 $ 30.00 $ 300 $ 20.00 $ 300 $ 225.00 $ 300 $ 60,00 $ 3 $ 100,000,00 $ 300 $ 150,00 $ 300 $ 10,00 $ $ Linear It 300 $ 130,00 Acres 0,85 $70,000 Acres 0.85 $ 500,000.00 $ TOTAL HARD COSTS $ SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7,5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (7% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Deveioper Administration (1.75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST FACILITY 11 9,000 6,000 67,500 18,000 300,000 45,000 3,000 119,000 $ $ 59,500 59,500 425,000 992,500 $ 148,875 $ 42,563 $ 1,350 $ 4,500 $ 17,025 $ 540 $ 59,550 $ 17,369 $ 19,850 $ 311,621 $ 1,304,121 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 178 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: EAST PALOMAR STREET FROM PAS[Q LADERA TO THE SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY CONSTRUCT NEW 4 LANE MAJOR ROAD. (LENGTH = 1,270') « <::>- C>:: s:?C>:: J Lw a V)« « s:a --.J -<: @o::, 0 ::;,0 I bj V)CQ 0:: EAST PALOMAR ST. f 100' f 50 50' 32' 8' 8' . 32' 5.5' 10' TYP. TYP. 'i. I I 4· PG.G.. SIDEWALK 6W TYPE -C- CURB ct GUTTER 4-LANE MAJOR NO SG.AlE COST ESTIMATE East Palomar St Paseo Ladera to Subdivision boundary New 4 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 1,270 FACILITY 178 TOTAL HARD COSTS (Source - The Ayres Land Co., awarded contract documents) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Deveioper Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST $ 900,579 $ 135,087 $ 108,069 $ 54,035 $ 15,760 $ 18,012 $ 330,963 $ 1,231,542 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 24D PROJECT DESCRIPTION: OLYMPIC PARKWAY FROM HERITAGE ROAD TO SR-125 CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD (LENGTH = 11,100') EAST '" ¡:¡ PARKWA Y '" Ol YMPIC I I f 128' f -------------------.---.--.---. ------------ 12' 64' 44' 64' 44' ------.------.- 12' 7' 5' ~r 8' 8' 4' P.C,C, SIDEWALK 2:1 MAX. 6' TYPE 'C- CURB'" GVTTfR 4" P.C.C, SIDEWALK -- 6" TYPE 'C- CURB'" GVTTfR 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALf Olympic Pkwy Heritage Rd to SR-125 Outstanding Project Items FACILITY 24D 1 Poggi Channel 2 Detention basin habitat plan ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL 500,000 350,000 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6%) Developer Administration (1,75%) City Project Administration (2%) TOTAL HARD COSTS $ $ $ 850,000 $ 127,500 $ 102,000 $ 51,000 $ 14,875 $ 17,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 312,375 PROJECT COST $ 1,162,375 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 25A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: OL YMPIC PARKWA Y INTmCHANG[ WITH 1-805 STM-J28 MODIFY EXISTING INTERCHANGE -'0::: 805 <tw ' L)\- 0::: -20 Ow ~L) ~ ~ N I þ. ~ t ì'ii :.;:~ / ~"" ~ .,;- Qj COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 25A Olympic Pkwy 1-805 Interchange Interchange Modifications (STM-328) 1 Construction Cost 2 Right-of-way $ $ 14,859,035 787,550 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ $ 15,646,585 TDIF PORTION (15%) 2,346,988 (Source - City of Chula Vista, awarded contract documents) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6%) Developer Administration (1,75%) City Project Administration (2%) Caltrans COOP Agreement (not to exceed amount) TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 2,346,988 $ 1 ,877 ,590 $ 938,795 $ 273,815 $ 312,932 $ 2,008,677 $ 7,758,797 $ 1,163,820 $ 23,405,382 TDIF PORTION (15%) PROJECT COST TDIF PORT/ON (15%) $ 3,510,807 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 26 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: EAST PALOMAR STREET FROM HERITAGE ROAD TO THE SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY CONSTRUCT NEW 4 LANE MAJOR ROAD, (LENGTH = 3,772') w <.:> ;:': 5:: w :r: ",.pIC PARKWAY OL I'" 'ð "" >- '&- U-I ":J: e 100' e so so 32' 8' 8' 32' S.S' 10' TYP. TYP. e;, I I 4" P.C.C. SIDEwALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB .t CUTTER 4-LANE MAJOR NO SCALE FACILITY 26 East Palornar St Heritage Rd to Subdivision boundary New 4 Lane Major Road Length: Length (Lf): feet ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL 1 Construction Cost 2,300,577 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ $ 2,300,577 (Source - The Otay Ranch Co., awarded contract documents) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6%) Developer Administration (1.75%) City Project Administration (2%) $ 345,087 $ 276,069 $ 138,035 $ 40,260 $ 46,012 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 845,462 PROJECT COST $ 3,146,039 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 288 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: OTA Y LAKES ROAD FROM LAKE CREST DR, TO WUESTE ROAD CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD (LENGTH = 1,082') (" c. V, CITY LIMIT /' L..- v ..... /'----..- L ~ r-- » " <::J1"'1 "'C") '" 1"'1 V> .... ~ ¡ I' 12B' I' 64' 64' 12' 44' 44' 12' 5' 7' 8' 8' 7' 5' 2cI MAX. 2:1 MAX. .. P. C. C, SIDEWALK 6- TYPE "G" CURB & GUTTER 4" P,C,C. SIDEWALK ...-------. 6" TYPE "G" CURB & GUTTER 6-LANE PRIME NO SCAL[ COST EST/MATE FACILITY 288 Dtay Lakes Rd Lake Crest to Wueste Rd Widen to 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 1,082 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Earthwork Drainage Items Suriace Improvements Dry Utilities Landscape & Irrigation Misc, Construction Logistics Special Items Habitat mitigation Linear ft Linear ft Linearft Linear ft Linearft Linearft 1082 $ 1082 $ 1082 $ 1082 $ 1082 $ 1082 $ 525,00 $ 130,00 $ 315,00 $ 60,00 $ 150,00 $ 10.00 $ $ 568,050 140,660 340,830 64,920 162,300 10,820 477,000 Acres $150,000 3.18 $ 477,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 1,764,580 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of totai hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) $ 264,687 $ 132,344 $ 85,208 $ 16,230 $ 35,292 $ 1,948 $ 105,875 $ 30,880 $ 35,292 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 707,754 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 2,472,334 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 37 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: EASTLAKE PARKWA Y FROM C. w.A. (H.S.) EASEMENT TO OL YMPIC PARKWA Y CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD, (LENGTH = J,DJJ') 07C-s.- S'C,ý, 0q. íJ.,\c, ""~ CJ f 5' 7' 128' 64' t= 64' 44' 44' U' -----I ~ ~ 7' , ~ t f 12' 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK --~~-~YPE "G" CURB .t GUrlfR! I I 6-LANE PRIME 4" P.C.C, SIDEWALK 6" rYPE "G" CURB .t GUrrER NO SCALE East/ake Pkwy CWA Easement to Olympic Pkwy New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 3,033 FACILITY 37 1 Construction Cost ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL 3,283,302 TOTAL HARD COSTS (Source - The Eastlake Co, awarded contract documents) SOFT COSTS Soft costs reimbursed to date Contingency (15%) Design (12% of contingency amount) Inspection/Administration (6% of contingency amount) Developer Administration (1,75% of contingency amount) City Project Administration (2% of contingency amount) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST $ $ 3,283,302 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,238,698 492,495 59,099 29,550 8,619 9,850 1,838,311 $ 5,121,613 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 42 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: BIRCH ROAD FROM LA MEDIA ROAD TO SR-125 CONSTRUCT 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROAD, (LENGTH = 4,900') ROAD \ \ ~ 112' ~ 56' '-'iÕ~--'-'~--'-'--'--'-'-""--'-;¡6-'------'--'-"'-'-"...... 7' 7' 56' 46' 10' t 5.5' ! 2:1 MAX. > 4- P.C,C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB & CU TrE:R 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB & CuTrER 6- LANE MAJOR NO SCALE COST ESTIMATE Birch Rd La Media Rd to SR-125 New 6 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 4,900 FACILITY 42 1 Earthwork Linear It 250,00 1,225,000 2 Drainage Items Linear It 130.00 637,000 3 Surface Improvements Linear It 425.00 2,082,500 4 Dry Utilities Linear ft 60.00 294,000 5 Landscape & Irrigation Linear It 250,00 1,225,000 6 Misc, Construction Logistics Linear ft 10,00 49,000 7 Special Items 910,000 Habitat mitigation Acres 13 $70,000 $ 910,000 TO TAL HARD cas TS $ 6,422,500 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7,5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soiis Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST $ 963,375 $ 481,688 $ 183,750 $ 122,500 $ 128,450 $ 8,820 $ 385,350 $ 112,394 $ 128,450 $ 2,514,776 $ 8,937,276 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 43 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: BIRCH ROAD FROM SR-125 TO EASTLAKE PARKWA Y. CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD (LENGTH = 1.750') I ¡ BIRCH PARKWA Y f 128' f 64' I 64' 12' 44' I 44' 12' 5' 7' I 8' i 8' 7' 5' , r 4" P~~:;;~;~:;~R~~_~~L~~j 4" P. C. C. SIDEWALK .-.--.-.-----------.---"--- 6" TYPE "C" CURB &< CUTTER 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL Birch Rd SR-125 to Eastlake Pkwy New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 1,750 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Landscape & Irrigation 6 Misc, Construction Logistics 7 Special Items Habitat mitigation Llnearft Linearft Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft 1,750 $ 1,750 $ 1,750 $ 1,750 $ 1,750 $ 1,750 $ 250.00 $ 130,00 $ 425,00 $ 60,00 $ 250,00 $ 10.00 $ $ Acres 7.6 $70,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST FACILITY 43 437,500 227,500 743,750 105,000 437,500 17,500 532,000 $ 532,000 $ 2,500,750 $ 375,113 $ 187,556 $ 65,625 $ 43,750 $ 50,015 $ 3,150 $ 150,045 $ 43,763 $ 50,015 $ 969,032 $ 3,469,782 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 45 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: EASTLAKE PARKWA Y FROM OL YMPIC PARKWA Y TO BIRCH ROAD, CONSTRUCT 6 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROAD, (LENGTH = 2,614') plZl'I'Í ..d ã ~ SR 125 f 128' f 64' 64' 12' 44' 44' 12' 5' 7' 8' 8' 7' 5' 2:1 MAX. 2:1 MAX. 4" P.C.C. SIDeWALK 6" TYPe "G- CURB .t GuTTeR --.------.------------.------- 6- LANE MAJOR NO SCAL[ COST ESTIMATE East/ake Pkwy Olympic Pkwy to Birch Rd New 6 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 2,614 FACILITY 45 Linear ft Linearft Linear ft Linear ft Linearft Linear It 250,00 130,00 425.00 60,00 250,00 10.00 653,500 339,820 1,110,950 156,840 653,500 26,140 539,000 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Landscape & Irrigation 6 Misc, Construction Logistics 7 Special Items Habitat mitigation Acres 7,7 $70,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civii Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 539,000 3,479,750 521,963 260,981 98,025 65,350 69,595 4,705 208,785 60,896 69,595 1,359,895 4,839,645 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 46 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: EASTLAKE PARKWA Y FROM BIRCH ROAD TO HUNT PKWA Y. CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD, (LENGTH = 4,714') iÊ BIRCH " '" e ::' " I :5 ~ t 128' f' 12' 64' 44' _Lr-t I I 8' 8' 64' 44' 12' 7' ~_ 2:1 MAX. 2:1 MAX. 4" P.C.C. SiDEWALK I I L.a: 6" TYPE "C- CURB do CU TTER! 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK --.---...--.---...........---". 6" TYPE "C- CURB do CUTTER 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL Eastlake Pkwy Birch Rd to Hunte/Rock Mountain Rd New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 4,714 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Landscape & Irrigation 6 Misc, Construction Logistics 7 Special Items Habitat mitigation Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Linear It Linearft Linearft 4714 $ 4714 $ 4714 $ 4714 $ 4714 $ 4714 $ 250,00 $ 130.00 $ 425.00 $ 60.00 $ 250,00 $ 10.00 $ $ Acres 13,9 $70,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, exciudes right-of-way) Utiiity Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COST FACILITY 46 1,178,500 612,820 2,003,450 282,840 1,178,500 47,140 973,000 $ 973,000 $ 6,276,250 $ 941 ,438 $ 470,719 $ 176,775 $ 117,850 $ 125,525 $ 8,485 $ 376,575 $ 109,834 $ 125,525 $ 2,452,726 $ 8,728,976 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 47 A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: SAN MIGUEL RANCH ROAD FROM PROCTOR VALLEY ROAD (NORTH) TO SR-125 CONSTRUCT 4 LANE COLLECTOR ROAD, (LENGTH = 4,600') ~\J' \ S~ /<$ ~\ 0 .... / u 0 / '" CL f 84' f 42' 42' 10' 32' 32' 10' 7)1>. (( TYP. I I .4~£,£L~I2f.'!~J< 6" TYPE "G- CURB'" GUTTER 12' 12' 4" P.c.c. SIDEWALK ..~:.JX':."--."!Lc.~!I.ªß._0J.!!.f!i 4-LANE COLLECTOR NO SCALf COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 47A San Miguel Ranch Rd (CY-105) Proctor Valley Rd (N) to SR-125 New 4 Lane Collector Length (Lf): 4,600 1 Earthwork Linear It 4600 190.00 874,000 2 Drainage Items Linear It 4600 130.00 598,000 3 Surface Improvements Linear It 4600 315,00 1,449,000 4 Dry Utilities Linear It 4600 60,00 276,000 5 Landscape & Irrigation Linear It 4600 150.00 690,000 6 Misc, Construction Logistics Linear It 4600 10.00 46,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 3,933,000 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 589,950 Design (12%) $ 471,960 I nspection/ Administration (6%) $ 235,980 Developer Administration (1,75%) $ 68,828 City Project Administration (2%) $ 78,660 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 1,445,378 PROJECT COST $ 5,378,378 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 48 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: HUNTE PKWY FROM OL YMPIC PKWY TO EASTLAKE PKWY CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAO, (LENGTH = 8.380') . :z: f ~ ~ ._.____________"__·____._______.___._______n____._____.___..._.__.____.__._____. 128' f .-.-.--.-..--......~~~...----.-.-¡-_.-......-..~.r._.__._.._........_..._........_ 12' , 44', 44' 12' --.-...---.-------+-.----.--.---...-..--.......--.----..-, 5' , 7' L.ª':"_.L 7' 5' I I I 6" rYPE "G" CURB .t GUrrER 2:1 MAX. ." P,C.C. SIDEWALK 6" rYPE "G" CURB .t GUrrER -------- 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE Hunte Pkwy Olympic Pkwy to Eastlake Pkwy New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 8,380 FACILITY 48 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Earthwork Drainage Items Surface Improvements Dry Utilities Landscape & Irrigation Misc, Construction Logistics Pipeline Encasement Special Items Habitat mitigation Acres Linear It Linear ft Linear ft Linearft Linear ft Linear ft Lump Sum 8380 8380 8380 8380 8380 8380 $ 250,00 $ $ 130.00 $ $ 425.00 $ $ 60.00 $ $ 250,00 $ $ 10,00 $ $ 600,000.00 $ $ 25,1 $70,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of iandscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST 2,095,000 1,089,400 3,561,500 502,800 2,095,000 83,800 600,000 1,757,000 $ 1,757,000 $ 11,784,500 $ 1,767,675 $ 883,838 $ 314,250 $ 209,500 $ 235,690 $ 15,084 $ 707,070 $ 206,229 $ 235,690 $ 4,575,025 $ 16,359,525 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 51A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: LA MEDIA ROAD FROM OL YMPIC PARKWA Y TO SANTA VENUlA CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD. (LENGTH = 1,350') ~ ¡ \<.oþ.í) BIRCH f 128' f 64' 64' 12' 44' 44' 12' 5' 7' B' B' 7' 5' 2:1 MAX. 4" P.C,C, SIDEWALK 6" TYPE -G- CURB ,¡, GUTTER 4" P.C.C, SIDEWALK I 6" TYPE "G" CURB ,¡, GUTTER 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE COST ESTIMATE La Media Rd Olympic Pkwy to Santa Venetia New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 1,350 FACILITY 51A 1 Earthwork Linear ft 1350 $ 250,00 $ 337,500 2 Drainage Items Linear ft 1350 $ 130,00 $ 175,500 3 Surface Improvements Linear ft 1,350 $ 425,00 $ 573,750 4 Dry Utilities Linear ft 1,350 $ 60,00 $ 81,000 5 Landscape & Irrigation Linear ft 1,350 $ 250,00 $ 337,500 6 Misc, Construction Logistics Linear ft 1,350 $ 10,00 $ 13,500 7 Special Items $ 546,000 Habitat mitigation Acres 7,8 $70,000 $ 546,000 TOTAL HARD COS TS $ 2,064,750 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST $ 309,713 $ 154,856 $ 50,625 $ 33,750 $ 41,295 $ 2,430 $ 123,885 $ 36,133 $ 41,295 $ 793,982 $ 2,858,732 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 51B PROJECT DESCRIPTION: LA MEDIA ROAD FROM SANTA VENECIA ROAD TO BIRCH ROAD CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD, (LENGTH = 1,500') ~ ¡ BIRCH f 128' f 64' 64' 12' 44' 44' 12' S' 7' 8' 8' 7' S' 2:' MAX. 4" P.C.C. SiDEWALK 6" TYPE "C- CURB & CUTTER 4" P. C. C. SIDEWALK I 6" TYPE ·C" CURB & CUTTER! 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS OTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL La Media Rd Santa Venetia to Birch Rd New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 1,500 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Suriace Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Landscape & Irrigation 6 Misc, Construction Logistics Llnearft Linearft Linear ft Linearft Linear ft Linearft 1500 $ 1500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 250,00 $ 130,00 $ 425.00 $ 60.00 $ 250,00 $ 10,00 $ TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utiiities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) , TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST FACILITY 518 375,000 195,000 637,500 90,000 375,000 15,000 $ 1,687,500 $ 253,125 $ 126,563 $ 56,250 $ 37,500 $ 7,500 $ 2,700 $ 101,250 $ 29,531 $ 33,750 $ 648,169 $ 2,335,669 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 52 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: LA MfDlA ROAD FROM BIRCH ROAD TO ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD, CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD, (LfNGTH = 5,393') - Ä1;-- - g LA MEDIA RO, ;z ~ ;z => C ~ Q c '" f /28' f 64' 64' /2' 44' 44' 5' 7' 8' 8' 7' 5' 2,/ MAX. 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB k CuTTER 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK -.....-.----.......---.--.- 6N TrPf Me- cuRB &- GUTTfR -----------..------ 6- LANE PRIME ND SCALE COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 52 La Media Rd Birch Rd to Rock Mountain Rd New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 5,393 1 Construction Cost 9,844,000 2 Special Items 1,106,000 Habitat mitigation Acres 15,8 $70,000 $ 1,106,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 10,950,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 1,642,500 Design (12%) $ 1,314,000 Inspection/Adm inistration (6%) $ 657,000 Developer Administration (1.75%) $ 191,625 City Project Administration (2%) $ 219,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 4,024,125 PROJECT COST $ 14,974,125 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 53 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: LA MEDIA ROAO FROM ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD TO OTAY VALLEY ROAD. CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD. (LENGTH = 4,513') RD, a 0: ;;; ;:': ;;s c ::0 g 0: ~- - - S'ç. 0: )... ..., ~ ~ ~ )... :> c LA MEDIA ROAD f 12B' f .___.___.________._.______...___._..u.._.____._____m____._...._________.___.___._____._.____.____.__._.__._n 12' 5' 7' 64' 44' 64' 44' 12' 7' 5' 8' 8' 2:1 MAX. 4" P,C.C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB & CUTTERI 4- P.C.C, SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB & GUTTER 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE FACILITY 53 La Media Rd Rock Mountain Rd to Dtay Valley Rd New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 4,513 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL 1 Construction Cost 2 Special Items Habitat mitigation Linear It 4513 $ 250.00 $ $ 13,3 $70,000.00 5,559,000 931,000 Acres $ 931,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 6,490,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) $ 973,500 $ 778,800 $ 389,400 $ 113,575 $ 129,800 $ 2,385,075 $ 8,875,075 TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 55A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: OTA Y LAKES ROAD FROM EAST 'H' STREET TO TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, WIDEN EXISTING ROAD TO 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL. (LENGTH = J,400') "' IT 0/>.° f 128' f -"--""-- ----_._._--~:.._-------_._----~---_._----_.- 12' 5' ..' I 8' B' ..' 12' _.1-_____ I 7' 5' i 7' i ." P.C.C. SIDEWALK ." P,C,C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB de CUTTER 2:1 MAX. 2:1 MAX. 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALf COST ESTIMATE - FACILITY 55A Otay Lakes Rd (STM-355) East H St to Telegraph Canyon Rd Widen to 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 3,400 1 Earthwork Linear It $ $ 102,000 2 Drainage Items Linear It $ $ 68,000 3 Surface Improvements Linear It $ $ 765,000 4 Dry Utilities Linear It $ 60,00 $ 204,000 5 Traffic Signal Modification Each $ 100,000,00 $ 300,000 6 Landscape & Irrigation Linear It $ 150,00 $ 510,000 7 Misc. Construction Logistics Linear It $ 10,00 $ 34,000 8 Special Items $ 396,000 Habitat mitigation $ 375,000 Private stairs & entry gate $ 19,000 Relocate monument wells $ 2,000 9 Right-of-way $ 1,300,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 3,679,000 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) $ 551,850 Civil Engineering (7,5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) $ 275,925 Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) $ 15,300 Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) $ 51,000 Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) $ 47,580 Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) $ 6,120 Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) $ 220,740 City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) $ 73,580 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 1,242,095 PROJECT COST $ 4,921,095 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 55B PROJECT DESCRIPTION: OTA Y LAKES ROAD FROM CANYON DRIV[ TO EAST H STREET WiDEN EXISTING ROAD TO 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL. (LENGTH = 7,544') OlAY R/DG£BACK RD, _._--"---- 128' ---·-------É~-----·--F--·---~·-·--------·------- 72' 44' 44' 12' , I -ì 5' 7' L 8' I 7' ,5' f f 4- P.C.c. SIDEWALK 6" rYP[ "C" CURB &t GJlr1£R 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALf Otay Lakes Rd (STM-355) Canyon to East H Sf Widen to 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 1,544 FACILITY 558 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Traffic Signal Modification 6 Landscape & Irrigation 7 Misc, Construction Logistics 8 Special Items Habitat mitigation Reiocate monument wells Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Each Linearft Linear ft 1544 $ 30,00 $ 1544 $ 20.00 $ 1544 $ 225,00 $ 1544 $ 60.00 $ 2 $ 100,000.00 $ 1544 $ 150.00 $ 1544 $ 10.00 $ $ TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of iandscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST 46,320 30,880 347,400 92,640 200,000 231,600 15,440 202,000 $ $ 200,000 2,000 $ 1,166,280 $ 174,942 $ 87,471 $ 6,948 $ 23,160 $ 23,326 $ 2,779 $ 69,977 $ 23,326 $ 411,928 $ 1,578,208 .-,-,.-------.,.----.-.-.. -.-....----...- ----"_...._,-------~-~_._,- CHULA VISTA TDlF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 56A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MAIN STREET FROM NIRVANA AVENUE TO 1,600' WEST OF HERITAGE RD./ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD, WIDEN EXISTING PORTION TO SIX LANES MAJOR, (LENGTH = 2.095') 2:1 MAX. !<! ~ '" "'w ~'" ",,,, ¡,¥' ~ 6· RD ~:" DUN1AIN .¡,'" ROC~ ~ \ ~\ MAIN STRCET -E-II...iITY LIMIT f 128' 64' m 64' -.!J..'-_ ,,' ,,' 5' , 7' f 12' 7' 5' .. p'c,C. SlDfWALK I 6- TYPE "G" CURB ~ GUTTER 6- LANE MAJOR NO SCALf COST ESTIMATE Main St Nirvana Ave to 1600' West of Heritage/Rock Mtn Rd Widened, new 6 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 2,095 1 Drainage Items 2 Surface Improvements 3 Landscape & Irrigation 4 Dry Utilities 5 Misc. Construction Logistics 6 Special Items Habitat mitigation Linear It Linear It Linear It Linear It Linear It 2,095 $ 2,095 $ 2,095 $ 2,095 $ 2,095 $ 20,00 $ 225,00 $ 150,00 $ 60.00 $ 10.00 $ $ Acres 11,8 $70,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% 01 total hard costs including right-ol-way) Civil Engineering (7,5% 01 hard costs, excludes right-ol-way) Landscape Architecture (10% 01 landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-ol-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% 01 total hard costs including right-ol-way) Developer Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-ol-way) City Project Administration (2% 01 total hard costs including right-ol-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COST FACILITY 56A 41,900 471,375 314,250 125,700 20,950 826,000 $ 826,000 $ 1,800,175 $ 270,026 $ 135,013 $ 31,425 $ 36,004 $ 3,771 $ 108,011 $ 31,503 $ 36,004 $ 651,756 $ 2,451,931 CHULA VISTA TOIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 56C PROJECT DESCRIPTION: OTA Y VALLEY ROAD FROM LA MEDIA ROAD TO SR-125, CONSTRUCT 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROAD. (LENGTH: ROADWA Y= 2,850') \ ~ ~ ~~ f 100' f 32' 8' 8' 50' 32' 50 5.5' TYP. 10' TYP. ~ I I 4- P,C.C. SIDEWALK ..n...._.____.__._._____ 4" P.C.C. SfO[WALK 6- TYPE "C" CURB k CUTTER 4- LANE MAJOR NO SCALE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL Otay Valley Rd La Media Rd to SR-125 New 4 Lane Major Arterial Road Length (Lf): 2,850 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Landscape & Irrigation 6 Misc. Construction Logistics Linear It Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft 2850 $ 2850 $ 2850 $ 2850 $ 2850 $ 2850 $ 190,00 $ 130,00 $ 315,00 $ 60,00 $ 150,00 $ 10,00 $ TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs inciuding right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COST FACILITY 56C 541,500 370,500 897,750 171,000 427,500 28,500 $ 2,436,750 $ 365,513 $ 182,756 $ 81,225 $ 42,750 $ 48,735 $ 5,130 $ 146,205 $ 42,643 $ 48,735 $ 963,692 $ 3,400,442 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 56D PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1-805 INTERCHANGE MOOIFlCA TlONS MAIN STREET WIDEN EXISTING UNDERPASS 1-805 / /" ~ I N J Main Street ~ J I:'J COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 56D Main St 1-805 underpass Underpass Widening Northbound on-ramp Southbound on-ramp TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 1,300,000 (Source - Staff, City of Chula Vista) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 195,000 Design (12%) $ 156,000 I nspection/ Admin istration (6%) $ 78,000 Developer Administration (1,75%) $ 22,750 City Project Administration (2%) $ 26,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 477,750 PROJECT COST $ 1,777,750 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 56E PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MAIN STREfT FROM 1,600' WEST OF HERITAGE RQ,jROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD TO HERITAG[ RD./ROCK MTN, RD, WIDEN TO SIX LANES MAJOR, (LENGTH = 1.600') Q~ o¡> & RD ,¡;-'" ~DUNT~IN .;¡,<;) RDC!< \ ~\ !>! ~ '" ~~ ¡¡¡'" t 4- P.C.C. SIDEWALK ~~~ MAIN ~\~'r STREcr _E II ...EITY LIMIT t 128' .------.--.---------.------.--...--.----.----.----------.--------.---.--...--- 12'____ 5' ]' 54' ,,' -f-----..,---------------------- 44' 12' 8' 8' I 7' 5' - ---I ------.---.-.---. 6- TYPE· -C- CURB II:: GUTTER 6- LANE MAJOR NO SCALE 2:' MAX. FACILITY 56E Main St 1600' West of Heritage/Rock Mtn Rd to Heritage/Rock Mtn Rd Widen to 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 1,600 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL 1 Construction Cost $ 1,875,000 2 Special tems $ 500,000 Retaining wall $ 500,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 2,375,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 356,250 Design (12%) $ 285,000 I nspection/ Administration (6%) $ 142,500 Deveioper Administration (1.75%) $ 41,563 City Project Administration (2%) $ 47,500 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 872,813 PROJECT COST $ 3,247,813 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 57 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: HERITAGE ROAD FROM OLYMPIC PARKWAY TO MAIN STREU/ROCK MOUNTAIN RD, CY-l04 CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD (LENGTH = 9,438') \ OTA Y \ LAND FILL . Z HERITAGE f 128' f 64' 64' 12' ..' ..' 12' 5' 7' 8' 8' 7' 5' 4" P,C.C. SIDEWALK, 6" TYPE "C" CURB of: CUTTER 2,1 MAX, 4" P,C,C, SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB of: CUTTER 6-LANE PRIME NO SCALE - -~-_.__._------ .._--_._---------~- COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 57 Heritage Rd Olympic Pkwy to Main St New 6 Lane Prime Arterial (CY-104) Length (Lf): 9,438 1 Construction Cost 14,100,000 2 Special Items 1,000,000 Habitat mitigation $ 1,000,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 15,100,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 2,265,000 Design (12%) $ 1,812,000 I nspection/ Adm inistration (6%) $ 906,000 Developer Administration (1,75%) $ 264,250 City Project Administration (2%) $ 302,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 5,549,250 PROJECT COST $ 20,649,250 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 58A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: HERITAGE ROAD FROM MAIN STREET/ROCK MOUNTAIN RD, TO CITY LIMIT. WIDEN EXISTING ROADWAY TO 6 LANES (LENGTH = 2,468') z .. Z 4. r- z => 0 -::;; '" '-' \ 0 ;::, a< V¡ ,>- \ S>I~ \ '-' <O;-..J V¡ -..J>- OTA Y LAND FILL ~I:: ~ <..\1<..\ ~ 54' 47' 54' 47' 2' 5' 5' 2% .' ~12!. 2% p, C, C, SIDEWALK (BOTH SIDES) 2% l!. {:~LJ I·~··· - EMERGENCY PARKfNG/BIKE LANE (TYP,) 6-LANE PRIME NO SCALE 2' . FACILITY 58A Heritage Rd Main St to City boundary Widen to 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (Lf): 2,468 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL 1 Construction Cost $ 4,800,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 4,800,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 720,000 Design (12%) $ 576,000 Inspection/Adm inistration (6%) $ 288,000 Developer Administration (1.75%) $ 84,000 City Project Administration (2%) $ 96,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 1 ,764,000 PROJECT COST $ 6,564,000 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 588 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: H[RITAGE ROAD BRIDGE CROSSING THE OTA Y RIVER. CONSTRUCT 6 LANE BRIDGE. (LENGTH = 1,070') HER! CE ~BRIDCE \ SITE \ \ \ \ \ OTAY \ LAND FILL \ I \ / >-.: -- \ <r¡ \ \:¡z ~ ~ 2' 5' lOB' BRIDGE STRUCTURE 54' 54' 47' 47' CD 2% - ,.', .. 12' 12' 12' 12' 12' 8' 5' 2' P.CC. SIDEWALK (BOTH SIDES) 2% .~ " EMERGENCY PARKING/BIKE LANE (TYP,) 6-LANE PRIME NO SCALE COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 588 Heritage Rd Ofay River Bridge New Bridge on 6 Lane Prime Arterial 1 Construction Cost 4,200,000 2 Special Items 350,000 Habitat mitigation $ 350,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 4,550,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 682,500 Design (12%) $ 546,000 Inspection/Adm inistration (6%) $ 273,000 Developer Administration (1,75%) $ 79,625 City Project Administration (2%) $ 91,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 1,672,125 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 6,222,125 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 59B PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROCTOR VALLEY ROAO FROM ROLLING HILLS RANCH NEIGHBORHOOD NINE WEST ENTRANCE TO EAST ENTRANCE CONSTRUCT 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROAD, (LENGTH = 1,035') rl \ ¡ "0',, -0 ^ :;;, -<. '" ~t: " ,,'" '5>- èã \ f 100' f j2'--- 8; 8' 50' 32' 50' 5.5' TYP. 10' TYP. 't I 6- TYPE -C- CURB .t CuTTER 4- P,C.C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB .t GUTTER 4_:_~LC:_2!!5!I'~!< 4- LANE MAJOR NO SCAlf ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL Proctor Valley Rd RHR Neigh 9 West Entrance to RHR Neigh 9 East Entrance New 4 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 1,035 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Landscape & Irrigation 6 Misc, Construction Logistics Linear ft Linearft Linear ft Linearft Linear ft Linear ft 1035 $ 1035 $ 1035 $ 1035 $ 1035 $ 1035 $ 190,00 $ 130,00 $ 315,00 $ 60,00 $ 150,00 $ 10,00 $ TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7,5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COST FACILITY 598 196,650 134,550 326,025 62,100 155,250 10,350 $ 884,925 $ 132,739 $ 66,369 $ 29,498 $ 15,525 $ 17,699 $ 1,863 $ 53,096 $ 15,486 $ 17,699 $ 349,972 $ 1,234,897 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 59C PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROCTOR VALLEY ROAD FROM ROLLING HILLS RANCH NEIGHBORHOOD NINE EAST ENTRANCE TO CITY BOUNDARY. CONSTRUCT 4 LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL ROAD, (LENGTH = U50') " ^ "" -< ::; V>~ ";¡ ..;¡;:::; ~ "'~ ãã -r-I \ ¡ \ f 100' 50 50' -}Y ----8' 8' 32' f 5.5' TYP. 10' TYP, ct I I 6" TYPE -C" CuRB de CUTTER ," P,C,C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB de CuTTER ," p, C. C, SIDEWALK __e.__"__·__···____ 4- LANE MAJOR NO SCALE COST EST/MATE Proctor Valley Rd RHR Neigh 9 East Entrance to City boundary New 4 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 1,750 1 Earthwork 2 Drainage Items 3 Surface Improvements 4 Dry Utilities 5 Landscape & Irrigation 6 Misc. Construction Logistics 7 Special Items Habitat mitigation Linear It Linear ft Linear ft Linear It Linear It Linear ft 1750 525.00 $ 1750 130.00 $ 1750 315.00 $ 1750 60,00 $ 1750 150,00 $ 1750 10,00 $ $ 6,03 $ 150,000.00 Acres TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of totai hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7,5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of totai hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of totai hard costs inciuding right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COST FACILITY 59C 918,750 227,500 551,250 105,000 262,500 17,500 903,926 $ 903,926 $ 2,986,426 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 447,964 223,982 137,813 26,250 59,729 3,150 179,186 52,262 59,729 1,190,063 $ 4,176,489 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 60A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD MAIN ST/HERITACE RD TO LA M£DIA ROAD, CONSTRUCT 4 LANE COLLECTOR ROAD, (LENG TH = 9,400'J :>,~ ~:¡, 4 I I <::> <Š '" ROCK ROAD ::> ß ::¡; "'< ~ f /28' f _______________________._______________._____._.____.__..._.__n__'.".·____ /2' 5' 7'! 64' 44' --1 8' 8' 64' 44' /2' 7' 5' 2:1 MAX. 4- P,C,C. SIDEWALK 6- TYPE -G" CURB ðt GUTTER 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK I 6" TYPE "G" CURB ðt GUTTER 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE FACILITY 60A Rock Mountain Rd Main/Heritage Rd to La Media New 6 Lane Prime Length (Lf): 9,400 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS DTY. UNIT COST TOTAL ITEM TOTAL 1 Construction Cost $ 20,650,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 20,650,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 3,097,500 Design (12%) $ 2,478,000 Inspection! Adm inistration (6%) $ 1 ,239,000 Developer Administration (1.75%) $ 361,375 City Project Administration (2%) $ 413,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 7,588,875 PROJECT COST $ 28,238,875 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 60B PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD FROM LA MEDIA ROAD TO SR-125, CONSTRUCT 4 LANE COLLECTOR ROAD, (LENGTH = 3,500') ;'!; ß :::¡ "t ~ !G , I 8i I I MOUNTAIN ROCK ROAD '" ì§ Q: f /28' f .------.--.---.-----.....------.....----.----....----.-------.---.-------..------------.---. 64' 64' /2' 44' 44' /2' 5' 7' -'1 8' 8' 7' 5' 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK! 2:1 MAX. 6" TYP£ "G- CURB .t GUTT£R 4" P,C,C, SlD£WALK 6" TYP£ "G" CURB .t GUTT£R 6- LANE PRIME ND SCALE COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 60B Rock Mountain Rd La Media Rd to SR-125 New 6 Lane Prime Length (Lf): 3,500 Construction Cost $ 6,825,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 6,825,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 1,023,750 Design (12%) $ 819,000 Inspection/Adm inistration (6%) $ 409,500 Developer Administration (1.75%) $ 119,438 City Project Administration (2%) $ 136,500 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 2,508,188 PROJECT COST $ 9,333,1BB CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 61 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: WILLOW STREET FROM BONITA ROAD TO SWŒTWA TER ROAD STL -261 RECONSTRUCT BRIDGE ON 4 LANE MAJOR ROAD (LENGTH = 1,000') a "" a <:t: TV/A TER 84' BRIDC£ STRUCTURf ------:¡y 35' I I ~' i ~' I I 1. 2"! 2% I --; ..... . . . I . .' I """.,--.--------- 2' ,5' 2% .. 2" ~ p, C. C. SIDfWALK (BOTH SIDfS) fMfRGfNCY PARKING/BIKf LANf (TYP,) .. :.... 12' 12' 4-LANE MAJOR NO SCALf " , 42' 35' 5' 2% - 2" .. :... .. " i 12' 12' I 8' 2' FACILITY 61 Willow St (STL -261 ) Bonita Rd to Sweetwater Rd Reconstruct Bridge on 4 Lane Major Road TOTAL HARD COSTS $ $ 1 ,887,768 9,438,840 TDIF PORTION (20%) (Source - 2001-3 CIP, City of Chula Vista) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6%) Developer Administration (1,75%) City Project Administration (2%) TDIF PORTION (20%) $ 283,165 $ 226,532 $ 113,266 $ 33,036 $ 37,755 $ 693,755 $ 138,751 $ 10,132,595 TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST TDIF PORTION (20%) $ 2,026,519 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 62 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: EAST 'H' STREET FROM BUENA VISTA WA Y TO OTA Y LAKES ROAD, WIDEN EXISTING ROAD TO 7 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD WITH ADDITIONAL EASTBOUND LANE. (LENG TH = 2,445 ') '" co '" 0..- z > "... N <' i ~ <:P "1b ~ ~ ~ 140' ~ 12' 5' L_ 56' 8' 8' 64' 44' 12' 7' 5' 76' 52' 40' EX/5nNG fXlsnNG ~ ~ 2: 1 MAX. ..*.~J I 12'1 12' 12' 12' .- P,C,C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE -G- CURB .Ii GU TTER 4" P.C.C. SIDEWALK 6- TYPE "G" CURB .Ii GUTTER 7- LANE PRIME (SECTION A- A) NO SCALf COST ESTIMATE East H St Buena Vista to Otay Lakes Rd Widen to 7 Lane Prime Arterial Length (U): 2,445 FACILITY 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Linear ft Each Linearft Linearft 2445 2445 2445 2445 2 2445 2445 Earthwork Drainage Items Surface Improvements Dry Utilities Traffic Signal Modification Landscape & Irrigation Misc, Construction Logistics Special Items Habitat mitigation Acres $ 30.00 $ $ 20.00 $ $ 225.00 $ $ 60.00 $ $ 100,000.00 $ $ 150,00 $ $ 10,00 $ $ 0.6 $70,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7,5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soils Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST 73,350 48,900 550,125 146,700 200,000 366,750 24,450 42,000 $ 42,000 $ 1,452,275 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 217,841 108,921 11,003 36,675 29,046 4,401 87,137 25,415 29,046 549,483 $ 2,001,758 LEG END: CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 63 [!] SIGNALS AT 4- WA Y INTERSECTIONS ~SIGNALS AT "T" INTERSECTIONS (!) SIGNALS AT COUPLUES (4 fA. ~ N I System wide Intersection Traffic Signalization FACILITY 63 ITEM INTERSECTION TDIF % UNIT COST TOTAL 1 Main, west of Oleander 2 Olympic Parkway @ NM Street 3 Olympic Parkway @ MM Street 4 Olympic Pkwy @ St "D" 5 E Palomar St @ Davies Dr 6 E Palomar St @ Medical Center Ct 7 E Palomar St @ Santa Marla 8 Heritage Rd @ Future Intersection 9 Heritage Rd @ Future Intersection 10 Heritage/Rock Mtn Rd @ Main St 11 Rock Mtn Rd @ Future Intersection 12 Rock Mtn Rd @ Future Intersection 13 La Media Rd @ Otay Valley Rd 14 Otay Valley Rd @ Magdalena 15 La Media Rd @ Future Intersection 16 La Media Rd @ Rock Mtn Rd (x4) 17 Rock Mtn Rd @ Magdalena 18 La Media @ Santa Luna 19 La Media @ Birch 20 Birch between Magdalena & SR-125 21 Otay Lakes Rd @ Canyon Dr 22 San Miguel Ranch Rd @ Avenida Loretta 23 San Miguel Ranch Rd @ Avenida Altamira 24 San Miguel Ranch Rd @ Proctor Valley Rd 25 Mt Miguel Rd @ Paseo Vera Cruz 26 Proctor Valley Rd @ Rocking Horse 27 Proctor Valley Rd @ Lane Ave, 28 Proctor Valley Rd @ Hunt Pkwy 29 Proctor Valley Rd @ Duncan Ranch Rd 30 Proctor Valley Rd @ Coastal Hills Dr 31 Proctor Valley Rd @ Lakecrest 32 Otay Lakes Rd @ Wueste Rd 33 Hunte Pkwy @ Stone Gate St 34 Olympic Pkwy @ Spine Rd 35 Oiympic Pkwy @ Future Intersection 36 Olympic Pkwy @ Future Intersection 37 Hunte Pkwy @ Future Intersection 38 Hunte Pkwy @ Future Intersection 39 Hunte Pkwy @ Future Intersection 40 Hunte Pkwy @ Eastlake Pkwy 41 Hunte Pkwy @ Spine (x4) 42 Eastlake Pkwy @ Birch 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 100% $ 100% $ 50% $ 50% $ 100% $ 50% $ 50% $ 100% $ 50% $ 50% $ 100% $ 50% $ 50% $ 100% $ 100% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 50% $ 100% $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 80,000 80,000 40,000 40,000 80,000 40,000 40,000 80,000 40,000 40,000 320,000 40,000 40,000 80,000 80,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 160,000 80,000 43 Eastlake Pkwy @ Future Intersection 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 44 Birch Rd @ Spine 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 45 Birch Rd between Eastlake Pkwy & Spine 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 TO TAL SYSTEM COST $ 3,600,000 Note: TDIF eligibility is based on the number of intersection legs that are TDIF facilities (Source - City of Chula Vista, Engineering Division) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Design (12%) Inspection/Administration (6%) Developer Administration (1,75%) City Project Administration (2%) TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 540,000 $ 432,000 $ 216,000 $ 63,000 $ 72,000 $ 1,323,000 PROJECT COST $ 4,923,000 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 64 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: HUNTE PKWY FROM SR-125 TO EASTLAKE PKWY CONSTRUCT 6 LANE PRIME ARTERIAL ROAD. (LENGTH = 1,900') <J) ':;D \ ~ N IJI ! I ~í). \'\ í þo,'\ \'\ 128' ----.-----.---------.---~~-----F ____._..£.4:...______________._ 12' 44' 44' 12' -~--:.-..-;-- --------------Î-£ 8' 7' 5' I I I I I f --------.--------- ------------.-.--- f 4" P. C C. SlDEWALKj -------- 6" rYPE "C" CURB 4c CurrER 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE 4" P.C,C_ SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB 4c CUTrER -----.---------".-.--.----. COST ESTIMATE Hunte Pkwy SR-125 to Eastlake Pkwy New 6 Lane Prime Arterial Road Length (Lf): 2,400 FACILITY 64 1 Earthwork Linearft 250.00 600,000 2 Drainage Items Linearft 130.00 312,000 3 Surface Improvements Linear ft 425,00 1,020,000 4 Dry Utilities Linear It 60,00 144,000 5 Landscape & Irrigation Linear ft 250,00 600,000 6 Mlsc, Construction Logistics Linear ft 10.00 24,000 TO TAL HARD COSTS $ 2,700,000 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of totai hard costs including right-of-way) Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Soiis Engineering (15% of earthwork costs) Landscape Architecture (10% of landscaping costs) Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-of-way) Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% of dry utilities costs) Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs including right-of-way) Developer Administration (1,75% of total hard costs including right-of-way) City Project Administration (2% of total hard costs Including right-of-way) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PROJECT COST $ 405,000 $ 202,500 $ 90,000 $ 60,000 $ 54,000 $ 4,320 $ 162,000 $ 47,250 $ 54,000 $ 1,079,070 $ 3,779,070 FACILITY 65 Traffic Management Center ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL 1 TMC Operations Room $ 2 Equipment Room $ 3 General Application Servers, Workstations, Computer Hardware $ 4 TMC Software Applications & Integration $ 5 Video/Traffic Surveillance System $ 6 Traffic Monitoring System Integration with Video Surveillance - Arterial Monitorir $ 7 Fiber/Related Field Communications Expansion/Upgrades $ 780,898,00 266,150 206,775 635,450 1,786,000 385,250 327,520 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ $ 2,632,826 4,388,043 TDIF PORTION (60%) SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 658,206 City Project Administration (2%) $ 87,761 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 745,967 TDIF PORTION (60%) $ 447,580 PROJECT COST $ 5,134,010 TDIF PORTION (60%) $ 3,080,406 COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 66 Transportation Oemand Mgrnnt (TOM) Improving traffic circulation and relieving congestion by allocating funding for Transit based TOM and Toll-way based TOM Transit Based TDM Express transit services, express shuttle services, and financial incentives to support the City's efforts to reduce the number of peak-hour vehicular trips in Eastern Chula Vista 2 Toll-way Based TDM $ To reduce peak-hour congestion by encouraging the use of/he SR125 toll-road and providing incentives targeted to Chu/a Vista residents 200,000 1,800,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 2,000,000 SOFT COSTS Contingency (0%) $ Design (0%) $ Inspection/Administration (0%) $ City Project Administration (0%) $ TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ PROJECT COST $ 2,000,000 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO, 67 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD BRIDGE OVERCROSSING SR-125 CONSTRUCT 6 LANE BRIDGE, (LENGTH = JOO') ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD /. , \ SITE f 128' f ------- 64' 44' 64' 44' 12' I 7' 5' 12' 5' 7' 8' 8' i ----I I I ! ! I 4- P.c.c. SIDEWALK I 6" TYPE "C" CURB & CUTTERI 4" P,C.C. SIDEWALK 6" TYPE "C" CURB & CUTTER 6- LANE PRIME NO SCALE FACILITY 67 Rock Mountain Rd SR-125 New Bridge Length (Lf): 300 ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL 1 Construction Cost (24,000 sq ft bridge @ $200/sq ft) $ 4,800,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 4,800,000 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 720,000 Design (12%) $ 576,000 Inspection! Adm inistration (6%) $ 288,000 City Project Administration (2%) $ 96,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 1,680,000 PROJECT COST $ 6,480,000 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 68 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: OTA Y VALLEY BRIDGE OVERCROSSING SR-725, CONSTRUCT 4 LANE BRIDGE. (LENGTH: ROAOWA Y= 300') \ 'J7 \ ~ '9 'J7 l "6 , "ß 1\ 1/ # =~~ SITE .........- e IDa' e so' 50' J2' 8' 8' J2' 5,5' 10' ryp, ryp, ~ I I 4" P,C.C. SJDfwALK 6" rYP£ "c" CURB ct CUTTCR 4-LANE MAJOR NO SCALE COST ESTIMATE FACILITY 68 Otay Valley Rd SR-125 New Bridge Length (U): 300 1 Construction Cost $ 6,240,000 (31,200 sq ft bridge @ $200/sq ft) TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 6,240,000 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) $ 936,000 Design (12%) $ 748,800 I nspection/ Adm inistration (6%) $ 374,400 City Project Administration (2%) $ 124,800 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 2,184,000 PROJECT COST $ 8,424,000 __'m_._~__..·_~______·__···_~_·___________~~_____·'_· o c ~d b (' +-., be-vclof' ~ t;/I ~5 -' I\.N \~ '( 0 i'Y) ty"\ \.A. Y\ ; . '1 rlo.c&:\ OYl ~ S wtclv5 -G, mee*\ ~. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM NO.: N MEETING DATE: 05/10/05 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR FY 2005-06 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG); HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME); AMERICAN DREAM DOWN PAYMENT (ADDI); AND THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) PROGRAMS; AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF THE 2005- 2010 CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND THE 2005-2006 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD); AND INSTRUCTING STAFF TO INCLUDE APPROPRIATIONS TO FUND THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN IN THE FY 2005-06 PROPOSED BUDGET SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR , REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER V ( 4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO ~ BACKGROUND The City of Chula Vista is eligible to receive $2,299,525 in CDBG; $1,027,072 in HOME; $34,958 in ADDI; and $87,011 in ESG entitlement funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for FY 2005-06 upon submittal and approval of the Annual Action Plan (Attachment A) to HUD. On March 29, 2005 and April 5, 2005 the City Council held a public hearing to review and receive comment on projects and programs being considered for CDBG; HOME; ADDI; and ESG funding for FY 2005-06 (Meeting Minutes attached hereto as Attachments "D" and "E"). Council's comments have been incorporated into the final funding recommendations. A summary of the FY 2005-06 CDBG/HOME Program Spending Plan is included as Attachment "C". Consolidated Plan and Annual Adion Plan The City of Chula Vista's Five-Year Consolidated Plan is a comprehensive planning document which identifies the city's needs in housing, homelessness, community and economic development. The City is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to complete a Consolidated Plan every five years to receive federal funds for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) programs. In addition, the City is required to prepare an Annual Action Plan which identifies a strategy for addressing the identified needs of the community through the use of CDBG; HOME; ADDI; and ESG funds. These needs include allocating funds ;q -/ PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 for administration and planning, capital improvements, community projects, economic development, public services, affordable housing, single-family rehabilitation, and first-time homebuyer programs. Per HUD regulations, the City must hold a 30-day comment period for the public to review the Consolidated Plan and the Annual Action Plan to make comments or suggest changes. The 30- day comment period to review both drafts began on April 5, 2005 and ended on May 5,2005. To date, no comments have been received from the public. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council adopt the resolution approving the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan and the 2005-2006 Annual Action Plan which includes funding recommendations for the CDBG; HOME; ADDI; and ESG programs; authorizing transmittal of the Consolidated Plan and the Annual Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and instruct staff to include appropriations to fund the Annual Action Plan in the FY 2005-06 proposed budget. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION The CDBG Ad-Hoc Committee reviewed the Public Service funding applications. Their funding recommendations were submitted on April 5, 2005. Members of the CDBG Ad-Hoc Committee included volunteers from the Commission on Aging and the Housing Advisory Commission. 19-2 PAGE 3, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 DISCUSSION For the 2005-06 CDBG program, the City of Chula Vista is eligible to receive a CDBG entitlement of $2,299,525. The total amount of CDBG funding requested is summarized as follows, along with staff's funding recommendation. All funding recommendations are further subject to HUD approval of the Annual Action Plan and its spending plan. CATEGORY Administration and Planning Capital Improvement Projects (City) Capital Improvement Projects (Non-City) Community Projects Economic Development Public Services AMOUNT REQUESTED $521,027 $1,227,500 $248,650 $384,790 $17,917 $856,406 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $459,905 $1,101,902 $0 $384,790 $8,000 344,928 TOTAL $3,256,290 $2,2,99,525 19.3 PAGE 4, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING Administration and Planning costs are costs related to the general management, oversight and coordination of the CDBG program. No more than 20% of the yearly entitlement may be obligated for planning and administration. The following is a summary of the 2005-06 CDBG Administration and Planning activities which total $459,905. ! ADMINISTRATION REQUESTS AMOUNT REQUESTED i TAB 1 CITY STAFF ADMINISTRATION AMOUNT REQUESTED $417,905 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $411,860 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $417,905 Funds will be used for the management and administratian of the City of Chula Vista's CDBG program, including: planning, regulatory compliance, contract administration, and fiscal management TAB 2 CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT - HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM AMOUNT REQUESTED $64,027 FY 2004-05 FUNDING NEW FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 Funding will be used to establish a Historic Preservation Program for the City of Chula Vista. This will allow staff to evaluate the historic significance af structures, prepare reports on requests to designate praperty as a historic resource, evaluate plans to modify or refurbish a historic structure, prepare grant applications, and pravide staff assistance to an appointed body charged with oversight of the historic preservation program. TAB 3 FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL OF SAN DIEGO AMOUNT REQUESTED $41,000 FY 2004.05 FUNDING $39,000 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $41,000 The Fair Housing Council of San Diego provides fair housing services to Chula Vista residents on behalf af the City. Services include mediation services for tenants and landlords in order to ensure equal opportunity in housing, and increase awareness of fair housing laws. TAB 4 REGIONAL TASK FORCE ON THE HOMELESS AMOUNT REQUESTED $1,000 FY 2003-04 FUNDING $1,000 FY 2004.05 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $1,000 The Regianal Task Force on the Homeless collects, analyzes and disseminates information on homelessness, and facilitates regional solutions through planning, coordination and advocacy. The Force provides information and referral services to homeless service agencies, individuals and local government jurisdictions. Funds will be used for professional and clerical staff costs. 19-4 PAGE 5, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 PUBLIC SERVICE PROGRAM The City received fwenty-fwo (22) eligible requests for public services totaling $856,406. The city may allocate up to $344,928 for public service programs, based on a 15 percent cap of the entitlement funds ($2,299,525). In order to be eligible for block grant funding, a project or service must address at least one of the CDBG national objectives which are: 1) Benefit primarily low and moderate income families; 2) aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; and 3) meet other community needs having a major emergency (disasters, etc.). The funding requests from public service organizations are CDBG-eligible as they meet the national objective to primarily benefit low-income families. The proposals are included in the CDBG Notebook under Public Service Requests. Methodoloay for Makina Fundina Recommendations In developing staff recommendations, the following principles were utilized: 1. Recommended funding levels for public services was based on [a] ability to expend CDBG funds in a timely manner; [b] submiftal of quarter reports on time; [c] review of the stated objectives as outlined in the CDBG agreement with actual performance; and [d] the length of time an organization has received CDBG funding. 2. Recommended funding levels for public services should not be below levels that make the offered CDBG-eligible activities infeasible. 3. Funding preferences should go to programs which best meet the criteria of providing new services to Chula Vista, providing services from a local base, collaborating efforts, reduced funding requests, and have a successful track record in providing services and expenditure of grant funds. The above principles were utilized as follows: 1. Staff used last year's approved funding level for each program as an initial basis from which to make recommendations. 2. Staff took into account the $2,299,525 entitlement expected to be received from HUD and the federally mandated funding cap of 15 percent. 3. As per Council direction, staff gave priority to locally-based organizations which are proposing to primarily serve Chula Vista residents and collaborating agencies. Staff especially took into consideration the longevity factor of those organization's receiving CDBG assistance, since the main emphasis for receiving CDBG funding is to assist new requests and start-up organizations. 19.5 PAGE 6, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 Fundina Recommendations All of the programs requesting funds are identified below. The information provided includes the amount of funds requested, the prior year funding levels, and staff funding recommendations. If a program is recommended for funding, then staff has determined that it is a viable program at the recommended funding level. Of the twenty-two proposals received, staff recommends funding seventeen. All of the funding requests for the public service programs are CDBG-eligible as they meet the national objective to primarily benefit low-income families. I YOUTH SERVICES TAB 16 FAMILY HEALTH CENTERS OF SAN DIEGO- KlDCARE EXPRESS MOBILE MEDICAL UNIT AMOUNT REQUESTED I AMOUNT REQUESTED $25,000 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $17,000 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $25,000 The KidCare Express Mobile Medical Units will provide health care to children whose parents cannot afford health insurance. The Mobile Health Clinic will rotate among strategically located schools in Chula Vista's low/moderate income neighborhoods.. Volunteers and nurses will transport students to the clinic from schools throughout the School District. Refer to Page 7 of the April 5, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes (Attachment E) for Council direction. TAB 22 YMCA FAMILY STRESS COUNSELING - KINSHIP PROGRAM AMOUNT REQUESTED $68,000 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $20 000 FY 2005.06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $25,000 The YMCA Kinship program provides services to relatives caring full time for children in the family based on the premise that placing children within the family is more beneficial and less disruptive than placing the children in foster care. TAB 25 CHULA VISTA YOUTH SERVICES NETWORK. COLLABORATIVE AMOUNT REQUESTED TOTAL FY 2004.05 FUNDING $143,445 $113,039 19-6 PAGE 7, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 FY' 2005.06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $ 90,068 (. South Bay Community Services $30,000 .:. Boys and Girls Club $13,000 .:. C.V. Community Collaborative $5,000 (. Chula Vista Police-PAL $6,468 .:. Ofay Recreation Center $6,600 .:. South Bay Family YMCA $29,000 This program provides youth educatian and counseling services in the area of tutoring/literacy, fine arts, mentoring, and day camp services. This colloborative is comprised of South Bay Community Services, Chulo Vista Police Activities league, South Bay Family YMCA, Boys & Girls Club of Chula Vista, the Chula Vista Cluster Coordinating Council, and the Chula Vista Parks & Recreation Department. 19-7 PAGE 8, ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: 19 05/11/04 TAB 17 LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES - CARING NEIGHBOR AMOUNT REQUESTED $29,000 FY 2003.04 FUNDING $29,000 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $19,000 Lutheran Sociol Services is requesting funds to continue providing health and safety home repairs to seniors. Local south bay contractors donate a majority of the labor. TAB 26 SOUTH BAY SENIOR COLLABORATIVE AMOUNT REQUESTED $91.372 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $58,275 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $52,065 .:. Meals on Wheels $12,705 .:. Elder Law and Advocacy $12,000 .:. City of Chula Vista-Recreation $4,460 .:. Lutheran Social Services $6,500 .:. Sf. Charles Nutrition $3,500 .:. Salvation Army $2,500 .:. South Bav Adult Health Dav Care Center $10,400 This collaborative comprises the organizations of Meals-on-Wheels; SI. Charles Nutrition; Adult Protective Services; Lutheran Social Services Shared Housing; The Solvation Army; Elder Law & Advocacy; and the Chula Vista Parks & Recreation Department. Each of these organizations offers services to seniors including meal delivery; adult day care; and rental assistance. Refer to Page 7 of the April 5, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes (Attachment E) for Council direction. 19-8 PAGE 9, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 I MISCELLANEOUS TAB 5 TAB 6 TAB 7 TAB 8 TAB 9 AMOUNT REQUESTED I CHULA VISTA FIRE FIGHTERS FOUNDATION AMOUNT REQUESTED $10,000 FY 2004.05 FUNDING NEW FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $2,500 Funds requested are to provide a variety of services to community members in need. Services include: certificates to stores for the purchase of essential items, car seat vouchers, bicycle helmet vouchers and support to the San Diego Burn Institute. Refer to Page 7 of the AprilS, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes (Attachment E) for Council direction. CHULA VISTA LITERACY TEAM CENTER AMOUNT REQUESTED $8,000 FY 2004.05 FUNDING $8,000 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $8,000 The Chula Vista Literacy Team Center is located in the South Branch of the Chula Vista Public Library and provides literacy services for adults. RECREATION DEPARTMENT - INFORMATION & REFERRAL AMOUNT REQUESTED $16,912 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $0 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 The Recreation Department is requesting assistance for the I&R Specialist. The purpose of the I&R Specialist is to provide comprehensive, uncomplicated, and readily available health and human service information. CHULA VISTA RECREATION - PEPSI PUNT PASS AND KICK AMOUNT REQUESTED $1,944 FY 2004.05 FUNDING NEW FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 The City has been selected to be the local host for the NFL Punt, Pass and Kick competition. Funds will be used for promotional flyers and staff costs to cover the event. CHULA VISTA RECREATION - FOURTH GRADE ELEMENTARY LEARN TO SWIM AMOUNT REQUESTED $40,440 FY 2004.05 FUNDING NEW FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 Funds will be used for salaries, trainings and operating expenses such as printing, postage, mileage, recreation supplies and special adaptive equipment. TAB 11 CHULA VISTA RECREATION - LIFEGUARD TRAINING AMOUNT REQUESTED FY 2004-05 FUNDING 19-9 $19,960 NEW PAGE 10, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 The program provides swim instruction and conditioning to prepare participants for the American Red Cross Lifeguard training courses. Funds are to be used specifically for pool rental fees, lifeguard fees, water safety instructors, transportation, and training materials. TAB 13 CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY COLLABORATIVE CHILD CARE COORDINATOR AMOUNT REQUESTED $47,923 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $46,200 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $40,000 This program provides enrichment for childcare providers through written, information, workshops and increased dialogue. This progrom also provides a position who serves as a liaison between the City Planning Department and residents interested in applying for large family daycare licenses. TAB 14 CHULA VISTA VETERANS HOME SUPPORT FOUNDATION- MECHANICAL Llns FOR BEDRIDDEN PATIENTS AMOUNT REQUESTED $3,500 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $3,500 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $3,500 The Chula Vista Veterans Home Support Foundation raises money to fund quality of living items for the Veterans Home residents that cannot be funded by the State of California's Department of Veterans Affairs. TAB 15 DRESS FOR SUCCESS - PROFESSIONAL WOMEN'S GROUP AMOUNT REQUESTED $12,000 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $8,000 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $5,000 This program is designed to provide Employment Retention and Professional Image services to economically disadvantaged women who are making the transition from government subsidy to economic independence. TAB 18 LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES - (PROJECT HAND) COMMUNITY & FAMILY SERVICES EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE OF CHULA VISTA AMOUNT REQUESTED $15,100 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $8,000 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $8,000 This program was formally known as Project Hand. Community & Family Services is an emergency and career assistance center that provides clients with shelter, food, clothing, transportation, medication, job search assistance, and utility assistance. 19-10 PAGE 11, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 TAB 19 PLAY IT COOL MUSIC FOUNDATION - SCHOOL PROGRAM AMOUNT REQUESTED $SO.OOO FY 2004-0S FUNDING NEW FY 200S-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 The program provides services to 70 at-risk youth who will participate in the drop-out prevention/academic enrichment program. TAB 20 SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES - THURSDAYS MEAL AMOUNT REQUESTED $6,000 FY 2004-0S FUNDING $6,000 FY 200S-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $6,000 Thursdays Meal provides free hot meals to the homeless and very low income residents of Chula Vista. TAB 21 SWEETWATER EDUCATION FOUNDATION-COMPACT FOR SUCCESS AMOUNT REQUESTED $100,000 FY 2004-0S FUNDING NEW FY 200S-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $S,OOO The Compact for Success path is the guarantee for Sweetwater district students-admissions to San Diego State University with a 3.0 grade point average and graduation from college within four years. Funds will be used to financially assist Chula Vista students who require financial assistance to complete their education at San DiegoState University. Refer to Poge 7 of the April 5, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes (Attachment E) for Council direction. TAB 24 CHULA VISTA FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION COALITION - COLLABORATIVE AMOUNT REQUESTED $SO,OOO FY 2004.05 FUNDING $44.100 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $32,000 This program provides education and outreach services to children, youth and families to aid in the prevention of violence. This collaborative proposal is comprised of South Bay Community Services, Chula Vista Police Department, Center for Community Solutions, YWCA Domestic Violence Services, and YMCA Family Stress Counseling Services. 19-11 PAGE 12, ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: 19 05/11/04 TAB 10 THERAPEUTIC SERVICES COLLABORATIVE - CHULA VISTA RECREATION DEPT. AMOUNT REQUESTED $73,377 FY' 2004-05 FUNDING $16,043 FY' 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $7,795 Refer to Poge 7 of the April 5, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes (Attachment E) for Council direction. TAB 12 THERAPEUTIC SERVICES COLLABORATIVE - CHARLES CHENEWETH FOUNDATION AMOUNT REQUESTED $17,523 FY' 2004-05 FUNDING $16,043 FY' 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $11 ,000 This collaborative includes the Chula Vista Recreation Department Therapeutics Program and the Charles Cheneweth Foundation. These two therapeutics programs will collaborate to enhance the leisure/recreational opportunities for individuals with disabilities who reside in Chula Vista. TAB 23 SOUTH BAY FAMILY YMCA HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL AMOUNT REQUESTED 526,000 FY' 2004-05 FUNDING $23,940 FY' 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $5,000 The Human Services Council develops coalitions between the communities of human service providers to effectively utilize personnel and programs and serve as a catalyst to bring local government, private industry and business organizations together to address and resolve the communities needs. 19-12 PAGE 13, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 COMMUNITY PROJECTS Two (2) Community Project requests were received totaling $384,790. Community Projects/Programs are designed to address slum and blight in the community. There IS no funding cap for this category. Staff recommends funding in the amount of $384,790. I NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION/INTERIM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT REQUESTED ~ TAB 27 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION PROGRAM - CODE ENFORCEMENT AMOUNT REQUESTED $284,790 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $262,253 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $284,790 Code Enforcement is 0 complaint-driven program, which torgets private residential (single- family detached and attached) as well as commercial properties located within targeted areas. CDBG funds are used to pay the salaries of the four Code Enforcement Officers, which are assigned to specific census tracts. The inspectors focus on residential complaints received in low to moderate income census tracts. Funds also pay a portion of the salaries for a Code Enforcement Technician, and a City Attorney in proportion to the amount of time those staff members spend on complaints in the low to moderate-income target trocts, along with related overhead expenses. TAB 28 HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM AMOUNT REQUESTED $100,000 FY 2004.05 FUNDING $163,000 FY 2005.06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $100,000 The Housing Inspection Program is the City's proactive approach to address continuous complaints from residents about serious life, health and safety violations occurring in multi- family housing units. Under this program, 2 City housing inspectors are assigned to make routine scheduled inspections of rental dwellings containing three or more units located within designated low/mod census tracts. This program ensures that all rental-housing units meet minimum standards of habitability as set forth in State law. CDBG funds will be used to pay for the salaries of the 2 inspectors, which are assigned to work in the low to moderate-income eligible target tracts. 19-13 PAGE 14, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The Capitallmpravement Program category includes both non-profit and City requests. Staff recommends not funding the Little League due to the fact that they do not meet eligibility requirements. In consideration of the funding decrease, staff has recommended not funding any of the non-profit capital improvement projects. The City capital improvement recommendation is $1,101,902. The capital improvement program category does not have a funding cap limit. I NON PROFIT CIP REQUESTS TAB 29 CHULA VISTA NATIONAL LlnLE LEAGUE AMOUNT REQUESTED I AMOUNT REQUESTED $11 0,650 FY 2003-04 FUNDING $75,925 FY 2004-05 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 The National Little League is requested CDBG funds to make critical repairs and upgrades including fences, backstops, dugouts, etc. This project does not meet HUD eligibility standards as a public facility due to the restriction of public access. TAB 31 MAAC PROJECT - COMMUNITY CENTER ENHANCEMENT AMOUNT REQUESTED $39,500 FY 2003-04 FUNDING NEW REQUEST FY 2004.05 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 Community Center improvements include 0 sump ond pump to divert floodwoter; electrical transformer repairs, new storefront doors and windows, three basketball backboards and volleyball courts. TAB 32 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CHULA VISTA - LAUDERBACH FACILITY AMOUNT REQUESTED $98,500 FY 2004.05 FUNDING $39,000 FY 2005.06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 The Boys & Girls Club is requesting funds for facility improvements including the restrooms, and security upgrades. 19-14 PAGE 15, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 I CITY-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMOUNT REQUESTED I TAB 30 OTAY RECRECREATION CENTER IMPROVEMENTS I AMOUNT REQUESTED I $225,000 I FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION I $220,000 Funds requested ore for the construction of classroom facilities for the Otay Recreation Center. It is proposed to build 2,000 square feet rooms with dividable walls to allow for multiple uses. TAB 3S.36 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS I AMOUNT REQUESTED I $500,000 I FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION I $379,402 Sidewalk Rehabilitation Annual Program (Citywide) $125,000 ADA Annual Progrom $254,402 TAB 33 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS I AMOUNT REQUESTED I $267,500 I FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION I $267,500 Installation of drainage improvements on Emerson Street (from Elm to 3'd) TAB 34 PARK LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS I AMOUNT REQUESTED I $160,000 I FY 2005.06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION I $160,000 This project will provide lighting for 0 walking trail pathway and the parking lot. The added lighting will enhance security and visibility of the area. TAB 37 STRED IMPROVEMENTS I AMOUNT REQUESTED I $50,000 I FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION I $50 000 This praject consists street improvements to 3,d Avenue (Orange to Main) TAB 38 AUDIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS I AMOUNT REQUESTED I $25,000 I FY 2005.06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION I $25,000 Installation of audible pedestrian signal crossing at various signalized intersections within the City. Audible signal will enhance the safety of pedestrians crossing the streets with sight disability. 19-15 PAGE 16, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REQUESTS The two (2) Economic Development requests total $32,917. Staff recommends funding in the amount of $8,000. I ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AMOUNT REQUESTED TAB 39 SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE CONTRACTING OPPORTUNITIES CENTER AMOUNT REQUESTED $17,917 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $10,751 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 This program provides hands-on technical assistonce to 011 smoll, smoll disodvontaged, veteran owned, woman owned and Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) zone business enterprises that desire to grow and expand their businesses in the governmental market sector. The program provides assistance In competing and potentially achieving government contracts. TAB 40 SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE MICRO ENTERPRISE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AMOUNT REQUESTED $15,000 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $10,000 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $8,000 The Small Business Development & International Trade Center will provide Chula Vista Businesses, that have been identified os potential growth companies, with detailed research reports using Geographic Information System (GIS) for the purpose of helping the businesses grow. 19-16 PAGE 17, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) PROGRAM BUDGET The City will receive $992,114 in HOME funds from HUD for FY 2005-06. HOME funds may be used to provide affordable rental housing and ownership opportunities through new construction, acquisition, rehabilitation, and tenant-based rental assistance. Over the past seven-yeors the City hos used these funds to support new construction and acquisition activities related to the development of affordable housing. TAB 41 STAFF ADMINISTRATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION $99,211 Administrative costs for city stoff to oversee the HOME program. These administrotive costs represent 10% of the HOME budget. These costs include staff costs for coordination, accounting, monitoring of sub-recipients, environmental review, and HUD reporting requirements. Approximately $84,000 will be used to reimburse the General Fund for staff- related costs and $15,000 will be used for affordable housin com liance monitoring. NO TAB COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION 15% SET-ASIDE STAFF RECOMMENDATION $154,200 HOME program regulations require 0 porticipating jurisdiction to set-aside 15% of the annuol HOME entitlement for a Community Housing Development Orgonizotion (CHDO) for the purpose of developing and/or supporting the City of Chula Vista in praviding offordable housin ro'ect in the Ci . TAB 43 SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES - OFFICE RENT (5% CHDO OPERATING) STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 Funds requested are for payment of office space. These funds ore available to Cammunity Housing Development Organizations producing affordable housing within the Ci . TAB 44 CHULA VISTA AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION $663,388 Funds will be used for new affordable housing development; to acquire land for infill offordable housing units; single-family rehabilitation; and first-time homebuyer ro rams. TAB 45 SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES - AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR LOW INCOME FAMILIES STAFF RECOMMENDATION $105,315 Funds requested are for counselor salaries, counseling materials, equipment and overhead ex enses. TAB 46 MAAC PROJECT FINANCIAL LITERACY AND HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNTIES STAFF RECOMMENDATION $0 Funds requested are for counselor salaries, counseling materials, equipment and overhead ex enses. TAB 42 AMERICAN DREAM DOWNPAYMENT INITIATIVE 19-17 $34,9581 PAGE 18, ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: These funds will be used to ossist first-time homebuyers. 19 05/11/04 19-18 PAGE 19, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) PROGRAM BUDGET Chula Vista will receive Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) entitlement funds in the amount of $87,011 for fiscal year 2005-06. The Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) program is designed to be the first step in a continuum of assistance to prevent homelessness and to enable homeless individuals and families to move toward independent living. ESG is a formula-funded program that uses the CDBG formula as the basis for allocating funds to eligible jurisdictions. TAB 47 CITY ADMINISTRATION The program will manage and administer Chula Vista's ESG program, including planning, regulatory compliance, contract administration, and fiscal management. AMOUNT REQUESTED $4,350 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $4,385 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $4,350 TAB 48 ESG-CASA NUEVA VIDA AMOUNT REQUESTED $82,661 FY 2004-05 FUNDING $82,748 FY 2005-06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION $82,661 South Bay Community Services provides emergency shelter services in two locations in Chula Vista. These services aim at homeless families, most of them victims of domestic violence. They aim to develop a comprehensive strength-based fomily assessment, alter which together they develop a treatment plan so the clients can work to re-establish self- sufficiency and end their homelessness. Funds are used for operating costs including child care, bus vouchers and motel vouchers. 19-19 PAGE 20, ITEM NO.: 19 MEETING DATE: 05/11/04 FISCAL IMPACT CDBG Proqram The City is eligible to receive $2,299,525 in CDBG entitlement funds. Staff recommends 02005- 06 spending pion of $2,2,99,525. Category Staff Recommendation Administration & PlanninrJ $459,905 Capital Improvement Program $1,101,902 Community Proiects $384,790 Economic Development $8,000 Public Service $344,928 HOME Proqram Chula Vista will receive a HOME entitlement of $1,027,072. Funds will be budgeted for administration; CHDO reserve; CHDO operating; and affordable housing development. Emerqency Shelter Grant Proqram/Amer;can Dream DownPayment Initiative ESG funds amount to $87,011 and the ADDI funds amount to $34,958, respectively. The ESG funds will be budgeted in accordance with the ESG regulations and the ADDI funds will be used in conjunction with the City's approved first-time homebuyer program. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - 2005-2006 Annual Action Plan Attachment B - 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan Attachment C - 2005-2006 Program Spending Plan (CDBG, HOME, ADDI and ESG) Attachment D - March 29, 2005 Minutes of an Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council Attachment E - April 5, 2005 Minutes of an Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council 19-20 RESOLUTION NO.2005- DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR FY 2005- 06 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG); HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME); AMERICAN DREAM DOWNPA YMENT (ADD!); AND THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) PROGRAMS; AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF THE 2005-20] 0 CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND THE 2005-2006 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD); and INSTRUCTING STAFF TO INCLUDE APPROPRIATIONS TO FUND THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN IN THE FY 2005-06 PROPOSED BUDGET WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has prepared the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan ("Consolidated Plan") and the 2005-2006 Annual Action Plan per HUD Rules and Regulations; and, WHEREAS, the City will receive a 2005-06 CDBG entitlement of $2,299,525; a HOME entitlement of $992, I 14; an ADD! entitlement of $34,958; and an ESG entitlement of $87,0 I I; and, WHEREAS, the City has followed its Citizen Participation Plan and held a public hearing on housing and community needs on March 29, 2005 and April 5, 2005 at which time public testimony was received and considered by the City Council with respect to the Annual Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City has determined that all of the proposed activities meet the CDBG national objectives to benefit primarily low-income households or aid in the elimination of slums and blight; and, WHEREAS, the City has determined that it is necessary and appropriate to fund special activities by certain sub-recipients to implement neighborhood revitalization and community economic development projects in order to meet the goals and objectives of the Consolidated Plan and the Action Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED based on the findings above, the City Council ofthe City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan and the 2005-06 Action Plan which includes a Spending Plan for FY 2005-06 CDBG; HOME; ADD!; and ESG programs, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Community Development Director is authorized to transmit the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan and the 2005-06 Annual Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and that staffis instructed to include appropriations to fund the Annual Plan in the FY 2005-06 proposed budget. Presented by Approved as to form by ~ ( h ( . J "4 0 ~ fIt ~'L"i ~ Ann ~oore City Attorney (c/cj{ Laurie Madigan Director of Community Development Iv - "2! 2005-2006 PROGRAM SPENDING PLAN CDBG, HOME, ADDI and ESG ADMINISTRATION Amount Available $459 905 120% of Entitlement) ~Qb iNo. Organization I'rogramJl'rojecl funding I City af Chula Visfa-Comm Dev. City Staff Administrafion $ 417.905.00 3 Fair Housing Cauncil of San Diego Chula Visfa Fair Housing Program $ 4 LOOO.OO 4 Regional Task Force Regional Task Force on Homeless $ I ,000.00 Tolals $ 459,905.00 /9- 22 ATTACHMENT A I yo u a IS Q- eerea Ion 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 24 25 25 25 25 25 25 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 Charles I. Cheneweth Foundation erapeu IC ervlces $ $ $ $ nl $ $ $ $ $ ervlces $ Family Violence Prevention and $ Intervention Coalition Youth Services Network $ Youth Services Network $ Youth Services Network $ Youth Services Network $ Youth Services Network $ Youth Services Network South Ba Senior Collaborative $ South Ba Senior Collaborative $ South Ba Senior Collaborative $ South Ba Senior Collaborative $ South Ba Senior Collaborative $ South Ba Senior Collaborative $ South Ba Senior Collaborative $ Total Public Services $ 11~ 23 11,000.00 30,000.00 3,500.00 5,000.00 25,000.00 19,000.00 8,000.00 6,000.00 5,000.00 25,000.00 5,000.00 16,000.00 16,000.00 30,000.00 13,000.00 5,000.00 6,468.00 6,600.00 29,000.00 12,705.00 12,000.00 4,460.00 6,500.00 3,500.00 12,500.00 10,400,00 344,928,00 27 City of Chula Vista-Planning & Bldg. 28 City of Chula Vista-Planning & Bldg. Community Preservation Program $ Housing Inpsection Program $ Total Community Projects $ 284,790.00 100,000.00 384,790,00 CIP (City) JOb No, Organization ProgramlProje<;t funding 30 City of Chula Vista-Recreation Otay Recreation Department $ 220,000.00 33 City of Chula Vista - General Services Emerson Street Drainage Improvements (EI $ 267,500.00 34 City of Chula Vista - General Services Park Lighting Improvements (Hilltop) $ 160,000.00 35 City of Chula Vista - General Services Annual ADA Curb Ramps $ 254.402.00 36 City of Chula Vista - General Services Annual Sidewalk Rehabilitation Project $ 125,000.00 37 City of Chula Vista - General Services 3rd Avenue Street Improvements (Orange $ 50,000.00 38 City of Chula Vista - General Services Audible Pedestrian Signal Modifications $ 25,000.00 Total CIP (City) $ 1,101,902.00 Economic Development Jab Staff No. Organization Program/Project Rec<:omendatlons - 40 Southwestern Community College Micra Enterprise Technical Assistance $ Total Economic Development $ 8,000.00 8,000.00 /9 - 2'/ 41 City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. City Statt Administration $ 99.211.00 42 City ot Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. ADDI-First Time Homebuyer Program $ 34,958.00 43 South Bay Community Services Office Rent - CHDO Operation $ City ot Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. 15 % CHDO Set-Aside $ 154,200.00 Assistance in Production at Attordable 44 City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. Housing $ 663.703.00 Affordable Housing for Low Income 45 South Bay Community Services Families $ 75,000.00 Total HOME and ADDI $ 1,027,072,00 Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Amount AVailable $87011 Tab Staff 1110. Organization Program/Project Reccomendatlons 47 City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. Administration $ 4.350.00 48 ISouth Bay CommunITY :>ervlces ,--osa Nueva Vida $ 82.661.00 Total ESG $ 87,011 ,00 /9- 25 ~~f?- ~ ,~~~~ -.- - - _...::::,~ erlY OF CHUlA VISTA DRAFT Consolidated Plan Annual Action Plan Fiscal Year 2005-2006 276 FOURTH AVENUE. CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5047 . FAX (619) 476-5310 /1 ." jl- __ !......., I >'-- ... ATTACHMENT A I. Consolidated Annual Action Plan Executive Summary ................................................. 1 A. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES ..................................... 2 B. SPECIFIC ANNUAL OBJECTIVES ........................................................................... 5 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS..................... ................... ..................... ................... ..... 8 1. Youth Services ............................................................................................. 15 2. Senior Services.... .... ........................ ......... .............................. ................ ...... 16 3. Disabled Services ......................................................................................... 16 4. Homeless Services .................................................... .............. ............... ....... 17 5. Battered and Abused Spouses ....................................................................... 18 6. General Public Services.................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. D. GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................26 E. HOMELESS AND OTHER SPECIAL NEEDS............................................................ 26 F. PUBLIC HOUSING NEEDS .................................................................................. 27 G. ANTI-POVERTY STRATEGY ................................................................................27 H. LEAD-BASED PAINT........................ ..................................... .............................. 28 1. OTH ER ACTIONS.................................................. ............................................. 28 J. FAIR HOUSING PROGRAM ................................................................................. 31 K. MONITORING......... .......................... ................... ............... .............................. 37 II. PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS................................................................. 38 A. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)..................................................... 38 B. HOME Investment Partnership (HOME)............................................................... 39 C. American Downpayment Initiative (ADDI)........................................................... 41 D. Emergency Shelter Grant Program ..................................................................... 41 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: LISTING OF PROPOSED PROJECTS ....................................................42 APPENDIX B: CERTIFICATIONS........ ............................................................... ....... 43 APPENDIX C: Citizen Participation and Public Comments.......................................... 52 APPENDIX D: SF 424 Forms ...................................................................................53 APPENDIX E: Proof of Publication ...........................................................................54 FIGURES Figure 1: Low and Moderate Income Population...................................................... 55 Figure 2: Minority Population Concentration ............................................................ 56 Figure 2: Hispanic Population Concentration ........................................................... 57 11<._7 I. Consolidated Annual Action Plan Executive Summary (Fiscal Year 2005/06) ^ n ^.,",....w._.w_..wn_w'^ "..,_,~.~,._... _M._"..~"_"',,,,,,,^,,,,,,_,~,,, ^._...~. ..'-',,~,.,,~. .,. ..~ .. ...... The Consolidated Annual Action Plan outlines the City of Chula Vista's planned use of funds during Fiscal Year 2005/2006, which include: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) funds, American Dream Down Payment Initiative funds (ADDI), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funds. The Plan describes: A) the resources available for program implementation; B) activity to be undertaken; C) monitoring; D) homelessness; E) anti-poverty strategy; F) coordination; G) obstacles to underserved needs; H) geographic location for expenditure of CDBG funds; I) program specific requirements; J) fair housing activities; K) objectives; and L) Section 108 Loan. This plan is consistent with the priority housing needs, priority homeless needs, priority special needs populations, and priority non-housing community development needs listed in the City of Chula Vista's Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2005-2010. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 1 of 57 17 - ~?'; A. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES Federal Resources: The City anticipates using the following federal programs for implementation of the Consolidated Annual Plan: . Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - the City of Chula Vista is an entitlement City and receives an annual grant from the federal government. These funds can be used for public facilities, services, or housing for low-income (80% and below the median County income) persons. For FY 2005-06 the City is expected to receive' $2,261,525 in CDBG funds. . HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) - the City also receives an annual grant from the HUD program through a jurisdictionally competitive process. The funds can be used for new housing construction, housing rehabilitation, rental assistance or to assist first time homebuyers. For FY 2005- 06 the City is expected to receive $992,114 in HOME funds. . American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) - In addition to regular HOME funds the City is expected to receive ADD! funds in the amount of $34,958 for FY 2005-06 to help low to moderate income residents become homeowners. . Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) - For FY 2005-06, Chula Vista will be receiving Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funds in the amount of $87,011 to address homeless needs. . Section 8 Rental Assistance - the County of San Diego operates the City's Section 8 program and will receive HUD funding for the next five years to provide rental assistance for low-income families (50% of median County income). State and Local Resources: The City also plans to use funds through the following State or local government programs: . Redevelopment Agency 20% Set-Aside - The City's Redevelopment Agency sets aside approximately twenty percent of tax increment revenue annually that is generated from the City's five redevelopment project areas, which is used for the development and rehabilitation of affordable housing. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 2 of 57 /1- 2fj . Mortgage Credit Certificate Program (MCC) - The City currently participates in the Regional MCC Consortium administered by the County of San Diego, which provides tax credits for first-time homebuyers to offset down payment and closing costs associated with purchasing a home. The City supports the application of other entities within the City for programs which would assist the City in reaching the goals of the Plan. These programs include Supportive Housing, Housing for Persons with AIDS, low income housing tax credits, and mortgage revenue bonds. As other programs from the State and Federal government arise during the five-year planning period which will assist the City in reaching the goals and objectives of the Plan, the City will pursue those resources. Non-Profit Resources Non-profit housing developers and service providers are a critical resource to the City. The following developers and service providers are some of the non-profits who have been active in the City and play an important role in the Plan. . Local Initiative Support Corporation (LISC) - Residential, commercial or mixed-use projects serving low income persons. LISC offers non-profit capacity building and pre-development grants and loans. . California Community Reinvestment Corporation (CCRC) - Provides permanent financing of multi-family rental and limited equity housing cooperatives. . South Bay Community Services (SBCS) - Multi-service social service agency and affordable housing developer working closely with the City on numerous community improvement projects. . Metropolitan Area Advisory Committee (MAAC) - Multi-service social service agency and affordable housing developer working with the City on various affordable housing projects. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 3 of 57 /e; - 30. Table 1: Summa of Annual Funds for FY 2005/06 CDBG Entitlement Grant Un ro rammed Prior Year's Income not Return of Grant Funds Total Estimated Pro ram Income $2 261 525 $0 $ 992 114 34 958 87 011 o $0 Total Fundin Sources: $3 375 608 City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 ;q- -) I -" , / , ~.J I Page 4 of 57 B. SPECIFIC ANNUAL OBJECTIVES The specific objectives and priorities for activities funded during FY 2005/06 are included below in Table 2. Further descriptions are found under Section C. TABLE 2: List of Proposed Projects for FY 2005/06 ~ Organization ~ Program/Project ~~ Priority Funding City of Chula Vista-Comm City Staff Administration $ Dev. 417905.00 Fair Housing Council of Planning and $ 5an Dieao Chula Vista Fair Housina Proaram Administration 41.000.00 Reaional Task Force Reaional Task Force on Homeless $ 1.000.00 Total $ 459.905.00 South Bay Community Youth Services Network $ Services 30.000.00 Boys and Girls Club of Youth Services Network $ Chula Vista 13 000.00 Chula Vista Community Youth Services Network $ Collaborative Youth Services 5.000.00 City of Chula Vista Police Youth Services Network $ DeDt. - PAL 6.468.00 Otay Recreation Center Youth Services Network $ Proarams 6 600.00 South Bav Familv YMCA Youth Services Network $ 29 000.00 Total $ 90.068.00 Meals-on-Wheels South Bay Senior Collaborative $ 12 705.00 Elder Law & Advocacv South Bay Senior Collaborative $ 12 000.00 City of Chula Vista- South Bay Senior Collaborative $ Recreation 4 460.00 Lutheran Social Services South Bay Senior Collaborative Senior Services $ 6,500.OC St. Charles Nutrition Center South Bay Senior Collaborative $ 3,500.00 Salvation Armv South Bay Senior Collaborative $ 12.500.00 South Bay Adult Day South Bay Senior Collaborative $ Health Care Center 10 400.00 Total $ 62.065.00 City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 5 of 57 /1-32 _~ _~__Or:ganizati_Qn _ ~_ _ _ Pro9l'am/Project - - Priority _ _ _ _ Fun!ll!19 ~ - City of Chula Vista- Recreation Theraoeutic Services $ 7 795.00 Charles 1. Cheneweth Community Access / Therapeutic Disabled Foundation Services Services $ 11 000.00 Chula Vista Veterans Mechanical Lifts for Bedridden Home Sunnort Foundation Patients $ 3 500.00 Total $22.295 Chula Vista Firefighters $ Foundation Random Acts of Kindness 2 500.00 City of Chula Vista-Public $ Librarv Literacv Team Center 8 000.00 Chula Vista Community $ Collaborative Child Care Coordinator 30.000.00 Dress for Success San Dieoo Professional Women's Grouo $ 5 000.00 Family Health Centers of KidCare Express Mobile Medical $ San Dieao Unit III 25.000.00 Lutheran Social Services Carina Neiahbor $ 19000.00 Lutheran Social Services Proiect Hand General Public $ 8.000.00 South Bay Community Services Services Thursdav's Meal $ 6.000.00 Sweetwater Education Foundation Comoact for Success $ 5 000.00 YMCA Family Stress $ Counselina Scvs. YMCA Kinshio Suooort Services 25.000.00 Chula Vista Human Services South Bav Familv YMCA Council $ 5 000.00 South Bay Community Family Violence Prevention and Services Intervention Coalition- $ 16.000.00 YMCA Family Stress Family Violence Prevention and Counselina Scvs. Intervention Coalition- $ 16 000.00 Total General Services 1$ 170.500.00 Total All Services $ 344.928.00 City of Chula Vista- Preservation Planninn & Bldn. Code Enforcement Proaram and $ 284.790.00 maintenance of City of Chula Vista- existing housing $ Plannino & Bldo. Housina Insoection Prooram 100 000.00 Total Community Proiects $ 384.790.00 City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005(06 Page 6 of 57 /1 - :3 3 ~~~__, e_ ..,,_ ~__~~~__~~~ _"'_,,~ __~_~<,,,,~, __ __~,,_ ~_ ~ ,__ ~ __~_ ~~..~ _"___~~~~ __"".. _~_~ , _ Orgcmization _ _ Program/Project _ Priori~ _ Fundil1g _ _ City of Chula Vista- Public Facilities Recreation Ota Recreation De artment 220 000.00 City of Chula Vista - Emerson Street Drainage General Services 1m rovements Elm to 3rd 267 500.00 City of Chula Vista - Park Lighting Improvements General Services Hillto 160 000.00 City of Chula Vista - General Services Annual ADA Curb Ram s $ 254,402.00 City of Chula Vista - Annual Sidewalk Rehabilitation Infrastructure General Services Pro'ect 125 000.00 City of Chula Vista - 3rd Avenue Street Improvements General Services Oran e to Main 50 000.00 City of Chula Vista - Audible Pedestrian Signal General Services Modifications 25 000.00 Total 1,101,902.00 Southwestern Community Micro-Enterprise Technical Economic Colle e Assistance Development 8 000.00 Total 8 000.00 CDBG Total 2 299 525.00 Qrganization _ _ _ Program/~roject _ _ _ Priority _FiI_n~ing _ __ City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. Ci Staff Administration City of Chula Vista-Comm. ADDI-First Time Homebuyer Dev. Pro ram South Bay Community Services Office Rent - CH DO 0 eration City of Chula Vista-Comm. Assistance in Production of Dev. Affordable Housin Administration and Planning Housing Assistance 99211.00 34 958.00 Housing Production 49 605.00 City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. Administration South Bay Community Services Casa Nueva Vida Administration and Planning Homeless Facilities Total ESG TOTAL 2005-2006 4 350.00 82661.00 87 011.00 3 413 608.00 City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 7 of 57 /q.. "... ,,r ~'t C. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS: The following section outlines the proposed projects to be undertaken by the City during FY 2005/06 by priority need, as identified in the City's 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan. PRIORITY: HOUSING NEEDS - Preservation and Maintenance of Existing Housing Priority 1: Maintain and preserve the City's aging housing stock Targeted Low to moderate income persons (31 to 80 percent of the GrOUDS: median) Five-Year 100 Housing Units (20 housing units per year) Obiectives: Performance Number of Households/Housing Units assisted as a proportion of Measure: the total low to moderate income households with housing problems in the Citv that were built prior to 1970 City of Chula Vista-Planning & Building - Community Preservation Program: Proposed Accomplishment: 588 - Housing Units Proposed Funding: $262,253 Code Enforcement is a complaint-driven program, which targets private residential (single-family detached and attached) and commercial properties located within low to moderate-income census tracts (targeted areas). CDBG funds are used to pay the salaries of the four Code Enforcement Officers, who are assigned to the targeted areas. The officers focus on complaints received in the targeted areas. Funds also pay a portion of the salaries for a Code Enforcement Technician, and a City Attorney in proportion to the amount of time those staff members spend on complaints in the targeted areas, along with related overhead expenses. This program is differentiated from the City's usual code enforcement activities by its dedication of four of the City's 11 Code Enforcement Offices to the program. General funds are used to fund all other code enforcement personnel and activities. The Code Enforcement program works in collaboration with the City's revolving loan program (CHIP) that provides loans to low and moderate-income households to correct many of the violations found by code enforcement officers in the targeted areas. Residents are informed of the CHIP program at the time of inspection. City of Chula Vista-Planning & Building - Housing Inspection Program: Proposed Accomplishment: SSO-Housing Units Proposed Funding: $163,000 The Housing Inspection Program is the City's proactive approach to prevent the decline of the affordable rental housing stock for low and very low-income residents. This program is in response to serious health and safety violations occurring in multi-family housing units. Under this program, two City housing inspectors are assigned to make routine scheduled inspections of rental dwellings containing three or more units located City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 8 of 57 /1- =----:-- ~. ..- within designated target areas. This program ensures that all rental-housing units meet minimum standards of habitability as set forth in State law. CDBG funds will be used to pay for the salaries of these two inspectors assigned specifically low to moderate- income eligible target tracts. The Housing Inspection Program works in collaboration with the City's Affordable Housing Financial Assistance Loan Program (AHFA). This program is offered to owners to correct the violation and is part of the City's ongoing effort to retain affordable rental housing for Chula Vista's very low and low-income households. An affordability clause is placed on the loan, which requires the units to remain affordable for a minimum of fifty (50) years. This program is funded through Redevelopment Low-Moderate Set-Aside Funds. Together, the Code Enforcement Program, the Housing Inspection Program, and the two loan programs (CHIP and AHFA) improve quality of life and provide our residents with a safe, healthy environment. PRIORITY: HOUSING NEEDS - Housing Assistance Priority 2: Provide Affordable Housing Opportunities to low and moderate income households Targeted Groups: High Priority is assigned to very low and low income family rental units. Medium Priority is assigned to low and moderate income familv for-sale units Five-Year 200 Households (20 households annually) Obiectives: Performance Number of households assisted as a proportion of the total Measure: number of low to moderate income households in the Citv. City of Chula Vista-Community Development - ,",OME-American Dream Downpayment Initiative: Proposed Accomplishment: 3 - Households Proposed Funding: $34,958 Funds will be used to assist first time homebuyers in conjunction with its existing first time homebuyer programs. Due to the rising home prices in Chula Vista, low/moderate income households have been unable to qualify for home loans; therefore, have not been able to take advantage of the ~ity's First Time homebuyers. As a result, staff will redesign the program to enable low-moderate income households to take advantage of the program. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 9 of 57 /9- :: b Targeted Groups: PRIORITY: HOUSING NEEDS - Housing Production Priority 3: Assist non-profit corporations to develop affordable housing for very low and low income households High Priority is assigned to small (2-4 persons per household) and large (5+ persons per household) families that are very low and low income. Medium Priority is assigned to extremely low and low income elderl ersons 20 Housing Units (5 housing units annually) Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: Units Constructed as a proportion of allocation for the a ro riate level income Housing Needs City of Chula Vista-Community Development - CHDO Set-Aside: Assistance in Production of Affordable Housing: Proposed Accomplishment: 10 - Housing Units Proposed Funding: $817,903 Funds will be used for infill affordable housing units consistent with the City's General Urban Core Specific Area Plan. It is projected that approximately 10 single family homes will be developed. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 10 of 57 ;C? - ?- -t' PRIORITY: HOMELESS NEEDS Priority 1: Continue to support programs offering transitional housing oDDortunities for homeless families and individuals Target Medium Priority is assigned to extremely low income families and Groups: individuals Five-Year 100 homeless persons (20 homeless persons annually) Obiectives: Performance Number of homeless persons assisted as a proportion of the estimated Measure: number of homeless in Chula Vista. South Bay Community Services - Emergency Shelter Grant-2005: Proposed Accomplishment - 75 Households Proposed Funding: $82,661 South Bay Community Services provides emergency shelter services in two locations in Chula Vista. These services aim at homeless families, most of them victims of domestic violence. They aim to develop a comprehensive strength-based family assessment, after which together they develop a treatment plan so the clients can work to re- establish self-sufficiency and end their homelessness. Funds are used for operating costs including child care, bus vouchers and motel vouchers. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 11 of 57 1.0. '-, '" /"1 - -, (. PRIORITY: NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS - Infrastructure Priority 1 - Provide for needed infrastructure improvements in lower and Infrastructure: moderate income target areas Target Groups: High Priority is assigned to addressing the need for street improvement, sidewalk improvements and street lighting. Medium Priority is assigned to addressing the need for flood Drevention/drainaae imorovements Five-Year 10 public facilities Obiectives: Performance Number of public facilities improved as a proportion of the number Measure: of low to moderate income households located in the projects census tracts. Emerson Street Drainage Improvements Proposed Accomplishment: 6172 - People Proposed Funding: $267,500 This project involves the installation of drainage improvements along Emerson Street from Elm Avenue to approximately 800 feet west of Third Avenue and from the existing 5' wide by 3.25' deep rectangular concrete channel west of Fourth Avenue and south of Emerson Street to an existing 42" CMP pipe south of Weisser Way. Right-of-way is required to construct the downstream portion of the project. Some of the adjacent property owners will benefit from the project's implementation, and construction will not occur unless those property owners dedicate easements for the drainage system. Those property owners that will not benefit directly from the improvements will be compensated for right-of-way, if necessary. Park Lighting Improvements (Hilltop) Proposed Accomplishment: 2,008 - People Proposed Funding: $160,000 This project will provide lighting for a walking trail pathway and the parking lot. The added lighting will enhance security and visibility of the area. Annual ADA Curb Ramps: Proposed Accomplishment: Low/Mod Income Census Tracts Proposed Funding: $254,402 This is an annual program. This project provides for the construction of concrete wheelchair ramps throughout the City. Existing pedestrian facilities lack wheelchair ramps which limits the mobility of physically challenged residents. The construction of wheelchair ramps will increase the mobility of these residents. Curb cuts are a requirement of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 12 of 57 VI' 'j,^, i'- _ ~,'~- . . Annual Sidewalk Rehabilitation Project: Proposed Accomplishment: Low/Mod Income Census Tracts Proposed Funding: $125,000 This is an annual program. This project involves the removal and replacement of deteriorated curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons. Some existing street improvements at various locations in the City are deteriorated and in need of rehabilitation. Curbs are broken and do not have gutters. Sidewalks are broken and/or uplifted and driveway aprons are broken and/or spalled. The lack of gutters creates drainage problems which can damage adjacent pavement. Uplifted sidewalks and driveways are potential safety hazards. 3rd Avenue Street Improvements Proposed Accomplishment: 5,976 - People Proposed Funding: $50,000 This project provides for the ultimate street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk, as well as pavement rehabilitation. This section of Third Avenue is highly traveled by both vehicular and pedestrian traffic and is sub-standard both in terms of street section and missing sidewalks. Audible Pedestrian Signal Modifications Proposed Accomplishment: 30,287 Proposed Funding:$25,000 Installation of audible pedestrian signal crossing at various signalized intersections within the City. Audible signal will enhance the safety of pedestrians crossing the streets with sight disability. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 13 of 57 I e' .:/ ' ,"'\ :' i. .,..,- _c,.... PRIORITY: NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS - Public Facilities Priority 2- Continue to improve the quality of existing community facilities to Public Facilities: serve the needs of lower and moderate income households Target Groups: High Priority is assigned to addressing the needs for community facilities serving youth, park and recreational facilities, and neighborhood facilities. Medium Priority is assigned to address the needs for community facilities providing health care, and those servina children reauirina child care seniors, and the disabled. Five-Year 10 public facilities Ob1ectives: Performance Number of public facilities improved as a proportion of the number Measure: of low to moderate income households located in the projects census tracts. I NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITIES Otay Recreation Center Proposed Accomplishment: 300 - People Proposed Funding: $220,000 Funds are requested for the construction of classroom facilities for the Otay Recreation Center. It is proposed to build 2000 square feet of rooms with dividable walls to allow for multiple uses. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 14 of 57 /9- L/ / PRIORITY: NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS - Public Services Priority 3 - Continue to fund public services at the federally mandated 15% Public Services: ca Targeted Medium Priority is assigned to addressing the support service Groups: needs of all lower and moderate (0 to 80 percent) special needs households (persons with AIDS, elderly, disabled, female-headed households and lar e famil households. Assist 2,500 people with fair housing services 500 youth 500 elderly 500 disabled 100 other s ecial needs rou s as needed Number of People assisted as a proportion of the number of eo Ie in need for each s ecial needs cate 0 . Five-Year Objectives: Performance Measure: I YOUTH SERVICES Youth Services Network Proposed Accomplishment: 2,152 - People Proposed Funding: .:. South Bay Community Services: $30,000 .:. Boys and Girls Club: $13,000 .:. Chula Vista Community Collaborative: $5,000 .:. Chula Vista Police Dept.: $6,468.00 .:. Otay Recreation Center: $6,600 .:. South Bay Family YMCA: $29,000 The "Network" will provide area youth with the services, support, and opportunities they need to lead healthy and productive lives. The collaborative includes South Bay Community Services which will provide staff support services for the Teen Center Job Development program; the Boys and Girls Club which will provide camp scholarships; the Chula Vista Community Collaborative, which will provide child care for low income families attending classes; South Bay YMCA, which will also provide low-cost child care services in addition to day camp services; and the Otay Recreational Center; which will provide personnel and supplies for educational and enrichment activities for 80 youth. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /9- 4-2- Page 15 of 57 I SENIOR SERVICES South Bay Senior Collaborative Proposed Accomplishment: 3,352 - People Proposed Funding: .:. Meals on Wheels: $12J05 .:. Elder Law & Advocacy: $12,000 .:. City of Chula Vista Recreation: $4,460 .:. Lutheran Social Services: $6,500 .:. St. Charles Nutrition Center: $3,500 .:. Salvation Army: $12,500 .:. South Bay Adult Day Health Care Center: $10,400 The "Senior Collaborative" is comprised of Elder Law & Advocacy which provides legal counseling, representation in administration law matters, document review/preparation, negotiation, and arbitration; the City of Chula Vista Recreation Department, which provides the Project CARE and Life Options programs, Vial of Life program; Lutheran Social Services which provides low-cost housing alternatives; St. Charles Nutrition Center and the Salvation Army, which provide lunch meals in a congregate settings for seniors; South bay Adult Day Health Care Center, which provides transportation to and from the South Bay Adult Day Health Care Center; and, Meals on Wheels, which provides two home delivered meals a day (seven days a week). Lutheran Social Services - Caring Neighbor Proposed Accomplishment: 20 - Housing Units Proposed Funding: $19,000 The program provides minor home repairs for low-income seniors to revitalize the homes and neighborhoods where they reside. Repairs/rehabs include installation of grab bars, wheelchair ramps, locks, security doors and lights, smoke detectors, new electrical fuses, fence repairs and weed abatement. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /q - tf3 Page 16 of 57 I DISABLED SERVICES Chula Vista Recreation - Therapeutic Services Proposed Accomplishment: 185 - People Proposed Funding: $7,795 The program provides the opportunity to participate in leisure/recreational programs that are specifically designed for persons who are developmentally or physically disabled. Charles I. Cheneweth Foundation - Community Access/Therapeutics Proposed Accomplishment: 180 - People Proposed Funding: $11,000 The Community Access Program provides one-to-one supervision, hands-on care, and door-to-door wheelchair-accessible transportaion to individuals with severe desabilities with leisure/recreational activities provided by the Chula Vista Recreation Department's Therapeutics Program. Funds will be used for direct service delivery as well as staff trainings and operating expenses such as printing, recreation supplies and equipment. Chula Vista Veterans Home Support Foundation: Mechanical Bedlifts Proposed Accomplishment: 50 - People Proposed Funding: $3,500 Funds will be used to purchase two battery operated height adjustable sling lifters to supplement three which were previously provided by the State. The lifts prevent injury to the nurses and safely allow the movement of bedridden veterans to their wheelchairs for transport. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 200S/06 Page 17 of S7 ;q ~ 'f y I HOMELESS SERVICES South Bay Community Services - Thursday's Meal: Proposed Accomplishment: 10,000 - People Proposed Funding: $6,000 This program provides homeless and needy families with hot and nourishing meals. Funds will be used for the purchase of food, drink's paper goods and storage facilities. Lutheran Social Services - Project Hand (formerly Community and Family Services Emergency Assistance of Chula Vista): Proposed Accomplishment: 8,750 Proposed Funding: $8,000 This program provides emergency services in the form of food, clothing, transportation and prescription vouchers to those in need. Funds will be used specifically for the provision of direct services, operating expenses as well as salary for a Program Manager. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /1- L/':i Page 18 of 57 I BATTERED AND ABUSED SPOUSES Chula Vista Family Violence Prevention: Proposed Accomplishment: gOO-People Proposed Funding: .:. South Bay Community Services: $16,000 .:. YMCA Family Stress Center: $16,000 The "Family Violence Prevention" collaborative provides bilingual, culturally appropriate continuum of services to families of the community which include prevention, intervention, residential services and supports. As part of the collaborative, South Bay Community Services will have an intervention team member housed in the Chula Vista Police Dept, as well as Safe Path Group Facilitators provided by the YMCA Family Stress Counseling. '\ City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /9- Llb Page 19 of 57 I GENERAL PUBLIC SERVICES Chula Vista Firefighters Foundation - Random Acts of Kindness Proposed Accomplishment: Proposed Funding: $2,500 Funds will be used to support the Foundation, which provides a variety of services to community members in need. Services include: 1) Community Relief to individuals of families who are victims of disasters by providing gift certificates to grocery stores and Target for the purchase of essential items; 2) Car Seat Safety vouchers for low/income families; 3) Bicycle Helmet vouchers; 4) College Scholarships to low/income high school seniors; and 5) support to the San Diego Burn Institute who provides services to survivors of life-altering burns. Chula Vista Community Collaborative - Child Care Coordinator Proposed Accomplishment: Proposed Funding: $30,000 This program provides enrichment for childcare providers through written information, workshops, and increased dialogue. This program also provides a position who serves as a liaison between the City Planning Department and residents interested in applying for large family daycare licenses. Funding will be used for the salary of a full time Childcare Coordinator position in addition to operating expenses. Lutheran Social Services Project Hahd Proposed Accomplishment: Proposed Funding: $8,000 This program provides emergency services in the form of food, clothing, transportation and prescription vouchers to those in need. Funds will be used specifically for the provision of direct services, operating expenses as well as salary for a Program Manager. Sweetwater Education Foundation - Compact for Success Proposed Accomplishment: Proposed Funding: $5,000 The Compact for Success program is an admission-guarantee for Sweetwater District students who maintain a 3.0 grade point average to San Diego State University and graduation from college within four years. Funds will be used to assist Chula Vista students who require financial assistance in order to complete their education at San Diego State University. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /q - tl7 Page 20 of 57 YMCA Family Stress Counseling Svcs.-Kinship Support Services Proposed Accomplishment: Proposed Funding: $25,000 This program serves children placed with relatives for safety and well being and also provides services to the relative caregivers to maximize the possibilities of the child's permanent placement within the family rather than in a stranger foster care. Funds will pay for rent and associated expenses for the center site. City of Chula Vista-Public Library - Chula Vista Literacy Team Center: Proposed Accomplishment: 238 - People Proposed Funding: $8,000 CDBG funds will be pooled with Matching Funds to support a position for a bilingual computer lab assistant who will supervise and maintain the Computer Learning Lab during peak usage hours. Dress for Success - Professional Women's Group: Proposed Accomplishment: 300-People Proposed Funding: $8,000 This program provides employment retention services through all the programs and services of the DSSD Professional Women's Group to 200 low-income women to assist them in maintaining their employment; thereby reducing the chance of going back to government subsidy. Funds will pay for a portion of the salaries and overhead expenses. Family Health Centers of San Diego - KidCare Express Mobile Medical Unit II: Proposed Accomplishment: 1,370 - People Proposed Funding:$17,000 This program will provide free medical care for children who do not have insurance. This raises student achievement by increasing attendance, and decreasing the use of hospital emergency rooms for illnesses or injuries which are not life threatening. Funds will pay for salaries that support the free services. South Bay Family YMCA - Human Services Council: Proposed Accomplishment: 180,000 Proposed Funding: $5,000 Public information is essential to improving the quality of life for Chula Vista's low income residents. The City allocates funds to the HSC program in order to provide valuable service-oriented information to the public with information by means of a quarterly newsletters, bi-annual community forums, monthly meetings and information sharing, asset mapping for community leaders, organizations and institutions, improving the quality of life through education and empowerment. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 21 of 57 /q-'I'l Family Violence Prevention and Intervention Coalition Proposed Accomplishment: Proposed Funding: South Bay Community Services: $16,000 YMCA Family Stress Counseling Services: $16,000 The "Family Violence Prevention" collaborative provides bilingual, culturally appropriate continuum of services to families of the community which include prevention, intervention, residential services and supports. As part of the collaborative, South Bay Community Services will have an intervention team member housed in the Chula Vista Police Dept, as well as Safe Path Group Facilitators provided by the YMCA Family Stress Counseling. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 ;q- '1<-1 Page 22 of 57 PRIORITY: NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS Economic Development Priority 4 - Economic Development: Five-Year Ob"ectives: Continue to provide proactive business assistance programs to encourage job creation through business attraction retention and ex ansion High Priority is assigned to business attraction, retention and ex ansion 20 'obs 5 'obs annuall Number of jobs created or retained made available to low and moderate income people as a proportion of currentl unem 10 ed ersons. Target Groups: Performance Measure: Southwestern College - Micro enterprise Technical Assistance Proposed Accomplishment: Proposed Funding: $8,000 This program will provide Chula Vista small business that have been identified as potential growth companies, with detailed research reports using GIS for the purpose of helping them grow their business through: 1) identification of new markets; 2)Data analysis of current market. ---- City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 200S/06 Page 23 of S7 let - ED PRIORITY: NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS Planning & Administration City of Chula Vista-Community Development - Administration Proposed Accomplishment: NjA Proposed Funding: $417,905 Funds will be used for the management and administration of the City of Chula Vista's CDBG program, including: planning, regulatory compliance, contract administration, and fiscal management. Regional Task Force on the Homeless - Regional Task Force on Homeless Proposed Accomplishment: 725 - People (General) Proposed Funding: $1,000 The Regional Task Force on the Homeless collects, analyzes and disseminates information on homelessness, and facilitates regional solutions through planning, coordination and advocacy. The Force provides information and referral services to homeless service agencies, individuals and local government jurisdictions. Funds will be used for professional and clerical staff costs. City of Chula Vista-Community Development HOME Program Administration: Proposed Accomplishment: NjA Proposed Funding: $99,211 Funds will be used for the management and administration of the City of Chula Vista's HOME program, including: planning, regulatory compliance, contract administration, and fiscal management. City of Chula Vista-Community Development Emergency Shelter Grant Administration: Proposed Accomplishment: NjA Proposed Funding: $4,385.00 The program will manage and administer Chula Vista's ESG program, including planning, regulatory compliance, contract administration, and fiscal management. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /1- 6/ Page 24 of 57 } I FAIR HOUSING SERVICES Fair Housing Council of San Diego City of Chula Vista Fair Housing Program: Proposed Accomplishment: 250 - People (General) Proposed Funding: $41,000 The Fair Housing Council of San Diego provides fair housing services to Chula Vista residents on behalf of the City. Services include mediation services for tenants and landlords in order to ensure equal opportunity in housing, and increase awareness of fair housing laws. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 25 of 57 /9- 52 D. GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION Housing assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City. Homeownership activities, rehabilitation of owner-occupied and rental housing, and mixed income rental housing acquisition and development can occur in any area of the City exhibiting need or project feasibility (subject to program guidelines). Site selection guidelines of the City ensure that all units are built or acquired in areas of the City where there are adequate services such as schools, health care, transportation and or recreational services. Housing Preservation Activities are implemented in the low to moderate-income census tracts throughout the city. Homeless assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City, at the specific location of the service providers. Clients receive services based on income level. Special Needs assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City, at the specific location of the service providers. Clients receive assistance based on income level. Assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City for public services, at the specific location of the service providers. Clients receive assistance based on income level. Funds will be distributed to infrastructure and public facilities projects that take place in income eligible low to moderate income census tracts. Assistance is generally available throughout the entire City for Economic Development activities as assistance is provided based on the number of jobs created or retained, income level of applicants receiving assistance and/or businesses are located in eligible low to moderate income census tracts. E. HOMELESS AND OTHER SPECIAL NEEDS The City of Chula Vista will continue to support the efforts of South Bay Community Services transitional and short-term housing projects which assist the homeless and in addition, will fund the following projects to help the homeless in fiscal year 2005-06: . Thursday's Meal . San Diego Regional Task Force on the Homeless . Lutheran Social Services - Project Hand . County of San Diego - Cold Weather Shelter Voucher Program City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /9 - !J3 Page 26 of 57 Emergency Shelter Grant Program Chula Vista has recently been awarded an allocation of Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funds in the amount of $87,011. South Bay Community Services (SBCS) will administer the grant as a sub-recipient during FY 2005/06. SBCS provides emergency shelter services in two locations in Chula Vista. These services aim at homeless families, most of them victims of domestic violence. They aim to develop a comprehensive strength- based family assessment, after which together they develop a treatment plan so the clients can work to re-establish self-sufficiency and end their homelessness. Funds are used for operating costs including child care, bus vouchers and motel vouchers. F. PUBLIC HOUSING NEEDS The Housing Authority of the County of San Diego (HACSD) operates four conventional public housing developments in Chula Vista, with a total of 120 units. They are all managed by Interfaith Housing Property Management and were recently modernized to be ADA and Section 504 compliant. These public housing units are as follows: . Dorothy Street Manor - 22 low income family units . Melrose Manor - 24 low income family units . Town Centre Manor - 59 low income senior/disabled units . L Street Manor - 16 low income family units The San Diego County Housing Authority owns and operates all of the public housing units located in the City of Chula Vista. The Housing Authority has formed a Public Housing Resident Association in order to increase resident awareness and involvement in the enhancement of their housing environment and operations. G. ANTI-POVERTY STRATEGY As part of the City's Anti-Poverty Strategy, the City will endeavor to integrate social services and housing activities for households below the poverty line. These efforts include, but are not limited to the following: . South Bay Community Services KIDSBIZ Program: This program teaches At-risk youths to use their entrepreneurial skills iA a positive way. Teenagers are taught to develop their own business plans and to run their own business. . Earned Income Tax Credit Program: SBCS has hired a program coordinator to do outreach and education to community residents about the Earned Income Tax Credit. This coordinator assists in qualifying citizens in applying for the tax credit. The goal of this program is to have 200 families receive the tax credit. , City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 ;9 - S Lj Page 27 of 57 Eligible families are working parents with children earning under $25,000 per year. . Park Village Apartments: On-site day care and job training services are offered at this very low-income apartment complex. . Casa Nueva Vida I & II: Residents are required to secure an income and save money for their first month's rent plus security deposit. They are referred to outside job training agencies for help in securing a job. Independent living skills are taught in areas of health, nutrition, immunizations, parenting, and other pertinent issues. Individual and family counseling is also offered. H. LEAD-BASED PAINT The City currently assists homeowners alleviate lead-based paint hazards through the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP). When lead-based paint is discovered through the rehabilitation of the property, funds are used to remove and dispose of the paint chips and to repaint the house. The City utilizes the Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds for this purpose. The City expects to use HOME funds to rehabilitate some homes. With the newly implemented lead-based paint legislation, Chula Vista will be designing a lead-based paint hazard program to provide information to Chula Vista residents and measures to limit the impact of lead-based paint. Additionally, the City's first-time homebuyer program has set aside funds to assist with lead-based paint issues. Currently, $24,000 is available for homebuyers purchasing homes that do not appear to contain lead-based paint. If a home has identified lead- based paint issues, the loan is increased to $40,000 to assist in abating the lead-based paint. I. OTHER ACTIONS Obstacles to Meet Undeserved Needs The City is continuing in its effort to remove obstacles to undeserved needs throughout the community. The City has made a commitment to budget CDBG funds at the maximum allowable to offer citizens much needed programs and services in the area of literacy, job training, youth activities, senior services, violence prevention, and health care assistance for low- income families. Fostering and Maintaining Affordable Housing The City maintains a portion of its affordable housing through the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP). The purpose of this program is to assist low income households rehabilitate their existing home. Both single-family and mobile homes are City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 )1- 55 Page 28 of 57 eligible to receive assistance. Currently, a combination of HOME and Low and Moderate Income Housing funds are used to fund this program. For fiscal year 2005-06 the City anticipates assisting 20 single-family households with loans. For the mobile home grant program, the City anticipates assisting 33 households. Removal of Barriers to Affordable Housing The City actively encourages developers to set-aside 10% of newly developed units for affordable housing purposes. The City also strongly supports the County of San Diego's effort at supplying public housing such as Dorothy Street and L Street. As part of the Housing Element, the City works closely with developers in negotiating affordable housing agreements which require a 10% unit set-aside for low and moderate income housing. Five percent for households at or below 80% of median income and 5% for moderate income households. Projects that meet this criteria are Rolling Hills Ranch (116 senior and 30 family units) and Otay Ranch (242 units). Both of these projects are located on the Eastern portion of the city. Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds have been targeted for these projects, however HOME funds could also be used. Due to the increase price of for-sale housing, the City offers a down payment assistance program. Since the down payment and closing costs require a large cash outlay, the transition from rental to for-sale housing can be a hardship for most low and moderate- income households. The City will provide subsidy funds for the down payment in the form of a loan and will also provide a portion of the closing costs in the form of a grant. Development of the Institutional Structure There are many organizations which playa role in implementing the City's five-year strategy. The coordination of these organizations in implementing the five-year strategy rests with the Community Development Department of the City. City staff continues to work with the San Diego County Housing Authority to provide Section 8 rental assistance and to build public housing in Chula Vista. On a regular basis, City staff attends several regional-wide consortiums to discuss and maintain up-to-date on issues involving our communities, including the CDBG and HOME programs. The CDBG Administrators meet on a quarterly basis to share information and cutting-edge programs either in the process of being developed or have been developed. This sharing of information has led to this group receiving an honorable mention in HUD's Best Practices publication. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /q - 5~ Page 29 of 57 Enhancing Coordination The City will coordinate and implement its strategies through the following activities: . Target available CDSG funding to those areas and population exhibiting the greatest need . Encourage social service providers to work with developers and CHDOs to provide service-enriched housing. Services include health care referrals, financial counseling, and case management . Assist county, state, federal, educational, and private organizations involved in economic development and job training in targeting their efforts toward those areas of Chula Vista exhibiting the greatest need City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /1- 07 Page 30 of 57 J. FAIR HOUSING PROGRAM The City of Chula Vista contracts with the Fair Housing Council of San Diego. The City collaborated with the Fair Housing Resource Board and other jurisdictions in 2003, when the County of San Diego Conducted a Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI), which included the following impediments and recommendations relevant to Chula Vista: Education and Outreach Impediment: Educational and outreach literature regarding fair housing issues, rights, and services on websites or at public counters is limited. Approximately 38 percent of the Fair Housing Survey respondents indicated that they had been discriminated against did not know where to report their complaints. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should provide links to fair housing and other housing resources with current information on their websites. Public counters should also prominently display fair housing information. Timeframe: By the end of 2005. Impediment: As many individual homeowners enter the business of being a landlord by renting out their homes, many may not be aware of current laws. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should make a concerted effort to identify one- to four-unit residences within their jurisdictions that are used as rentals and target education and outreach materials to this segment of the market population. Timeframe: Ongoing, consider funding allocations to pursue periodic mailing to owners of small properties. Impediment: Many fair housing violations tend to be committed by small "mqm and pop" rental operations. These prop~rty owners/managers are often not members of the San Diego County Apartments Association. Outreaching to this group is difficult. Recommendation: Jurisdictions and fair housing service providers should work with the San Diego County Apartments Association (SDCAA) to expand outreach to the "mom and pop" rental properties. Discuss with SDCAA if it is feasible to establish a lower-tier membership for two- to six-unit owners to encourage access to SDCAA education programs. Timeframe: To the extent feasible, take proactive efforts to expand outreach to owners of small rental properties. Begin discussion with SDCAA and fair housing service providers in 2005. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /0 __ c:::Q !) '...Ju Page 31 of 57 Lending and Credit Counseling Impediment: Hispanics and Blacks continue to be under-represented in the homebuyer market, and experienced large disparities in loan approval rates among the 19 jurisdictions. Specifically, low and moderate income Black loan applicants achieved significantly lower approval rates than White applicants at the same income level. This pattern was also identified in the 2000 AIs. Also, several lenders had high rates of loan applications due to incomplete information, suggesting inadequate follow-up with potential homebuyers. Recommendation: Provide findings of this AI and other related studies to the Community Reinvestment Initiative (CRr) Task Force to follow up with discussions and actions with lenders. Timeframe: Upon adoption of this AI in 2004, provide a copy to the CRr Task Force. Impediment: Many of the reasons for application denial, whether in the rental market or in the home purchase market, relate to credit history and financial management factors. Recommendation: Provide findings of this AI and other related studies to the Community Reinvestment Initiative (CRr) Task Force to follow up with discussions and actions with lenders. Timeframe: Upon adoption of this AI in 2004, provide a copy to the CRr Task Force. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should collaborate to provide education and outreach on Credit History and Financial Management. Timeframe: By 2005, identify an agency with a capacity and experience in conducting outreach and education on Credit History and Financial Management. Consider funding a regional program using CDBG or other housing funds, as appropriate. Housing for Persons with Disabilities Impediment: Housing choices for persons with disabilities are limited. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should expand the variety of housing types and sizes. In addition to persons with disabilities, senior households can also benefit from a wider range of housing options. To allow seniors to age in place, small one-story homes, townhomes or condominiums, or senior rentals may be needed. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /q- 07 Page 32 of 57 Timeframe: Ongoing effort to promote variety of housing. Re-evaluate housing policies as part of the 2005-2010 Housing Element update. Impediment: Discrimination against people with disabilities has become an increasing fair housing concern, which is supported by general literature, statistical data, cases filed with DFEH, and recent audits conducted in the region. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider promoting universal design principles in new housing developments. Timeframe: Ongoing. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider using CDBG, HOME, and other housing funds available to provide monetary incentives for barrier removal of non- compliant complexes. Timeframe: Develop a realistic strategy to improve housing accessibility and allocate funding in 2005 as part of the five-year Consolidated Plan process. Recommendation: Fair housing service providers, supportive housing providers, or other regional agencies as appropriate, should collaborate and develop a list of apartments that are ADA-compliant and provide vacancy information for persons with disabilities. Timeframe: Collaborate to include the development and maintenance of such a database as part of the fair housing services work scope. Seek to launch database in 2006. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 33 of 57 /9 - ~O Lead-Based Paint Hazards Impediment: Lead-based paint hazards often disproportionately affect minorities and families with children. While lead-based paint issues pose a potential impediment to housing choice, testing of lead hazards is rarely performed when purchasing or renting a unit. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider requiring lead-based paint testing as part of their homebuyer and residential rehabilitation programs. Timeframe: Consider expanding lead-based paint testing to home-buying programs as part of the Consolidated Plan process. Regional Collaboration Impediment: While collaboration was identified in the 2000 AIs, only minimal success has been achieved. Recommendation: Encourage fair housing service providers to collaborate and support each others' activities, so that similar activities are available to residents across jurisdictions. The Fair Housing Resources Board (FHRB) should continue to function as a collaborative to coordinate fair housing services for the region. Timeframe: Ongoing Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider the service gaps identified in this AI and revise work scope with fair housing service providers to ensure equal access to fair housing services. Timeframe: 2005 and annually thereafter. Reporting Impediment: Fair housing service providers report accomplishments and statistical data in different formats based on the requirements of each jurisdiction. Ethnicities and income data are also track differently across jurisdictions. Inconsistent reporting makes tracki ng trends difficult. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should develop a uniform method of reporting to incorporate into each sub-recipient contract to ensure that proper documentation is available regarding ethnicity, income level, and types of calls received based on HUD's reporting categories. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 34 of 57 /1'- 0/ Timeframe: Develop reporting format in 2005. Impediment: While education and outreach efforts are a clear priority of all agencies involved, a review of sub-recipient contracts, Action Plans, CAPER reports, and annual accomplishment reports indicates a lack of quantifiable goals, objectives, and accomplishments to gauge success or progress. Recommendation: In response to HUD's recent memo on performance measures that should be outcome based, Consolidated Plan, Action Plans, CAPERs, and sub-recipient contracts and annual reporting should identify specific quantifiable objectives and measurable goals related to furthering fair housing. Timeframe: Annually, jurisdictions and sub-recipients should work on developing outcome-based performance measures, in addition to statistics on clients served. Fair Housing Services Impediment: Fair housing services vary across the regjon based on the agency providing the services and the work scopes of each sub-recipient contract. Differing levels of funding may also be an explanation accounting for variances in services. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should collaborate with fair housing services providers to ensure an adequate level of service is available to all residents. Some jurisdictions may require additional services due to their special circumstances. However, a basic level of services should be established. Jurisdictions should also consider the appropriate levels of funding for the provision of these services. Timeframe: Evaluate service gaps annually and budget as appropriate. Annually update the service area map for use regionally to provide the public with clear information on service providers and types of services available. Impediment: While a few cities include auditing in the scope of work required by the fair housing services providers, no specific criteria are established to ensure audits are performed on a regular basis. Sales audits and lending audits are rarely performed. Recommendation: Ensure that audits are conducted within the County on a regular basis. Timeframe: To the extent feasible, set aside funding for audits in 2006 and every two years thereafter. Specifically, rather than acting individually, consider pooling funds to conduct regional audits and work collaboratively with fair housing service providers to pursue FHIP funds for audits and testing as HUD funding is available. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005(06 Page 35 of 57 /9- 02 Impediment: While tenant/landlord disputes are not fair housing issues in general, providing dispute resolution services may prevent certain situations from escalating to discrimination issues. Recommendation: Incorporate tenant/landlord dispute resolution into fair housing contracts. Encourage mediation services by qualified mediator as part of the fair housing contracts. Timeframe: To the extent feasible, set aside funding for audits in 2006 and every two years thereafter. Specifically, rather than acting individually, consider pooling funds to conduct regional audits and work collaboratively with fair housing service providers to pursue FHIP funds for audits and testing as HUD funding is available. Actions to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing During FY 2005/06, the City of Chula Vista will seek to address to affirmatively further fair housing through contracting with the Fair Housing Council to provide fair housing services to residents. Additionally, the City will continue to address the regional Analysis of Impediments for 2005-2010 AI recommendations, specific to the City of Chula Vista including: 1. The Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance does not include a density bonus ordinance consistent with State law. 2. The Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance does not expressly address licensed residential care facilities consistent with the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act. 3. Licensed residential care facility serving seven or more persons are not explicitly permitted by right or conditionally permitted in any residential zoning district within Chula Vista. 4. The Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance does not expressly permit transitional housing or emergency shelters. 5. Chula Vista has not established procedures for obtaining reasonable accommodation pursuant to ADA. It was recommended that the City should consider amending its policies and regulations to address the various potential impediments identified. As part of the upcoming Housing Element update, the City will be evaluating the above potential impediments, and mitigate if necessary and feasible, in order to comply with the State Housing Element law regard mitigating constraints to housing development, City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 36 of 57 /1- 03 addressing housing needs of special needs population, and providing for a variety of housing for all income groups. K. MONITORING Monitoring for the City of Chula Vista is directed toward programmatic, financial and regulatory performance. The primary objects are to ensure that all sub-recipients: . Comply with pertinent regulations governing their administrative, financial, programmatic operations; . Achieve their performance objectives within schedule and budget; and, . Assess capabilities and/or any potential needs for training or technical assistance in these areas. Careful evaluation of the housing and public service delivery system can be the most effective tool in detecting gaps and making appropriate modifications. As such, the City of Chula Vista monitors and evaluates its sub-recipients, CHDO's, and CBDO's as part of the pre-award assessment. Evaluation of the nature of the activity, proposed plan for carrying out the activity, the organization's capacity to do the work, and the possibility of potential conflicts of interest are within the pre-award assessment. After awards have been made Quarterly Progress reports are required of each sub- recipient, which must be current prior to approval of any request for reimbursement of expenditures. In addition to the Quarterly Progress reports, annual on-site visits are conducted to ensure compliance with federal regulations. Agreements made with sub- grantees encourage uniform reporting to achieve consistent information on beneficiaries. Technical assistance is provided when necessary. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 37 of 57 / q - 01 II. PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS A. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) CDBG activities to be undertaken during the reporting period are discussed under section K - Objectives CDBG funds expected to be available during the program year includes the following: Chula Vista will receive $2,261,525 in HUD CDBG entitlement funds. Additionally, $196,469 will be allocated to the CDBG program from the available fund balance in the City's Line of Credit and expected program income of $118,563 for a total CDBG Spending Plan of $3,942,460. Surplus from Urban Renewal Settlements - Not Applicable Grant Funds Returned to Line Of Credit - Not Applicable Income from Float-Funded Activities - Not Applicable Urgent Needs Activities - Chula Vista has not identified any urgent need activities. Chula Vista only budgets CDBG funds in eligible census tracts with a low and moderate income population in excess of 51 %. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /1'- b5 Page 38 of 57 B. HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) The Federal HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) allocated funds by formula directly to state and local governments to promote affordable housing. Participating jurisdictions are able to provide this assistance to both for-profit and non-profit housing developers or directly to qualified home buyers or renters. The assistance may take the form of grants, loans, advances, equity investments, and interest subsidies. HOME funds may be used to provide affordable rental housing and home ownership opportunities through new construction, acquisition, rehabilitation, and tenant-based rental assistance. In addition, HOME funds can be used to fund operational costs for Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO). A CHDO is a non-profit, community-based organization that has, or intends to retain, staff with the capacity to develop affordable housing for the community it serves. Currently, the City has two (2) designated CHDO's: The MAAC Project and South Bay Community Services. South Bay Community Services has also been certified as a Community Based Development Organization (CBDO). The City is required to provide a 25 percent match for HOME funds used for rental assistance, housing rehabilitation, and acquisition of standard housing. A 30 percent match is required for new construction. Some examples of allowable matching contributions would include Redevelopment Agency Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds, land value (donated or a loan), on and off-site improvements, waiver of local and state taxes or fees, voluntary labor in connection with site preparation. If a project exceeds the required match, the excess credit can be applied to future projects. The table below delineates the uses of HOME funds for fiscal year 2005/06. TABLE 3: ESTIMATED 2005-06 USE OF HOME FUNDS Funding Requests Recommended Fundina Staff Administration $99,211 Community Housing $735,786 Development Orqanization (CHDO) SBCS - Office Rent $52.400 ADDI $61,306 DownPavment Assistance TOTAL $948,703 City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 39 of 57 / i- 0b The following is a brief description of the above HOME activities being recommended for funding: Staff Administration Administrative costs for city staff to oversee the HOME program. These administrative costs represent 10% of the HOME budget. These costs include staff costs for coordination, accounting, environmental review, and HUD reporting requirements. CHDO 15% Set Aside Per HUD regulations a City is required to set-aside 15% of the annual allocation for Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO) to assist the City in development and/or support in providing affordable housing projects for low and moderate income families. For FY 2004-05, the City of Chula Vista is setting aside $157,638for CHDO housing projects. These funds will be awarded on a competitive basis. CH DO Operation The $52,400 proposed for CHDO operation costs is earmarked for South Bay Community Services. CHDO Monitoring A careful evaluation of the CHDO delivery system is an effective way to determine the organization is carrying out the goals and objectives in providing affordable housing. The City of Chula Vista will be monitoring South Bay Community Services in the same manner that it monitors CDBG sub-recipients. An annual financial examination of the organization will be performed along with requiring South Bay Community service to submit quarterly progress reports. At year end, staff will tour the South Bay Community Services facility and related projects that were assisted with HOME funds. Affordable Housing Projects Chula Vista is very proactive in the development of affordable housing. HOME funds have generally not been the financing source in the production of affordable housing. Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds (Redevelopment 20% set-aside funds) have been the primary source, however, since the fund balance in this account has been used to fund a large rental development, HOME funds will now be the primary tool in the affordable housing development process. City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /q- G7 ....... , Page 40 of 57 Per 24 CFR 92.205 HOME funds may be used by participating jurisdictions to provide incentives to develop and support affordable rental housing and homeownership affordability. Chula Vista utilizes its HOME funds through the development of new rental housing and for first-time homebuyers. HOME funds are typically used to provide "gap financing" in the form of a "residual receipt" loan process. The City leverages it HOME funds by requiring the developer to apply for Low Income Tax Credits or through tax-exempt bond financing. The residual receipt loan is typically deferred and is based on a per unit cost of the total development. The affordability period for a "residual receipt" loan is 50 years. Chula Vista also uses its HOME funds for down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers. The amount of financial assistance determines the period of affordability. Resale provisions as outlined in 24 CFR 92.254 (a)(2)(iii) are in place. In addition, HOME funds are also used to rehabilitate existing housing stock for health and safety repairs. The provisions outlined in 24 CFR 92.254(a)(2)(iii) are also in place. Geographic Location for HOME Funds The City of Chula Vista has committed HOME funds to various projects throughout the city. These projects are designed to target low and moderate-income households at or under 60% of median income. A major commitment is a newly created down payment and closing cost assistance to assist first-time homebuyers. c. American Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) D. Emergency Shelter Grant Program The City's ESG allocation from HUD for FY 2005/06 is $87,011. The City solicited proposals from non-profit homeless service care providers to participate in the ESG Program for 2005/06, of which South Bay Community Services (SBCS) was awarded the contract. The City conducted an inspection of the two facilities operated by SBCS as part of the review of funding requests and reviewed evidence of matching funds equal to the dollar amount of their grant from governmental, private, or non-profit for qualification purposes per HUD regulations. The City is also required to make sure the following caps are not exceeded: . 10% for staff salaries/fringe benefits per sub-recipient grant . 30% of the total ESG allocation for essential services . 30% of the total ESG allocation for prevention activities . 5% of the total ESG allocation for administrative/operating costs City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /9- be Page 41 of 57 APPENDIX A: LISTING OF PROPOSED PROJECTS City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 11- 0:; Page 42 of 57 APPENDIX B: CERTIFICATIONS In accordance with the applicable statutes and the regulations governing the consolidated plan regulations, the jurisdiction certifies that: Affirmatively Further Fair Housing - The jurisdiction will affirmatively further fair housing, which means it will conduct an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice within the jurisdiction, take appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments identified through that analysis, and maintain records reflecting that analysis and actions in this regard. Anti-displacement and Relocation Plan - It will comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, and implementing regulations at 49 CFR 24; and it has in effect and is following a residential anti-displacement and relocation assistance plan required under Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, in connection with any activity assisted with funding under the CDBG or HOME programs. Drug Free Workplace - It will or will continue to provide a drug-free workplace by: 1. Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition; 2. Establishing an ongoing drug-free awareness program to inform employees about: (a) (b) (c) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; The grantee's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; Any available drug counseling rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and Cd) / The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace; 3. Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by paragraph 1; 4. Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph 1 that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will: /C)- 70 (a) Abide by the terms of the statement; and (b) Notify the employer in writing of his or her conviction for a violation of a criminal drug statute occurring in the workplace no later than five calendar days after such conviction; 5. Notifying the agency in writing, within ten calendar days after receiving notice under subparagraph 4(b) from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. Employers of convicted employees must provide notice, including position title, to every grant officer or other designee on whose grant activity the convicted employee was working, unless the Federal agency has designated a central point for the receipt of such notices. Notice shall include the identification number(s) of each affected grant; 6. Taking one of the following actions, within 30 calendar days of receiving notice under subparagraph 4(b), with respect to any employee who is so convicted: (a) Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination, consistent with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; or (b) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; 7. Making a good faith effort to continue to maintail) a drug-free workplace through implementation of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 Anti-Lobbying - To the best of the jurisdiction's knowledge and belief: 1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of it, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement; 2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, it will complete and submit Standard Form LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions; and City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005{06 /1- 7/ Page 44 of 57 3. It will require that this language on anti-lobbying of this certification be included in the award documents for all sub-awards at all tiers (including subcontracts, sub-grants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all sub- recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Authority of Jurisdiction - The consolidated plan is authorized under State and local law (as applicable) and the jurisdiction possesses the legal authority to carry out the programs for which it is seeking funding, in accordance with applicable HUD regulations. Consistency with plan - The housing activities to be undertaken with CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds are consistent with the strategic plan. Section 3 - It will comply with section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, and implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 135. Signature/Authorized Official Date "Title City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 j/?_ 7') '-I. '...._. Page 45 of 57 SPECIFIC CDBG CERTIFICATIONS The Entitlement Community certifies that: Citizen Participation - It is in full compliance and following a detailed citizen participation plan that satisfies the requirements of 24 CFR 91.105. Community Development Plan - Its consolidated housing and community development plan identifies community development and housing needs and specifies both short-term and long-term community development objectives that provide decent housing, expand economic opportunities primarily for persons of low and moderate income. (See CFR 24 570.2 and CFR 24 part 570) Following a Plan - It is following a current consolidated plan (or Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) that has been approved by HUO. Use of Funds - It has complied with the following criteria: 1. Maximum Feasible Priority. With respect to activities expected to be assisted with COBG funds, it certifies that it has developed its Action Plan so as to give maximum feasible priority to activities which benefit low and moderate income families or aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight. The Action Plan may also include activities which the grantee certifies are designed to meet other community development needs having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community, and other financial resources are not available); 2. Overall Benefit. The aggregate use of COBG funds including Section 108 guaranteed loans during program year(s) 2005-2006 (a period specified by the grantee consisting of one, two, or three specific consecutive program years), shall principally benefit persons of low and moderate income in a manner that ensures that at least 70 percent of the amount is expended for activities that benefit such persons during the designated period; 3. Special Assessments. It will not attempt to recover any capital costs of public improvements assisted with COBG funds including Section 108 loan guaranteed funds by assessing any amount against properties owned and occupied by persons of low and moderate income, including any fee charged or assessment made as a condition of obtaining access to such public improvements. However, if COBG funds are used to pay the proportion of a fee or assessment that relates to the capital costs of public improvements (assisted in part with COBG funds) financed from other revenue sources, an assessment or charge may be made against City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 11- 73 Page 46 of 57 the property with respect to the public improvements financed by a source other than CDBG funds. The jurisdiction will not attempt to recover any capital costs of public improvements assisted with CDBG funds, including Section 108, unless CDBG funds are used to pay the proportion of fee or assessment attributable to the capital costs of public improvements financed from other revenue sources. In this case, an assessment or charge may be made against the property with respect to the public improvements financed by a source other than CDBG funds. Also, in the case of properties owned and occupied by moderate-income (not low-income) families, an assessment or charge may be made against the property for public improvements financed by a source other than CDBG funds if the jurisdiction certifies that it lacks CDBG funds to cover the assessment. Excessive Force - It has adopted and is enforcing: 1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non-violet civil rights demonstrations; and 2. A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such non- violent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction; Compliance With Anti-discrimination laws - The grant will be conducted and administered in conformity with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC 2000d), the Fair Housing Act (42 USC 3601-3619), and implementing regulations. Lead-Based Paint - Its notification, inspection, testing and abatement procedures concerning lead-based paint will comply with the requirements of 24 CFR 570.608; Compliance with Laws - It will comply with applicable laws. Signature/Authorized Official Date / I Title City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005(06 ;q - 7Lf Page 47 of 57 SPECIFIC HOME CERTIFICATIONS The HOME participating jurisdiction certifies that: Tenant Based Rental Assistance - If the participating jurisdiction intends to provide tenant-based rental assistance: The use of HOME funds for tenant-based rental assistance is an essential element of the participating jurisdiction's consolidated plan for expanding the supply, affordability, and availability of decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing. Eligible Activities and Costs - It is using and will use HOME funds for eligible activities and costs, as described in 24 CFR 92.205 through 92.209 and that it is not using and will not use HOME funds for prohibited activities, as described in 92.214. Appropriate Financial Assistance - Before committing any funds to a project, it will evaluate the project in accordance with the guidelines that it adopts for this purpose and will not invest any more HOME funds in combination with other Federal assistance than is necessary to provide affordable housing. Signature/Authorized Official Date Title City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005{06 /1- 7-') f __ Page 48 of 57 SPECIFIC ESG CERTIFICATIONS The Emergency Shelter Grantee certifies that: Major rehabilitation/conversion - It will maintain any building for which assistance is used under the ESG program as a shelter for homeless individuals and families for at least 10 years. If the jurisdiction plans to use funds for purposes less than tenant- based rental assistance, the applicant will maintain any building for which assistance is used under the ESG program as a shelter for homeless individuals and families for at least 3 years. Essential Services - It will provide services or shelter to homeless individuals and families for the period during which the ESG assistance is provided, without regard to a particular site or structure as long as the same general population is served. Renovation - Any renovation carried out with ESG assistance shall be sufficient to ensure that the building involved is safe and sanitary. Supportive Services - It will assist homeless individuals in obtaining appropriate supportive services, including permanent housing, medical and mental health treatment, counseling, supervision, and other services essential for achieving independent living, and other Federal State, local, and private assistance. Matching Funds - It will obtain matching amounts required under 576.71 of this title. Confidentiality - It will develop and implement procedures to ensure the confidentiality of records pertaining to any individual provided family violence prevention or treatment services under any project assisted under the ESG program, including protection against the release of the address or location of any family violence shelter project except with the written authorization of the person responsible for the operation of that shelter. Homeless Persons Involvement - To the maximum extent practicable, it will involve, through employment, volunteer services, or otherwise, homeless individuals and families in constructing, renovating, maintaining, operating facilities, and providing services assisted through this program. Consolidated Plan - It is following a current HUD-approved Consolidated Plan or CHAS. , Signature/Authorized Official Date Title City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /e; - -~; Page 49 of 57 APPENDIX TO CERTIFICATIONS INSTRUCTIONS CONCERNING LOBBYING AND DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE REQUIREMENTS: A. LobbvinG Certification This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, U.s. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. B. DruG-Free WorkDlace Certification 1. By signing and/or submitting this application or grant agreement, the grantee is providing the certification. 2. The certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance is placed when the agency awards the grant. If it is later determined that the grantee knowingly rendered a false certification, or otherwise violates the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act, HUD, in addition to any other remedies available to the Federal Government, may take action authorized under the Drug-Free Workplace Act. 3. Workplaces under grants, for grantees other than individuals, need not be identified on the certification. If know, they may be identified in the grant application. If the grantee does not identify the workplaces at the time of application, or upon award, if there is no application, the grantee must keep the identity of the workplace(s) on file in its office and make the information available for Federal inspection. Failure to identify all known workplaces constitutes a violation of the grantee's drug-free workplace requirements. 4. Workplace identifications must include the actual address of buildings (or parts of buildings) or other sites where work under the grant takes place. Categorical descriptions may be used (e.g., all vehicles of a mass transit authority or State highway department while in operation, State employees in each local unemployment office, performers in concert halls or radio stations). , 5. If the workplace identified to the agency changes during the performance of the grant, the grantee shall inform the agency of the change(s), if it previously identified the workplaces in question (see paragraph three). City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /1-77 Page 50 of 57 6. The grantee may insert in the space provided below the site(s) for the performance of work done in connection with the specific grant: Place of Performance (Street address, city, county, state, zip code) 276 FOURTH AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CA 91910 Check if there are workplaces on file that are not identified here The certification with regard to the Drug-Free Workplace is required by 24 CFR part 24, subpart F. 7. Definitions of terms in the Non-procurement Suspension and Debarment common rule and Drug-Free Workplace common rule apply to this certification. Grantees' attention is called, in particular, to the following definitions from these rules: "Controlled substance" means a controlled substance in Schedules I through V of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.s.C.812) and as further defined by regulation (21 CFR 1308.11 through 1308.15); "Conviction" means a finding of guilt (including a plea of nolo contendere) or imposition of sentence, or both, by any judicial body charged with the responsibility to determine violations of the Federal or State criminal drug statutes; "Criminal drug statute" means a Federal or non-Federal criminal statute involving the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, use, or possession of any controlled substance; "Employee" means the employee of a grantee directly engaged in the performance of work under a grant, including: (i) All "direct charge" employees; (ii) all "indirect charge" employees unless their impact or involvement is insignificant to the performance of the grant; and (iii) temporary personnel and consultants who are directly engaged in the performance of work under the grant and who are on the grantee's payroll. This definition does not include workers not on the payroll of the grantee (e.g., volunteers, even if used to meet a matching requirement; consultants or independent contractors not on the grantee's payroll; or employees of sub-recipients or subcontractors in covered workplaces). , City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /q~ 7Z Page 51 of 57 APPENDIX C: Citizen Participation and Public Comments City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 ('1- ---!/ Page 52 of 57 APPENDIX D: SF 424 Forms .' City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005(06 Page 53 of 57 11- ro ~ ( APPENDIX E: Proof of Publication City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 /9- 2/ Page 54 of 57 Figure 1: Low and Moderate Income population 1; "" ~ n~ . .0- C--' U ~ J ,:t; ~ '."- ~ " '. ~ ~; " '% " <> if <P a <P c -j a ii 0- 0' .!! . \ l l ;: :I: . .'j ~- ~. =- ~ . Ii: ;U . 0 -:; . ~ . .~ b ~ .. " 00 Q.. ~ ~ :!!: '" ~ 0 "c Q. "'~ .. 3 g: ill 00 - g-~ ~ m\f1 (') (ij g g ~.~ ; ~i "'D ",?" 0 ."", ." o ~ " g# ~ ii)9. o. g3 :I " 0 " C) .z 9. " ?" ~ ;;;- ~ ;' ,... w n 0 " 0 ~ o ~ :l DI ~ " :s ~'aDo '" "- O' == ~ "0 0 " s:: Do ~;." g.....cD. E5 0 ~ ~ b = e \ \., ~..-'~ f" , \ ,~ " " /' ----- /'/ . [j/ ~~ .(l, i:V./ .' \,?~\,-\;;}, \, L"<'\ ,A\,,~_, \ _..c'--' 'r "1' @it ..~/.' -,";;J.:-!].;:'\ii':. , v~ ~",,' \ : \"' \ . '2. \ ?,"</.... ", \.-"".,"\ ',,- . "-.' \ " \ r.'. ", 'J'" \ <"' '\ ~, , ") .....;..::... "- " ,'" ;- t l_~-. \ ., . ,,;;; L~-'" ::: --I i I '-'-1 I . ._._J i I I ~ '"\ , . \ :/., \ . 0 .....,. r-"~ \_._~.1 \,.f!' ,;;^\ \,..;'. j\ \ I \. ~. \ I \ ~ \ i._.~ \ L._.__ - \ ~~ \ I \. -.... \ i .-. \ i\.... i..I ! . ".,...,./.. \ . . I )., '1:._._ I . ~Y""'~..--"'--~I,........-t l' r._~"""''''''''-..a--': - ~ V....' '~.J.....' ~~ i ! ~ ;..-._.___.1 ('n " .- o " \ .,. I Page 55 of 57 City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 ICI "-'..-, /- r L- Figure 2: Minority Population Concentration :) Q ~ Q 0: ~ CD 0 ~ ij' . " if ~ ~.~ ]Qii; a~!;; g-g ~ Q-g ~ .::rmtc ~~a g-g~ ,,'Qw ~2!.~ b>w::r ~"~ ~-" -"0 m~ '0 Il~ , Q. Q << s- o ~ ~ '" 11: < ;;; ::I '" 0 0 0 n ... ~ 0 0 ... s- '< 0: :I '" n 'II ,. ~ CD 0 -U :I " '" ~ ... C '" ... 0 1\1 1\1 -n 0 ~ ... ... .0' N 0 0 " :< m 0 ::J ::J '" r- CD '" n~ . .Q. U <"> ~ CD o o "- m -< I " .!'!. g '" o m ~ m ;;: :; o ~ ~ " o " " ~ 0' ~ o o ~ o G> ~ ~ 0- ~ ., g ii,'0. '::i ?-' ~ :.' '~ ii' ~.<:: ..;; ~ \, \ ." , ~~ .~" , .( . \~ ' -~~. " \'0-_ ~) __c-~,/ :.\;;~..~ __~ '" i ~ -~~ -r.'4Y"" \-nl'~ I,'" ;/ \ ,,~~~~-~ \ ~_-~~.\-\~::r L(-:' '~~~-~~\~-~~~\ 't.:",.".' ,,' ~ >\ -,- ., .-...-{:;f" :..' \ ,.). '.."- ~,.;. ~ ,.--- \ ' "" \ ~ ~1 \ , ., <;I,:, \ \ , ..:. '"\1(\....,." ' " " ~. .,~" \ " " \ ~.p,' \ , .., \ ' .\ ~... t- . '\::~",""",,, .-: l\" \ .... ".' "' \?., \ "'-" ,"-\ ' '\ :' ~'~'\:<' , ... : ') ,~~. : 't' , ( $ ;...-", \ r-' ,/\ r I I, :r .c [ < . , '.... '[ 0. ,/: .. " ,'.;j o - :~ , ~ - :-'-'J '--~---.. '1._. I I ['-' In .....: i :-'-'1.1 i . I 1.-.-.-.....: ... City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 56 of 57 1/7 .-., ~> 7-/" .5 Figure 2: Hispanic Population Concentration :) :] i ~ ~J f ~ .- ~ IO ~~.~ ~~.&; 00 a ~'g g ;::;:-g ~ "<-c ~!!!......, ~g'~ 1~ ~ ~~5 ;$!.-,-C ~S'a .~ 00 _a ~o ~o 9. r- '" <Q n~ , ,c. U o '" '" o 5 " . "' I '" o . ~ . :I: "" ~ . . ~ . ::t: iiI ." " " ,;- ." o ." C ;;; - ,r " o o " " .. " - ~ ~ o' " 2 ~ s. " a " :r: '" < '" Vi '0 '" " AI 0 n ::I " . 0 s. n 0: ::I ~ n "D <> ~ CD 0 ." ::I "CI '" " .. c: N .. - 0 AI AI ." '" 'I' .. .. .e' N - " '" 0 0 a; 0 ::I ::I <.0 ! I .-:/ r \ \ \ \ \ \ \ :.....-.1 .-.-...., \. '1._. \ I \ I \ r'-' . I r" \ ; tV.......,:?' ....: i \......;"'\.'""!-._.-"'...../',t\,.."',~....!~.( . -.-.\., ' I 1.-.-.-....: ~:. " ~' , r._.J '" ~ ,~ 6 " o o " :~ ~ ~ .. \ \ ~."-~..-;/ \\-,r------- ' ,,' ~ " . "\ " " " " g / ~/ . ~; \ \ \ , " ", " '{~:%i& ':7/' " >- ''', '. " ~f .-"'-' I I I I i :... \ \ \ \ '\.._~~ '\. '~ "'%, .", .,~ , , ',9 \,'o{!' ,~ ';1/ /~.. .".<If '. 'J, '. , '!' City of Chula Vista Annual Action Plan FY 2005/06 Page 57 of 57 /9- C"\ ... t:Yt , ~~f? ~ ~ -.- --- --- -.- .......""~~ CIlY OF CHUIA VISTA DRAFT CONSOLIDATED PLAN FY 2005-2010 City Contact: Angelica Davis City Of Chula Vista Community Development Department 276 Fourth Avenue, MS C-400 Chula Vista, Ca 919~0 (619) 691-5036 adavis(1i)ci.chula-vista.ca. us , \ (Ll- ?~) ATTACHMENT B TABLE OF CONTENTS I. COORDINATING AND MANAGING THE PROCESS.................................................................1 A. Introduction......... ....... ......... ..... ......................... ....... ..... ........ ............... ..... ...... ......... ........ 1 B. Lead Agency .....................................................................................................................2 C. Public and Private Consultation ....................................................................................... 2 D. Social Service/Non-profit Consultation ...........................................................................3 II. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ........................................................................................................ 4 III. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS ................................................... 7 A. HOUSING NEEDS ..........................................................................................................7 B. PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ............................................................................ 12 C. HOMELESS NEEDS .....................................................................................................26 D. PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING NEEDS ............................................................ 29 E. LEAD-BASED PAINT HAZARDS ............................................................................... 32 F. HOUSING CONDITIONS.............................................................................................. 35 G. BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ................................................................40 H. FAIR HOUSING - Regional Issues ................................................................................ 44 I. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS .................................................................... 50 IV. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN............................. 54 Housing and Community Development Resources.............................................................. 54 Housing and Community Development Objectives and Projects ........................................ 54 Priority - Housing Needs .....................................................................................................55 Priority - Homeless Needs ...................................................................................................59 Priority - Special Needs ....................................................................................................... 60 Priority - Non-Housing Community Development Needs ................................................... 60 .:. Priority 1- Inftastructure: .................................................................................................. 60 .:. Priority 2- Public Facilities: .............................................................................................62 .:. Priority 3 - Public Services:..............................................................................................62 .:. Priority 4 -Accessibility/ADA Improvements:.................................................................63 .:. Priority 5 - Economic Development: ...............................................................................64 V. LEAD-BASED PAINT HAZARDS REDUCTION STRATEGY.......................................... 64 VI. ANTI-POVERTY AND STRATEGY COORDINATION..................................................... 65 VII. BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ......................................................................... 65 VIII. INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE .......................................................................................... 66 IX. PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENT INITIATIVES ...................................................................66 .,.....w..""_.....~_'m_. _. .......m.'._....., 19- E"?. I. COORDINATING AND MANAGING THE PROCESS A. Introduction This Consolidated Plan satisfies the minimum statutory requirements of Chula Vista's CPO formula programs: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership (HOME), American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG). The Consolidated Plan is a Five- year planning document that identifies a jurisdiction's overall housing and community development needs, and outlines a strategy to address those needs. The Plan is required to: 1) Describe the jurisdiction's housing and community development needs and market conditions; 2) Set out a strategy that establishes priorities; and 3) Establish a short-term investment plan that outlines the intended use of resources. A primary purpose of the Consolidated Plan is to encourage jurisdictions to develop a plan for addressing the needs of lower income groups that are intended beneficiaries of HUD programs. >" ~ City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 1 of 68 /9-- ?7 B. Lead Agency The Chula Vista Community Development Department serves as the lead agency in coordinating of the consolidated planning and submission process. Extensive efforts were undertaken by the City to solicit input in the development of the Five-Year plan. The following section describes the City's process for consultation with public and private agencies that provide housing, health and social services during preparation of the plan. Section II of this plan describes the Citizen Participation process in detail. C. Public and Private Consultation The Chula Vista Community Development Department consulted with other key City departments in development of this plan, including: Building and Planning; Finance; Engineering/Public Works, Library, Recreation, Redevlopment, and Police. Other key public and quasi-public agencies contacted in preparation of the Plan include: . County of San Diego Housing Authority . San Diego County Department of Health and Human Services, HIV / AIDS Epidemiology . San Diego County Office of AIDS Coordination . County of San Diego Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program . Fair Housing Council of San Diego . Southwestern College . California Association of Realtors . California State Community Care Licensing Division . San Diego Regional Task Force on Homelessness . Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce . Building Industry Association of San Diego County (BIA) . South County Board of Realtors Copies of the draft Consolidated Plan were sent to adjacent units of local government as well as several non-profit and social service agencies during the 3D-day public review of the Plan. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 2 of 68 /9 - f?8 D. Social SelVice/Non-profit Consultation The City conferred with a variety of social service agencies in preparation of the Consolidated Plan. Three public meetings were noticed in local newspapers. A public hearing was held before the City Council to solicit input on community development and housing needs, including social services needs, on March 22 and April 5, 2005. In preparing the needs assessment, a wide range of service providers were contacted to develop complete information on community needs. Agencies representing the following needs groups were contacted: . Persons with HIV / AIDS . Homeless persons . Low -income youth and children . Persons with disabilities . Elderly persons . Persons with alcohol or substance abuse problems City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 3 of 68 /1-gc; II. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Citizen participation is one of the most important components of the Consolidated Plan process. The City of Chula Vista Community Development Department utilized the following strategy to solicit meaningful input in preparing the City's Consolidated Plan. A. Applications for Funding CDBG applications for funding were distributed the week of December 27, 2004. Public Notices of the availability of funds were published in the Star News on December 17 and 24th,2004. Applications were due February 7, 2005 and were reviewed for eligibility from February 8 to March 8, 2005. B. Public Hearings and Meetings In order to solicit citizen participation and community input on the Consolidated Plan, two public hearings were held one March 29, 2005 and the other on April 5, 2005. Public Notices of the hearings were published in the Star News on March 4th and March 18th 2005. In addition, a thirty -day public review was held from April 5- May 5, 2005. Formal approval and adoption of the final Plans occurred at the City Council Meeting held on May 10, 2005. C. Access to Meetings The City of Chula Vista allowed adequate, timely notification of all public meetings. The public meetings conducted at various stages of the Consolidated Plan were advertised in three newspapers and through other methods of public notice. D. Access to Information As part of the 30-day public comment period held AprilS through May 5, 2005 copies of the draft Consolidated Plan and Action Plan were available for the public to read at the following locations: the Community Development Department office, the Chula Vista Main Library and the South Chula Vista Library. Following the end of the 30-day comment period, the City Council adopted the Plans on May 10, 2005 and transmitted it to HUD for approval on May 13, 2005. The final Consolidated Plan, amendments to the Plan, and annual performance reports will be available for five years at City Hall and public libraries. Residents affected by the Plan's implementation have access to the City's plans, to minimize displacement and to assist those displaced, if any, as a result of the Plan's activities. City staff ensures adequate notification of public hearings related to significant amendments and performance reviews of the Consolidated Plan. Advance notice of public hearings is printed in newspapers of general circulation at least ten (10) day prior to the meeting date. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /9. Cjo Page 4 of 68 In addition, the City ensures reasonable access to information and records related to the development of the Plan and to the expenditure of resources for programs funded by CDBG and HOME for the past five (5) years. E. Technical Assistance City staff notified public meeting participants and other community members who represent lower and moderate income groups that they could receive technical assistance in order to develop funding requests for CDBG and HOME funds. Technical assistance for such groups include: helping them understand the program requirements and determination of eligible/ineligible activities; suggestions on structuring new programs; and assistance in completing the application. F. Public Hearing for Draft Consolidated Plan Public hearings were publicized adequately and held at times and locations convenient to the community, especially those persons affected by the program resources. The location of the hearing at City Hall is accessible to persons with physical disabilities. Public hearings held before the Chula Vista Council on March 22, 2005 and AprilS, 2005 concerning the draft Plan provided opportunities for public comment prior to submission of the Plan to HUD. They were held at 6:00 pm to accommodate residents who attend school or work during the day. G. Publishing the Plan The draft Plan which contains community overview with needs assessment, housing and community development five-year strategic plan, and annual funqing plan was distributed for 30-day public comment review on AprilS, 2005. The City Council adopted the Plan May 10, 2005 and the final Plan was sUbsequently provided to the HUD office in Los Angeles. Publication of notices in local newspapers described the purpose, priorities and goals of the Plan, and the availability of the draft Plan for review. H. Public Comment During the 30-day public review (April 5- May 5, 2005), community members had the opportunity to comment on the draft Consolidated Plan and Action Plan. Community members were encouraged to submit comments during the developm'ent of the Plan, and will also be encouraged to submit comments to any subsequent Plan amendments, and to the annual performance report to the Plan. Written and verbal comments expressed during the comment period are considered and summarized in Appendix C of the Plan. I The City made an effort to respond in writing within 16 working days to those written comments and will make an effort to respond in the same amount of time to future comments. Complaints regarding the Consolidated Plan process must have been made within the 30- day public comment period, and City staff made an effort to respond to complaints within City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 5 of 68 Iq~ '1/ 15 working days from the date of the complaint, where practical. Complaints regarding the Plan amendments and annual progress reports must include: 1) a description of the objection with supporting facts and data; and 2) name, address, telephone number, and date of complaint. I. Community Development Needs Assessment Survey The Community Development Department placed a survey on the Star News to solicit resident input on Community Development Needs and potential activities to be undertaken during the Consolidated Plan. Only five responses. As such, those responses will be included in the public comment section of the appendix and will not be included in the needs assessment portion of the document. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /q - 92 Page 6 of 68 III. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS This section of the Consolidated Plan presents an overall picture of the housing and community development needs in Chula Vista. The needs assessment provides the foundation for establishing priorities and allocating Federal, State, and local resources to address identified housing and community needs. The section is divided into two major components: A) Housing, and B) Non-Housing Community Development Needs. Major data sources include 1990 and 2000 Census, CHAS data, the 1999-2004 Housing Element, information collected through community public meetings and interviews with interested parties and City staff. A. HOUSING NEEDS The needs assessment detailed below, focuses on Chula Vista's housing needs. Household Needs This section summarizes available data on the most significant current housing needs of lower and moderate income Chula Vista residents, and projects those needs over the five- year Consolidated Plan period. Current supportive housing needs are also summarized. 1. Background and Trends Chula Vista is the second largest municipality in San Diego County with a population of 173,556 residents. The City covers approximately 50 square miles along the San Diego Bay and is surrounded by National City, the City of San Diego, and the unincorporated areas of the County. Two major north-south freeways, Interstate 5 and Interstate 805 traverse Chula Vista. The area west of the I-80S "western Chula Vista" is built up and characterized by well established with primarily infill and redevelopment residential construction activity. The developing "eastern area" is comprised of large vacant tracts constituent to several master-planned communities in various stages of approval and implementation. 2. Population As shown in Table 1, the population of San Diego County was 2,498,016 in 1990. It increased to 2,795,780 in 2000, an increase of 11.9 percent. " In comparison, Chula Vista's population increased by approximately 28.4 percent, which is slightly more that double the increase for the County. TABLE 1: POPULATION GROWTH 1990-2000 Year Chula Vista San Dieao CountY 1990 135.163 2,498.016 2000 173 556 2813,833 Source: Census 1990 and 2000 City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 7 of 68 Ie;- 13 3. Age Table 2 shows the age characteristics of residents of Chula Vista for 1990 and 2000. As shown, the age of the population has remained relatively the same, with the most notable change 2.3 percentage points in the 45-55 age range category. While seniors age 65+ represent 11 percent of the population, children and teens represent 31.5 percent or almost a third of the population. TABLE 2: AGE OF THE POPULATION 1990-2000 1990 2000 A<>e Group Number Percent Number Percent Under 5 vears 11,245 8.3% 13,565 7.8% 5 to 20 vears' 30,221 22.4% 41,191 23.7% 21 to 24 vears" 9,444 7% 11,398 6.6% 25 to 44 vears 44,519 32.9% 54,791 31.6% 45 to 54 vears 12,816 9.5% 20,563 11.8% 55 to 59 vears 5,684 4.2% 7,007 4.0% 60 to 64 vears 5,467 4.0% 5,922 3.4% 65 to 74 vears 9,623 7.1% 10,437 6.0% 75 to 84 vears 4,727 3.5% 6,826 3.9% 85 vears and over 1,417 1.0% 1,856 1.1% Total 135,163 100% 173,556 100% 'Due to different category grouping, nwnbers for Census 2000 are totaled for 5-19; "Due to different category grouping, nwnbers for Census 2000 are totaled for 20-24 Source: Census 1990 and 2000 City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 8 of 68 /() ,~., 7 - l!f 4. Income Income levels influence the range of housing prices and the ability of the population to afford housing. Households that are low- income are limited in their ability to balance housing costs with other needs and often the ability to find housing of adequate size. The 1999 median household income for Chula Vista was $44,861. While this is higher than neighboring Imperial Beach ($35,882) and National City ($29,826), it is much lower San Diego County's median income ($47,067) and also the City of San Diego ($45,733). For the purposes of the Consolidated Plan, HUD has established the following income categories: . Extremely Low Income Households: Households whose gross income is equal to 30 percent or less of the area median income. . Very Low Income Households: Households whose gross income is equal to 31 percent and 50 percent or less of the area median income. . Low Income Households: Households whose gross income is between 51 percent and 80 percent of the area median income. . Moderate Income Households: Households whose gross income is between 81 percent and 95 percent of the area median income. Table 3 shows the distribution of the household income. Though, the majority of the population in households earn more than $50,000 per year, 33.6 percent or about a third earn less than that, irrespective of household size. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 9 of 68 ! q- 1'7 Moreover, the 2000 Census shows that the median household income differs by tenure, with owner households earning $59,663 and renters earning $30,962. Median income reported by the 2000 Census also differs by ethnicity as follows: . White $47,419 . Hispanic or Latino $39,110 . Black $41,533 . American Indian $34,531 . Asian $62,861 . Native Hawaiian/Pac Islander $51,630 As shown, Asians earn considerably higher incomes than all other races, though they do not represent a majority of the population. While Hispanics make less than the overall City median, they represent nearly half of the City's population, indicating they may be at a disproportionate disadvantage in terms of earnings. A lower level of education may be one explanation for this, as the 2000 Census reports that of the population 25 years and older 36 percent of Hispanics have and educational attainment level that does not include a high school diploma. In comparison 19 percent of Whites, 11 percent of Asians, and 10 percent of African Americans have similar education levels. Without the proper skill set needed for employment higher earnings will likely continue to be a struggle for this group. 5. Employment Characteristics Chula Vista has been forecasted to be one of the fastest growing employment centers in the region because of land available for employment center development, access to major transportation corridors such as Interstate 8 and 805, and its proximity to the U.s. - Mexico International Border. Table 4 indicates major employers in the City of Chula Vista that have 200 or more employees. As shown, Hospitals employ 29 percent of the total employees held by the City's major employers followed by aerospace (24 percent) and general merchandise 20 ercent. TABLE 4: MAJOR EMPLOYERS Business B.F Goodrich Aeros ace Shar Chula Vista Medical Center Scri s Memorial Hos ital United Parcel Service Target (3 stores) Costco Wholesale Cor Sears Roebuck & Co. AT C Vancom of California L P Wal-Mart Store #3516 Home De ot #658 Ba view Behavioral Health Carn Federated Western Pro Ra heon S stems Com an Communications Source: City of Chula Vista Finance Department, June 2004 City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 10 of 68 /1- -'it As shown in Table 5, the industries of the employment sector have remained relatively unchanged, with the exceptions of manufacturing and retail trade that decreased and entertainment/recreation and health services, which has increased. Though retail trade has decreased significantly by eight percentage points, it still remains the highest proportionally at 14 percent of industries listed. Another significant change has occurred in the entertainment and recreation industry, which increased by nine percentage points. TABLE 5: EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY 1990 - 2000 1990 Percent 2000 Percent Aariculture. forestrv, and fisheries 609 1% 112 0% Minina 37 0% 6 0% Construction 3885 7% 4.426 7% Manufacturina 8,831 16% 7.771 12% TransDortation 2176 4% 2515 4% Communications & other Dublic utilities 1.478 3% 2.670 4% Wholesale trade 2371 4% 2348 4% Retail trade 11,842 22% 8.850 14% Finance. insurance. and real estate 4517 8% 4.987 8% Entertainment and recreation services 791 1% 6.133 10% Health services 4121 8% 7786 12% Educational services 4,660 9% 6.637 10% Other Drofessional and related services 3,953 7% 3776 6% Public administration 5214 10% 6.260 10% Source: Census 1990 and 2000 6. Racial and Ethnic Composition One of Chula Vista's greatest assets is the cultural diversity of its people and neighborhoods. Many of the 'leighborhoods reflect residents living together harmoniously in various cultural and economic groups and sharing a sense of community, even though some of these neighborhoods are concentrated with low income and minority households. As shown in Table 6, Hispanics continued to make up the majority of the population, though there was an increase of approximately 12 percentage points. Other ' proportions of racial and ethnic groups remained r~latively similar, with Whites representing 31.7 percent, Asians 10.6 percent, and African Americans 4.3 percent. , / City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 11 of 68 /9 .- 17 TABLE 6:CHANGE IN RACIAL/ETHNIC COMPOSITION RaceIEthnicitv 1990 Percent 2000 Percent White (non-Hispanic) 41,187 30.5% 55,04 31.7% 2 Black 6216 4.6% 7517 4.3% Hispanic 50,376 37.3% 86,07 49.6% 3 Amer. Indian & Alaska Native alone 863 0.6% 593 0.3% Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific 914 0.7% 883 0.5% Islander alone Asian alone 11,161 8.3% 18,41 10.6% 0 pooulation of two or more races N/A - 4765 2.8% Other! Some other race alone 24 446 18.1% 273 0.2% Total Population 135,05 1000/0 173, 100% 6 556 Source: 1990 and 2000 Census 7. Racial/Ethnic Concentrations Ethnic concentrations occurs when the percentage of residents in a census tract exceed the countywide average percentage for that particular race. For Chula Vista concentrations exist as follows: 8. Household Language and Linguistic Isolation The 2000 Census reports that nearly one third of the population in Chula Vista are foreign born. In addition, of 57,626 households, 43 percent speaks Spanish, of which nearly 17 percent are linguistically isolated. A linguistically isolated household is one in which all members over 14 years of age has some difficulty with English. Of the 5,454 households that speak Asian languages nearly 18 percent are linguistically isolated. Language barriers may prevent residents from accessing services, informatiorl, housing, and may also affect educational attainment and employment. B. PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS There are some population groups that have been identified as having a need for special or alternative types of housing. These special need populations have difficulty finding appropriate housing to meet their needs due to economic, social, mental, or physical conditions. These groups are the elderly, persons with disabilities, large- families, single parents, the homeless, farm workers, day laborers, and students. Many of these groups overlap, for example many farm workers are homeless and many elderly people have a disability. I I City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /1 --9] Page 12 of 68 1. Elderly and Frail Elderly The limited incomes of many elderly persons often make it difficult for them to find affordable housing. Many elderly spend a higher percentage of their income for food, housing, medical care, and personal care than non-elderly families, and therefore need some form of housing assistance. The elderly population comprises about 13 percent of the estimated population in Chula Vista or 22,606 persons according to the 2000 Census. Elderly is defined as 62 years or older, while frail elderly is an elderly person who is 62 years or older and unable to perform at least 3 activities of daily living (ADL's). Examples of ADL's include, but are not limited to eating, bathing, grooming, and household management activities. The housing needs of the elderly include supportive housing, such as intermediate care facilities, group homes, and other housing that may include a planned service component. Needed services related to the elderly households include personal care, health care, housekeeping, meal, personal emergency response, and transportation services. According to the 2000 CHAS data for Chula Vista, approximately 6, 421 elderly households are low to moderate-income, most of which are homeowners (61 percent). Of all elderly households renting their home, 32.5 percent are estimated to pay more than 50 percent of their income for housing. Elderly households constitute nearly 27 percent of all Chula Vista low to moderate- income households. Of the total low to moderate- income renter households, 17 percent are elderly. A wide variety of facilities and services are presently available to serve the elderly population, including: . Norman Park Senior Center offers an exciting array of educational courses, health programs, exercise, dancing and special events. I . life Options South Bay is a public / private partnership coordinated by the City of Chula Vista, Southwestern College and the Chula Vista Coordinating Council, targeted at active retirees over the age of 50. Activities include: volunteer, education, 2nd career training, recreation and travel, health, fitness and employment opportunities. / City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /'I? -. '"' '1 ~ (/-/ Page 13 of 68 2. Persons with Disabilities According to the u.s. Bureau of the Census, a person is considered to have a disability if he or she has difficulty performing certain functions (seeing, hearing, talking, walking, climbing stairs, and lifting or carrying), or has difficulty with certain social roles (doing school work for children or working at a job for adults). A person, who is unable to perform one or more activities, uses an assistive device to get around, or who needs assistance from another person to perform basic activities is considered to have a severe disability. The U.S. Bureau of the Census estimates that ten percent of the total population in the United States has a severe disability and that 20 percent has some kind of disability. Applying these rates to Chula Vista would result in an estimate of 17,356 persons with severe disabilities and 34,712 with some kind of disability. This is consistent with the 2000 Census data that reports 30,257 people in Chula Vista with a disability. Four factors - affordability, design, location, and discrimination - significantly limit the supply of housing available to households of persons with disabilities. Most homes are inaccessible to people with mobility and sensory limitations. Housing is needed that is adaptable to widened doorways and hallways, access ramps, larger bedrooms, lowered countertops, and other features necessary for accessibility. Location of housing is also an important factor for many persons with disabilities as they often rely on public transportation to travel. Housing and advocacy groups report that people with disabilities are often the victims of discrimination in the home buying market. People with disabilities, whether they work or receive disability income are often perceived to be a greater financial risk than persons without disabilities with identical income amounts. The 2000 CHAS data estimates 10,631 households living in Chula Vista as having a mobility or self-care limitation, 57 percent of which are low to moderate income. While 48.5 percent of all disabled households reported having any housing problem, disabled renters were more impacted (65.6 percent) than owners (36.3 percent). Extra elderly low income disabled households were the most impacted of all disabled households with 97.3 percent with any housing problem. Group housing, shared housing, and other supportive housing options can help meet the needs of persons with disabilities. These housing options often have the advantage of social service support on-site or readily available. Disabilities can also hinder the ability of a person to earn adequate income. "The U.s. Bureau of the Census estimates that 70 percent of all people with severe disabilities are unemployed and rely upon fixed monthly disability incomes which are rarely adequate for the payment of market rate rent." ! City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 14 of 68 Iq- /00 Table 7 illustrates the types of disabilities tallied in the 2000 Census. As shown, most disabilities tallied are employment disabilities (26 percent), followed by physical and go-outside the home at 23 percent each. More than one disability can be reported by one individual; thus the numbers are higher than if the count was for total disabled Dersons. TABLE 7: DISABILmES TALLIED 16 to 64 Years 65 Years and Total Percent over SensorY disabilitv 2016 3.066 5.082 10% Phvsical disabilitv 5,905 6.098 12 003 23% Mental disabilitv 3458 2400 5.858 11% Self-care disabilitv 1,954 1937 3891 7% Go-outside-home disabilitv 8013 4.087 12.100 23% Emolovment disabilitv 13,418 - 13,418 26% Total 34.764 17.588 52.352 100% Source: Census 2000 3. Physically Disabled According to the 2000 Census approximately 4,106 people over the age of five have physical disabilities in Chula Vista. The majority of the supportive services and housing assistance for physically disabled persons are provided through noncprofit organizations. A primary provider is the Access Center of San Diego. The Access Center's services provide independence, dignity and access to physically disabled persons. The Access Center provides a variety of services including: . Intake and Referral Services . Personal Assistance to obtain personal care attendants or homemakers . Housing Referral to obtain accessible and/or appropriate housing . Benefits Counseling to help disabled individuals apply for public benefits . Case management services to help individuals move out of institutional environments . Assist young adults with disabilities moving from a school setting to independent living larrangements . Peer Counseling furnishes services and opportunities for social contact and involves areas such as individual, marital, family, and sexual counseling; . Transportation to medical, employment or personal appointments; . Spoke Shop is a business enterprise which offers medical supplies and sales, service and repair of durable medical equipment such as wheelchairs; . Public Relations and Development to provide public information to the community, manages public relations events, produces fund development special projects, supervise volunteer coordination and membership recruitment. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 15 of 68 ICJ- /0/ The City of Chula Vista provides CDBG funds to the Access Center for services to residents in Chula Vista. 4. Mentally Disabled According to the 2000 Census, approximately 1,690 people over the age of five have mental disabilities in Chula Vista. Region wide, facilities for the mentally disabled include hospitals, medical centers, outpatient clinics, mental health centers, counseling and treatment centers, socialization centers, residential facilities for children, crisis centers, and adolescent and adult day treatment offices. Services available region wide through the County Mental Health Services and its contracting agencies include: screening and emergency, inpatient, partial day treatment, 24-hour residential treatment, outpatient, crisis, community support, probation, forensic, program review and development, case management, homeless outreach and volunteer services. At present, there is a limited range of community-based rehabilitative and supportive housing options for persons not in crisis who need living accommodations. Current County Mental Health Services housing resources for the region include: . Supplemental Rate Program: board & care with supplemental services . Long-term/Transitional Residential Program: group living with supportive services . Semi-Supervised Living Program: transitional living from the streets to group housing I I " ~ City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /9-102- Page 16 of 68 5. Developmentally Disabled The federal definition of developmental disability is a severe chronic disability caused by physical or mental impairment that is evident before age 22. According to the Illinois Department of Human Services website, approximately 1 percent of the population is affected by a developmental disability. Applying this to Chula Vista, an estimated 1,736 people may be developmentally disabled The San Diego Regional center for the Developmentally Disabled is an information clearinghouse and provider of services for developmentally disabled persons. It is responsible for providing diagnostic counseling and coordination services. Regional centers serve as a focal point within the community through which persons with developmental disabilities and their families receive comprehensive services. The San Diego Regional Center is responsible for providing preventive services, including genetic counseling to persons who have or may be a risk of having a child with a developmental disability. They are also responsible for planning and developing services for persons with developmental disabilities to ensure that full continuum of services are available. . Training and Education for Retarded Individuals, Inc. is a private, non-profit corporation created for the purpose of developing residential, educational and recreational programs designed to serve individuals with developmental disabilities. . The United Cerebral Palsy Association of San Diego County provides communication training, pre-vocational testing and training, and social and recreational activities for developmental disabled persons. . Association of Retarded Citizens (ARC), a private non-profit corporation provides job training to the developmentally disabled in Chula Vista. The Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Department assists with the Special Olympics. . The Therapeutics Recreation Section offers a wide range of activities for persons with developmental disabilities and/or physical disabilities. Activities include dances, sports, exercise, weekend recreation; weeknight recreation, field trips and , special events. . Kids Included Together (KIT) is a nonprofit organization that is designed to support programs that serve children with disabilities. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 19- /)3 Page 17 of 68 6. Large Households/Families Large families, defined as five or more persons, usually require units with three or more bedrooms and pay a larger percentage of monthly income for housing. They often have lower incomes and frequently live in overcrowded smaller units which can result in accelerated unit deterioration. According to 2000 CHAS data, 9,576 (17 percent) of Chula Vista's 56,864 total households were large families of five or more persons. Of those, 6,039 (63 percent) were owners and 3,537 (37 percent) were renters. Approximately 40 percent ofthese large households were low to moderate income (3,816). While 78.9 percent of large renter households reported having any housing problem, only 34.3 percent of large renter households indicated paying more than 30 percent of their income for rent. In comparison 55.2 percent of large owner households reported having any housing problem, with 36.1 percent indicated paying more than 30 percent of their income for rent. The 2000 Census reports 28,010 housing units with three or more bedrooms, 85 percent of which are owner-occupied, indicating that there are a sufficient number of larger homes to accommodate the large household population. While it is likely that overcrowding is a major housing problem facing large renter households in Chula Vista, housing condition may also explain part of the problem, since there appears to be an adequate number of larger homes. Large owner households also appear to face overcrowding, though not to the same extent. 7. Single Parents Single parents comprise a significant portion of lower-income households "in need." Single-parent households often require special consideration and assistance because they tend to have lower incomes and a greater need for day care, health care, and related facilities. 2000 Census data indicate that 6,351 (11 percent) of the City's total households are headed by single parents. Of these households in Chula Vista, 1,400 (22 percent) are headed by males and 4,951 (78 percent) by females. Of the female single-parent households, 1,626 live below the poverty level, compared to 243 male householders with no wife present and children under 18. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 18 of 68 /1-/)1 8. Homeless Throughout the country and the San Diego region, homelessness has become an increasing problem. Factors contributing to the rise in homelessness include a lack of housing affordable to low and moderate income persons, increases in the number of persons whose income fall below the poverty level, reductions in subsidies to the poor, drug/alcohol abuse, and the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill. As defined by the U.s. Department of Housing and Urban Development, an individual or family who is homeless: 1. Lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; or 2. Has a primary nighttime residence that is: . A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill); . An institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized; or . A public or private place not designated for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings. This definition does not include persons living in substandard housing (unless it has been officially condemned); persons living in overcrowded housing, or persons being discharged from mental health facilities (unless the person was homeless when entering and is considered to be homeless at discharge). The Regional Task Force on the Homeless issued a report in July 2004 states that more than 7,300 urban homeless and 2,300 rural homeless are located in the San Diego region. Within Chula Vista the homeless population is estimated at 474 homeless. The Regional Task Force on the Homeless also estimates that families account for approximately 32 percent of the urban homeless population in the San Diego region. Single adults account for approximately 66 percent of the urban homeless. Many homeless are substance abusers (30 percent), are farm workers/day laborers (32 percent), are chronically homeless (19 percent), and mentally ill (19 percent). I Services for the homeless are discussed under the Homeless Needs section of this Plan. City of Chula Vista Page 19 of 68 Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /1 ,. .., L- . .~. v'::J 9. Farm Workers and Day Laborers Farm workers and day laborers are described as those individuals who live in the area and work regularly in the fields or in casual labor situations. Due to the rapid sub- urbanization of Chula Vista, very little of the County's agricultural employment base is left in the area. According to the 2000 Census, there are only 118 people employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and mining in Chula Vista. Chula Vista's day laborers may work on small construction jobs and odd jobs. Similar to the farm workers, day laborers often reside in the city temporarily and may choose to be homeless in order to send their earnings home to their families rather than using their resources for housing. This was seen in 1995 when the City of San Diego met some resistance from farm workers and day laborers who were offered to be relocated from encampments into apartments. It is difficult to provide an accurate estimate of this population due to this population's geographical, linguistic, and cultural isolation. The Regional Task Force on the Homeless has roughly estimated a rural homeless population of 2,340 day laborers in the San Diego region, with zero in Chula Vista as of October 2003. 10. Students Students can impact housing demands in areas that surround universities and colleges. Typically students are low-income and are therefore affected by a lack of affordable housing, especially within easy commuting distance from campus. They often seek shared housing situations or live with their parents to decrease expenses and can be assisted through roommate referral services offered on-and-off-campus. Chula Vista is the location of Southwestern Community College with an enrollment of approximately 17,390 students (Fall 2004 opening day). Most of these students are part-time (64 percent) and only 27 percent are new enrollees. The average age is 26 and 84 percent are ethnic minorities. The average family income is $29,600 and the average family size is 3.9. Approximately 41 percent live in Chula Vista (7,121). When surveyed about their needs, none indicated a need for housing. Other services were noted relevant to community development needs, specifically: disabled services, employment, child care, health services and tutoring. There is no housing office on campus and the college administrators have not heard about housing problems from the students. The Olympic Training Center represents a unique student need in Chula Vista. Approximately 120 of the athletes require short-term stay of one to two months and use the four dormitories at the Center. Approximately 75 athletes require year-round housing, 25 of whom reside at the Center and 50 reside in the nearby community. The average age is 25 years and the average income in under 50 percent of the area median income. Approximately 75 percent are female and 25 percent are male. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 20 of 68 /9- J i"'\ ! , L.. t:> 11. Persons with the HIV Infection and with AIDS According to the County HIVjAIDS Epidemiology Program, there were 406 cases of AIDS reported for Chula Vista as of December 2004. Of these cases, 246 are currently living with AIDS and are composed of 28 percent White, 9 percent African American, 61 percent Hispanic, and 2 percent Asian residents. These figures appear consistent with the demographic composition of the City. In comparison to the County as a region, the County of San Diego Health and Human Services Agency Public Health Services HIV/AIDS Epidemiology Report 2004 reports the following: . There have been 12,034 individuals diagnosed with AIDS in San Diego County. . The number of new cases reported per year has been decreasing since 1993 . Individuals diagnosed with AIDS in San Diego County are most commonly white, male, between 30 to 39 years of age, and have male sexual partners. . Over the years, this has been slowly changing with a larger proportion of people being diagnosed at age 40 or older, African American or Hispanic racial/ethnic groups, women, or having used injection drugs. . While AIDS was once considered a fatal illness, the advances in medicine and medical treatment have enabled individuals with AIDS to live longer, healthier lives. As the number of individuals newly diagnosed with AIDS has been decreasing, the number of individuals living with an AIDS diagnosis continues to increase. . To date, approximately 5,454 are living with an AIDS diagnosis in San Diego County. The Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA) has divided the County into six regions. Chula Vista is part of the South Region, which is the second most frequently reported place of residence since 1995. Cases diagnosed in the South are predominately Hispanic (56%) and white (30%). Of the 12,201 AIDS cases reported for San Diego County as of December 2004, Chula Vista represents about 2 percent (246 cases). The City of San Diego represents the majority with approximately 74 percent. Chula Vista represents approximately 5% of the 5,454 people living with AIDS in San Diego County. HIVjAIDS related programs available to Chula Vista residents include: . AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP): Provides assistance to eligible individuals in obtaining prescription drugs for the treatment of HIV JAIDS (619) 296- 3400 x174 . HIV Testing Clinics: Free anonymous and confidential testing to anyone ages 12 or older. Available at several sites (619) 296-2120 . Office of AIDS Coordination: Provides the planning and administration of HIV prevention funding and Ryan If1(hite Care Act funds for San Diego County, as well as AIDS case management and HIV testing (619) 296-3400 " City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 21 of 68 IC;~ /0 7 . Partner Counseling and Referral Services (PCRS): Provides assistance to those who want to notify partners of possible exposure to HIV. A free, voluntary and confidential service (619) 296-2120 . STD (Sexually Transmitted Disease) Clinics: Low cost/free confidential testing and treatment of STDs to anyone ages 12 or older. Available at several Sites (619) 692-8550 . T-Cell Testing Program: A one-time, free confidential T-cell test (619) 296-2120 One of the inevitable consequences of AIDS is deterioration in health, leading to an inability to work. As a result, AIDS is often regarded as an illness of impoverishment. Studies by MediCal indicate that approximately 55 percent of AIDS patients have extremely limited incomes, making almost all market-rate housing unaffordable for AIDS patients. Thus, many patients are at high risk of homelessness. In fact, the July 2004 report by the Regional Task Force on the Homeless indicated that just over 400 persons with AIDS are unsheltered in San Diego County, though it is difficult to estimate because many homeless do not bother to get tested for HIV / AIDS. Facilities available regionally include 10 facilities containing 99 beds, one skilled nursing home with an AIDS program, AIDS housing information and referral service, and a volunteer-based free moving service for low income people with AIDS who need to change residences. Approximately 90 County residents with AIDS participate in a HOPWA-funded tenant-based rental assistance program; over 600 persons with AIDS are on the waiting list for that service. In an effort to coordinate all Non-Homeless Special Needs services, the Chula Vista Human Services Council publishes a Human Services Directory for the South Bay which lists all the valuable services along with important information, contact persons and telephone numbers. \ , City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 22 of 68 ! r"1 -. " 'i - l() r 12. Foster Children The County Foster Care Program is financed by the State of California. Under this program, a licensed family may receive $400 to $550 per month for housing a foster child. Currently no foster care agencies located in the City of Chula Vista are listed on the California State Community Care License Division's website, however there are facilities in nearby jurisdictions. Inadequate housing for families seeking foster care placement is not significant. The housing needs of foster children are greatest when the foster child reaches the age of 18 years and no longer qualifies for State-funded foster care. It is estimated that one- third of those currently in foster care will become homeless when they reach the age of 18. According to the Child Services Division of the County of San Diego Health Services Department, rental assistance is the best way to prevent homelessness among foster children reaching the age of 18 years. In order to provide some level of housing assistance, the City of Chula Vista has partnered with South Bay Community Services and the County of San Diego to fund an after-foster care facility. The Trolley Trestle project also provides temporary housing for those foster children released from the foster program. 13. Substance Abuse People suffering from substance abuse such as drug or alcohol require special housing needs while they are being treated and are recovering. According to the San Diego County Report Card, in 2003, 11.4% of those surveyed San Diego County students reported smoking a cigarette, 28.9% reported alcohol use, and 13.4% reported marijuana use in the past 30 days. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Office of Applied Studies (OAS) indicates that the national rate in 2002-2003 for past year dependence on or abuse of alcohol or illicit drugs among persons aged 12 or older was about 9.2 percent. IApplying this rate to Chula Vista approximately 13,385 (includes ages 10-14 as grouped QY the 2000 Census) people may face substance abuse problems. An article released by Prevent Child Abuse America states that the relationship between parental alcohol or other drug problems and child maltreatment is becoming increasingly evident. And the risk to the child increases in a single parent household where there is no of the parent's problem. Services available to Chula Vista residents include: . Substance abuse prevention education is taught in all grades, preschool through grade six. . South Bay Community Services Teen Recovery Center (TRC) - provides a day City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 23 of 68 /1- /)1 treatment program for youth with substance abuse issues. . McAlister Institute is a non-profit agency dedicated to providing high quality, low cost, substance abuse services. . South Bay Options for Recovery is a comprehensive outpatient recovery center which provides individual and group counseling and individualized treatment planning. Program curriculum includes alcohol and drug education, life skills, employment preparation and job skills, parenting classes, relapse prevention, and health education. On-site child care and random drug testing are also available. 14. Victims of Domestic Violence According to the San Diego County Report Card, there were 20.6 reports of domestic violence per 1,000 households; in 2003. South Bay Community Services provides an array of domestic violence prevention and intervention services that includes emergency response, confidential shelter for victims and their families, transitional confidential housing, counseling groups for victims, for their children, and groups for Court-ordered batterers. 15. Community Care Facilities for Special Needs According to the California State Division of Community Care Licensing Division, there are 101 facilities in Chula Vista with a capacity of 1,990 beds to serve persons with sDecial needs (Table 8), Table 8: Licensed CommunitY Care Facilities Facility Type Facilities Capacity Adult and Elderlv Residential Adult Dav Care 4 310 Ad u It Dav Su DDOrt 0 0 Adult Residential 35 201 Residential Chronicallv III 0 0 Residential Elderlv 36 1074 Social Rehab Infant Centers 11 261 Children's Residential GrouD Home 8 115 Small Familv Home 7 29 Foster Aoencv .-- 0 0 Transitional Housino Placement 0 0 Total 101 1.990 ./ Source: California Community Licensing Division website, 2005 Definitions for the types of facilities listed above are as follows: City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 24 of 68 /9-1//) . Adult Day Care Facilities (ADCF) are facilities of any capacity that provide programs for frail elderly and developmentally disabled and/or mentally disabled adults in a day care setting. . Adult Day Support Centers (ADSC) provide a community-based group program designed to meet the needs of functionally impaired adults through an individual plan of care in a structured comprehensive program that provides a variety of social and related services in a protective setting on less than 24-hour basis. . Adult Residential Facilities (ARF) are facilities of any capacity that provide 24-hour non- medical care for adults ages 18 through 59, who are unable to provide for their own daily needs. Adults may be physically handicapped, developmentally disabled, and/or mentally disabled. . Residential Care Facilities for the Chronically III (RCFCI) are facilities with a maximum licensed capacity of 25. Care and supervision is provided to aduits who have Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). . Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE) provide care, supervision and assistance with activities of daily living, such as bathing and grooming. They may also provide incidental medical services under special care plans. The facilities provide services to persons 60 years of age and over and persons under 60 with compatible needs. RCFEs may also be known as assisted living facilities, retirement homes and board and care homes. The facilities can range in size from six beds or less to over 100 beds. . A Social Rehabilitation Facility is any facility that provides 24-hour-a-day non-medical care and supervision in a group setting to adults recovering from mental illnesses, who temporarily need assistance, guidance, or counseling. . Group Homes are facilities of any capacity and provide 24-hour non-medical care and supervision to children in a structured environment. Group Homes provide social, psychological, and behavioral programs for troubled youths. . Small Family Homes (SFH) provide 24-hour-a-day care in the licensee's family residence for six or fewer children who are mentally disabled, developmentally disabled, or physically handicapped, and who require special care and supervision as a result of such disabilities. . Foster Family Homes (FFH) provide 24-hour care and supervision in the licensee's family residence for no more than six children. Care is provided to children who are mentally disabled, developmentally disabled, or physically handicapped, children who have been removed from their home because of neglect or abuse, and children who require special health care needs and supervision as a result of such disabilities. . Transitional Housing Placement Programs provide care and supervision for children at least 17 years of age participating in an independent living arrangement. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 25 of 68 /q~-I/ / c. HOMELESS NEEDS It is the goal of the Consolidated Plan to coordinate services and facilities available for the homeless as continuum of care. A continuum of care begins with a point of entry in which the needs of a homeless individual or family are assessed. Once a needs assessment is completed, the individual/family may be referred to permanent housing or to transitional housing where supportive services are provided to prepare them for independent living. The goal of a comprehensive homeless service system is to ensure that homeless individuals and families move from homelessness to self-sufficiency, permanent housing, and independent living. The following section summarizes the housing and supportive service needs of the homeless in Chula Vista, as well as persons and families at risk of becoming homeless. This section also includes an inventory of services and facilities available to serve the City's homeless population and those who are at risk of becoming homeless. Service and facility gaps in the continuum of care are also identified. 1. Extent of Homelessness and Subpopulations The Regional Task Force on the Homeless issued a report in July 2004 states that more than 7,300 urban homeless and 2,300 rural homeless are located in the San Diego region. Within Chula Vista the homeless population is estimated at 474 homeless. The Task Force also estimates that families account for approximately 32 percent of the urban homeless population in the San Diego region. Single adults account for approximately 66 percent of the urban homeless. Many homeless are substance abusers (30 percent), are farm workers/day laborers (32 percent), are chronically homeless (19 percent), and mentally ill (19 percent). Many extremely low and low income households are considered to be at risk of homelessness, because they often overpay for housing and would lose their homes if they were to become unemployed. Victims of domestic violence, persons with HIV / AIDS, youth recently released from the foster system, parolees, and other persons released from medical facilities may also be considered "at-risk". 2. Inventory of Homeless Services and Facilities Social service and homeless providers address the supportive service needs of the homeless, as well as housing needs. The many and various needs of the homeless include emergency shelter, transitional housing, social services (i.e., job counseling/training), mental health services, and general health services. Existing service agencies indicate that a growing need exists for limited-term shelter or transitional facilities for homeless individuals and families. Many organizations located in other cities offer shelter for the homeless population currently residing in Chula Vista. Table 9 lists the shelter locations both in and near Chula Vista that are known to serve Chula Vista's homeless population. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 200S-201O Page 26 of 68 /1-//2 South Bay Community Services (SBCS) is the primary social service agency that provides homeless shelter and services within Chula Vista. SBCS operates four transitional living programs in Chula Vista and participates in the FEMA and County of San Diego Hotel/Motel Voucher Program. The City of Chula Vista took a lead role in the County by creating an Affordable Housing Policy (AHP) which required developers of housing projects in excess of 50 units to explore Federal and State subsidy programs along with other economically feasible means of reducing the price of housing. The AHP requires the developer to provide a minimum of 5 percent of the units for low- income households and 5 percent of the units to middle income households. This policy continues to be a positive step toward ensuring a more racially and economically balanced community. TABLE 9: SHELTERS FOR THE HOMELESS SAN DIEGO - SOUTH BAY Agencies Program Name Target Special Beds City Population Needs Emeraencv Shelter Ecumenical ISN Rot'l Shelter South General General 12 Regional Council of SD Bay (mid-October - Population Homeless County March) SBCS Casa Nueva Vida I Families General 54 Chula Vista w/children Homeless SBCS La Nueva Aurora Families Victims of 12 Chula Vista w/children Domestic Violence Transitional Shelter MAAC Project Nostros Adult Men Su bsta nce * Chula Vista Abuse SBCS Casa Nuestra Shelter Homeless General * Chula Vista Youth Homeless SBCS Casa Segura I&II Women Victims of 50 Chula Vista w/Children Domestic Violence SBCS Casas Families General 7 Chula Vista w/Children Homeless SBCS Casas de Transition Families General 73 Chula Vista w/Children Homeless SBCS Trolley Trestle Adult Men/and General 10 Chula Vista or Women Homeless SBCS Trolley Trestle Families General 10 Chula Vista w/Children Homeless .- SBCS Victorian Heights Women Victims of 38 National City w/Children Domestic Violence ../ City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 27 of 68 19- 1/3 Winter Hotel/Motel Vouchers (November throuah ADriJ) MAAC Project Hotel/Motel Vouchers Families At-Risk N/A w/Children w/disabilitv SBCS Hotel/Motel Vouchers Families General N/A Chula Vista w/Children Homeless Source: Regional Task Force on the Homeless Total Beds 266 Definitions: Seasonal Emergency Shelter - A program which provides shelter and support services during a limited portion of late fall and Winter months. Transitional Housing - Temporary housing and support services to return people to independent living as soon as possible, and not longer than 24 months. 3. Homeless Prevention Programs and Services For the last few years, the City has allocated Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to SBCS for youth and family support services, housing services, and economic development opportunities. Located in Chula Vista, SBCS offers assistance to persons who are "near homeless" through coordination of available services and financial resources and counseling in such matters as financial management and family support. Case Management Services available in the South Bay region, which are located in Chula Vista include: . Lutheran Social Services Project Hand (General Homeless) . M.LT.E. Options South Bay (Families w/Children & Substance Abuse Treatment) . MAAC Project South Bay (General Homeless) . The Salvation Army Chula Vista Family Services (General Homeless) City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 28 of 68 /1- 1/'1' D. PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING NEEDS 1. Public Housing The Housing Authority of the County of San Diego (HACSD) operates four conventional public housing developments in Chula Vista, with a total of 120 units. They are all managed by Interfaith Housing Property Management and were recently modernized to be ADA and Section 504 compliant. These public housing units are as follows: . Dorothy Street Manor - 22 low income family units . Melrose Manor - 24 low income family units . Town Centre Manor - 59 low income senior/disabled units . L Street Manor - 16 low income family units 2. Section 8 Certificate Program and Housing Vouchers Approximately x households receive Section 8 housing voucher from the County of San Diego Housing Authority. The following is a breakdown by program and unit size of the number of households currently receiving Section 8 rental assistance in Chula Vista as of March 2005: Public Housina Proaram o Bedroom 1 Bedroom 58 2 Bedroom 17 3 Bedroom 46 4 Bedroom 5 Bedroom 6 Bedroom Total 121 Voucher Proaram o Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom 5 Bedroom 6 Bedroom Total 13 791 1,054 503 109 20 2 2,492 According to the Housing Authority, Of the Voucher participants, 66 percent of those in the Voucher program Hispanic, 20 percent are White and 10 percent are African- American. This is consistent with the City's demographic composition. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 29 of 68 /1- /I~ Waiting List The Housing Authority of the County of San Diego maintains a waiting list of households interested in receiving rental assistance. The Housing Authority accepts applications by telephone on an open enrollment basis. Currently, the number of households on the waiting list for both programs is approximately 5,552. The following is a breakdown by family type and bedroom size of the households on the waiting list who currently reside in the Chula Vista area: Public Housina Elderly Disabled Family Single 174 377 1,283 90 Voucher Proaram Elderly Disabled Family Single 383 812 2,264 169 Total 1,924 Total 3,628 As shown, families represent the majority of the groups waiting for assistance, followed by disabled and elderly. When an applicant applies for the Certificate or Voucher programs, Federal preference is given to households that are involuntarily displaced, living in substandard housing, or paying more than 50 percent of family income for rent. Currently, approximately 75 percent of all applicants qualify for one or more of the Federal preferences. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /C)_. 1/ /" " {C:' Page 30 of 68 When there are available certificates, vouchers or vacancies in Public Housing, names are selected from the waiting list by Federal preference and date of application. The length of time an applicant may wait for assistance is approximately two to five years. Table 10: Other Federal. State and Locallv Assisted Units TVDe ComDlex Cateaory HUD Section 236 Castle Park Garden Aoartments 62 Non-elderly low income Oxford Terrace ADartments 132 Non-elderly low income Palomar Aoartments 168 Non-elderly low income Rancho Vista Aoartments 24 Non-elderly low income HUD Section 202 Silvercrest 75 Senior low income Short-Term/Transitional Casa Nueva Vida #1 43 Beds Housina Casa Nueva Vida #2 48 Beds SBCS Condo Units 25 Beds Low Income Rental Units Park Plaza Villaae Aoartments 28 Very Low/Low income familv Tax ExemDt Financina Beacon Cove 35 Low income family Eucalvotus Grove 75 Low income familv Terra Nova 46 Low income familv Pear Tree Manor Aoartments 119 Low income familv Villa Serena 132 Senior low income Cordova Villaae 40 Very Low income familv Trolley Terrace 18 Low income familv Teresina at Lomas Verdes 88 Low income familv All of the above listed units are estimated by the City to have a near zero percent (0%) vacancy rate. Assisted Housing Units "At Risk" Chula Vista has 386 HUD Section 236 units which are "at risk" of converting to market rate housing. As explained in the five-year strategy to follow, the City continues to monitor these units and is ready to provide staff and financial resources to maintain the affordability of these units. Five Year Projections State law defines regional share needs for new housing units by jurisdiction and distributes that need to all income groups. The City of Chula Vista will need 17,000 new housing units broken down as follows: City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 31 of 68 la ".,. (-/---, I r" E. LEAD-BASED PAINT HAZARDS The Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (CLPPP) is a Division of Community Epidemiology. It seeks to prevent lead poisoning among children under age six, through community education, and to provide case management to children identified with dangerous blood lead levels. According to the San Diego County Department of Health and Human Services CLPPP, there have been 10 reported cases of elevated blood lead levels (15 + mg/dL) for youth under 21 years of age in Chula Vista children between 2000 and 2004. Five of these cases have occurred in zip code 91910 and five in 91911. The Center for Disease Control has determined that a child with a blood lead level of 15 to 19 mg/dL is at high risk for lead poisoning, while a child with a blood lead level above 19 mg/dL requires full medical evaluation and public health follow-up. The CLPPP offers the following advice on preventing lead poisoning in children: Paint - Cover old paint that is chipped or peeling with duct tape or contact paper. Remove fallen paint chips immediately. Prevent children from chewing on or picking at windowsills and other painted areas. Dust - Mop and wipe floors, windowsills and window frames weekly with warm water and a general all-purpose cleaner. 50il- Do not allow children to play in outdoor areas near a busy street, highway, factory or auto shop. Cover soil around your house with grass, plants, rocks or pavement. Wash children's hands before eating, after playing and before taking a nap or going to bed. Toys - Use toys that can be easily washed. Avoid using baby bottles with decals. Candy - Avoid giving children imported candies made with tamarind or chili powder. Pottery - Do not use handmade or imported pottery and highly decorated dishes for cooking and storing food unless you are certain it is lead free. Cast iron and metal pots are safe to use. Special swabs to test for lead can be purchased at some hardware stores. - Home remedies - Only give children doctor-approved medicines. Nutrition -Give children low-fat, healthy foods rich in iron, calcium and vitamin C. Good diet helps prevent lead absorption into the body. City of Chuia Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 32 of 68 /q - / /F Lead Hazard Information Sources for Lead Hazard Information include: . U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - The HUD Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control operates the Healthy Homes program to protect children and their families from lead poisoning. The program develops lead- based paint regulations and offers lead-based paint hazards information via the Internet in the form of brochures and fact sheets featuring childhood lead screening guidance. . The U.S Environmental Protection Agency national Lead Information Center has several free lead poisoning prevention booklets that are available by calling 1(800) 424-5323 or going online. . U.s. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) - Visit the CDC Web site or, call the National Lead Information Center at 1 (800) 424-LEAD [5323]. . U.s. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Healthy Homes Program, San Diego field office: (619) 557-5310. . The Environmental Health Coalition offers publications, fact sheets and reports on lead hazards and other toxic substances. . The Alliance to Childhood Lead Poisoning offers fact sheets and brochures. . The State of California Department of Health Services, Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Branch has information specific to controlling lead hazards and regulate Lead Safe work practices in California. . Lead-related Construction Information Line, 1(800) 597-LEAD [5323] . The Orange County Register Toxic Treats is a Web site that describes the many candies that contain high levels of lead, lists the lead levels in individual candies and provides additional online content about the sources and effects of lead poisoning. The City currently assists hO'l1eowners alleviate lead-based paint hazards through the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP). When lead-based paint is discovered through the rehabilitation of the property, funds are used to remov~ and dispose of the paint chips and to repaint the house. The City utilizes the Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds for this purpose. The City expects to use HOME funds to rehabilitate some homes. With the newly implemented lead-based paint legislation, Chula Vista has designed a lead-based paint hazard program to provide information to Chula Vista residents and measures to limit the impact of lead-based paint. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 33 of 68 /11.-- ,/;' c:;- -/ ,I I Additionally, the City's first-time homebuyer program has set aside funds to assist with lead-based paint issues. Currently, $24,000 is available for homebuyers purchasing homes that do not appear to contain lead-based paint. If a home has identified lead-based paint issues, the loan is increased to $40,000 to assist in abating the lead-based paint. The San Diego Housing Commission (SDHC) also offers a variety of home improvement programs for low to moderate income residents of San Diego. Some programs are specifically targeted to reduce or remove hazards in the home. Estimating the Number of Housing Units with Lead-Based Paint For estimating the number of housing units with lead-based paint, the age of the housing stock is the key variable. Starting in 1978, the use of all lead-based paint on residential property was prohibited. Based on the national average, 75 percent of all residential property built prior to 1978 contains lead-based paint. More than half of the housing units in Chula Vista were built prior to 1979 (63 percent), indicating potential hazards. Using the national average, it can be estimated that approximately 28,024 housing units contain LBP. Using Census 2000 data, and HUD's formula for estimating units containing lead-based paint, the following Table 11 estimates the number of housing units that may contain lead-based paint in more detail. T bl 11 N b f H U' . h LBP a e um er 0 OUSlnq nits Wit Percent Year Built Units Units with LBP' Estimated No. of Units with LBP 1960-1979 24,084 62% + 10% 14,932+ 2,408 1940-1959 11,814 80% i: 10% 9,451 + 1,181 Before 1940 1,468 90% + 10% 1321+ 147 Total Units 37.366 25.704 (+ 3.736) Sources: Census 2000 CHAS data on affordability mismatch indicates that approximately 11,511 low to moderate income households occupy housing units built prior to 1970 (78 percent renters and 22 percent owners). The data further indicates that many of these units are three bedroom units or larger. As stated earlier the City's First-time Homebuyer Program and Residential Rehabilitation Program (CHIP) are used to address lead-based paint hazards in older housing stock. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 / /} '20 c( _ .' Page 34 of 68 F. HOUSING CONDITIONS 1. Housing Stock Characteristics According to the 2000 Census, Chula Vista had a housing stock of 59,495 units. This is a growth of 19 percent from the 1990 total units of 49,849 (Table 12). TABLE 12: HOUSING UNITS Year Chula Vista 1990 49 849 2000 59,495 Total Increase 9,646 0/0 Increase 19% Source: Census 1990 and 2000 2. Housing Type The largest percentage of housing units in Chula Vista have continued to be single- family detached units (50.8 percent), followed by 33.6 percent multi-family units. As shown in Table 13, all types of housing units in Chula Vista increased between 1990 and 2000, with the exception of mobile homes and other which decreased. While the number of multi-family units increased, their proportion to the rest of the housing stock decreased by almost three percentage points. TABLE 13: HOUSING UNIT TYPE 1990-2000 Housing Type 1990 % of Total 2000 % of Total Single-Family attached 4,007 8.0% 5,457 9.2% Single-Family detached 23,140 46.4% 30,237 50.8% Multi-Family 18,429 37.0% 19,987 33.6% Mobile-homes 3,744 7.5% 3,703 6.2% Other (Boats RV, Etc) 529 1.1% 149 0.2% Total Housing 49,849 100% 59,529 1000/0 Source: Census 1990 and 2000 City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 35 of 68 ;q - /2/ 3. Housing Age Age of housing is often an indicator of housing conditions. Many federal and state programs use age of housing as one factor to determine housing needs and the availability of funds for housing and/or community development. Table 14 indicates that approximately 63 percent of the City's housing stock was built prior to 1970. It is generally accepted that housing over thirty years old will need minor repair, while housing older than fifty years is apt to need major rehabilitation. TABLE 14: AGE OF HOUSING STOCK Units Year Built Number Percent 1999 to March 2000 2,414 4.1% 1995 to 1998 4,484 7.5% 1990 to 1994 5,061 8.5% 1980 to 1989 10,204 17.1% 1970 to 1979 13,126 22.0% 1960 to 1969 10,958 18.4% 1950 to 1959 8,845 14.9% 1940 to 1949 2,969 5.0% 1939 or earlier 1,468 2.5% Total 59,529 1000/0 Source: Census 1990 and 2000 These older units are a source of affordable housing stock for low- and moderate- income residents as rents and sales prices are usually lower. It is important for Chula Vista to preserve these units as affordable housing stock through careful monitoring, code enforcement, and rehabilitation. 4. Housing Condition The 2000 Census indicated that 146 owner-occupied units were lacking complete plumbing facilities along with 198 renter-occupied units. Of the renter-occupied deficient units, 75 are reported to be overcrowded, compared to 11 overcrowded owner-occupied units. These 344 deficient units can be addressed through the City's home improvement program. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 36 of 68 /9- /22 6. Housing Tenure The total estimated number of occupied dwelling units in Chula Vista was 57,728 according to the Census 2000. Of these units, 33,195 (58 percent) were owner occupied and 24,533 (42 percent) were renter occupied. The City's First-time Homebuyer program seeks to increase the opportunity of low to moderate income renter households become homeowners. The majority of owner-occupied housing units are 3- bedrooms or larger (23,860 units) compared to only 4,150 renter- occupied units with three or more bedrooms. This makes overcrowding a major issue facing large renter households. Whereas an overcrowded unit that is owner- occupied can alleviate overcrowding through a room addition, renters can typically only alleviate the problem my moving to a larger unit, of which the supply is limited in Chula Vista. 7. Overcrowding An overcrowded household is defined as one with more than one person per room, excluding bathrooms, kitchens, hallways, and porches. Severely overcrowded households are households with more than 1.5 persons per room. Overcrowding is an indicator of housing affordability, because it often results from high housing costs and lower incomes which don't allow families to find housing that is affordable and of adequate size. Culture also contributes to overcrowding as some cultures tend to have larger household sizes and/or prefer to live with extended family members. Overcrowding often leads to deterioration of homes, unsanitary conditions, garage conversions, and increased on-street parking as garage conversions no longer accommodate parking. According to the 2000 Census, 4,064 units are overcrowded, with an additional 4,205 that are severely overcrowded. The overcrowding is much more severe in Chula Vista for renter households, who represent approximately 70 percent (5,614) of the 8,069 overcrowded units. In fact, the average household size according to the 2000 Census is 2.99 compared to the average family size of 3.44. This is slightly higher than the 1990 average household size of 2.79. The City's CHIP program provides funds for owner-occupied residential rehabilitation, which seeks to make improvements, such as a room addition, more affordable to lower income owners. While similar assistance is not available to renters, the City has worked with developers to build affordable rental units and works with the Housing Authority of San Diego to provide affordable opportunities for renter that need larger units. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 37 of 68 ;C) - /23 8. Vacancy Rates Vacancy rates are an indication of housing supply and demand. High vacancy rates may indicate an over supply of housing and/or low demand for such housing. A prolonged high vacancy rate tends to discourage new construction, especially multi- family residential development. A low vacancy rate indicates a high demand relative to supply. A prolonged low vacancy rate tends to elevate rents in the rental stock. Vacancy rates between two to three percent are usually considered healthy for single- family housing; and five to six percent for multi-family housing. However, vacancy rates are not the sole indicator of market conditions and must be viewed in the context of all the characteristics of the local and regional market. The 2000 Census indicated a vacancy rate of 1.0 for owners and 3.1 for rentals in Chula Vista. These low rates indicate a high demand for housing in Chula Vista. In comparison, the 1990 Census reported a vacancy rate of 2.2 for owners and 4.0 for renters. This is interesting to note given that the City has been constructing substantially more units than nearby Cities. As vacancy rates have substantially declined and rental rates have increased, there will likely continue to be a trend of housing shortages, over-crowding and over-payment particularly among lower-income households. 9. Housing Costs Housing costs are indicative of housing accessibility for all economic segments of the community. Typically if housing supply exceeds housing demand, housing costs will fall. If housing demand exceeds housing supply, housing costs will rise. In Chula Vista, housing costs have continued to rise. Similar to the rest of southern California, ownership housing cost has risen by double digits for the fifth year in a row; 29.4 percent as shown on Table 15. TABLE 15: OWNERSHIP HOUSING COSTS Median Cost of Resale Housina Jurisdiction January January DID Change 2005 2004 Chula Vista $550,000 $425,000 29.4% e-.. National City $427,000 $304,500 40.2% San Diego, City $468,000 $385,000 21.6% San Diego, County $490,000 $390,750 25.4% Source: California Association of Realtors (CAR) 2005 Generally speaking, as housing values increase, so do the rents asked. The 2000 City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 38 of 68 Ie" 1-:,' .~ . 1_, u I , ...;::,__ -or . . I Census reported that the median rent asked in Chula Vista was $873, slightly higher than the City of San Diego ($808) and much higher than National City ($527). Table 16 shows that most of the renters in Chula Vista were paying between $500 and 1,000 for rent regardless of bedroom size. Table 16: Gross Rents by Number of Bedrooms with Cash Rent 0 1 2 3+ Less than $200 176 205 66 26 $200 to $299 123 210 104 23 $300 to $499 469 1,158 679 146 $500 to $749 1,615 4,864 3,657 342 $750 to $999 300 1,348 3,047 1,070 $1,000 or more 128 474 1,254 2,279 Total 2,811 8,259 8,807 3,886 sou rce: Census 2000 As the housing market has gone up in value since 2000, so have the rents. An internet survey of rents on rentnet.com in March 2005 indicates that current rents for older units/apartments may have similar ranges as reported in the 2000 Census; however newly built units rent for at least are at lease $300-$400 more expensive per bedroom than reported in the 2000 Census. A snapshot of 2005 rents is as follows: . O-bed . 1-bed . 2-beds . 3+beds $650- $700 $625- $1,230 $775- $1,550 $1,510- $1,865 10. Worst Case Housing Needs (Overpayment and Overcrowding) The U.S. Department of Housing and Community Development defines "worst case" housing needs as "households which have incomes of 50 percent or less of median area income and pay more than half of their incomes for rent or are living in severely substandard housing. CHAS data indicates that in Chula Vista, 61.8 percent of all households making less than 30 percent of the median overpay for housing by 50 percent (3,925 households). In addition, 28.9 percent of households in the 30-50 percent of the median income category have a cost burden of 50 percent (1,835 households). Thus, an estimated 5,760 households can be considered to have the worst case housing needs (10 percent of the total households in the City). City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 39 of 68 ;C/- ! . ;" .--: G. BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING Actual or potential constraints on the provision of housing and the cost of housing affect the development of new housing and the maintenance of existing units for all income levels. Governmental and non-governmental constraints are discussed below. 1. Governmental Constraints Governmental constraints can limit the operations of the public, private and nonprofit sectors making it difficult to meet the demand for affordable housing and limiting supply in the region. Governmental constraints include growth management measures, land use controls, building codes, processing fees, and site improvement costs. 2. Land Use Controls Land use controls take a number of forms that affect the development of residential units. These controls implement the General Plan which establishes the overall character and development of the community. Chula Vista's General Plan designates substantial areas of vacant land for residential development at a variety of densities. Most of the vacant land will be developed under the "Planned Community (PC) Zone" which permits varied densities and the use of flexible development standards. The section on Housing Opportunities presents more detailed information on the availability of residentially zoned land. In summary, there is sufficient vacant land in Eastern Chula Vista to accommodate 29,565 additional units. Of these units, 41 percent will be high density multi-family and another 11 percent will be in the 6 to 11 units/acre range which typically generates patio homes/town-homes. The remaining 48 percent are at densities for single family homes. The Zoning Ordinance includes a Mobile-home Park (MHP) zone, density bonus provisions, mixed use development zones, and the construction of residential projects in certain commercial zones. Chula Vista allows dwelling groups, two or more detached dwellings on one parcel with a common yard or court, by right in the R-2 zone and with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the RE & R1 zones. All zones require site plan and architectural approval. Housing developments for seniors may be allowed in any zone except the R-1, R-2, C- V, C-T, and industrial zones. Because the residents of such developments have dwelling characteristics which differ from those of families and younger persons, it is not appropriate to apply all of the normal zoning standards. Senior housing is allowed with a CUP and the Planning Commission and City Council may make exceptions to the density, off-street parking, minimum unit size, open space, and such other requirements as may be appropriate. The Planning Commission and City Council may also adjust required setbacks, building height, and yard areas as appropriate to provide an adequate living environment both within the development and on nearby properties. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /ej - I 2 0 Page 40 of 68 Any exceptions and adjustments shall be subject to the condition that the development will be available for occupancy by seniors only. The City does not have a provision for accessory dwelling units. Accessory structures are a permitted use in any R zone, however they are not allowed to have a kitchen and are not intended as living quarters. Guest houses are permitted as accessory uses in the Agriculture and Residential Estate (RE) zones subject to provisions in the Municipal Code and not rented or otherwise conducted as a business. 3. Growth Management The following growth management provisions exist in Chula Vista: a. Threshold Standards: Adopted in November 1987, the "thresholds" established performance criteria and standards for eleven public facilities and services to ensure residents "quality-of-life" in conjunction with growth. They addressed such matters as minimum "Level of Service (LOS)" to be maintained on roadways, police and fire response times, minimum park acreage and library square footage per 1,000 persons, and guarantees for school, water, and sewer service as examples. b. The Standards included two types of implementation measures, those for application by staff on a project-by-project basis, and those to be applied City-wide on a periodic basis. For the latter, a Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) was formed and tasked with an annual review and report on Citywide compliance. c. Growth Management Element: Incorporated with the General Plan Update in April 1989, it sets forth the City's goals, objectives, and policies related to protection of residents' quality-of-life. Established a City commitment consistent with the concept of the Threshold Standards and Controlled Residential Development Ordinance. d. Growth Management Program: Adopted in April 1991, it serves as the implementing mechanism for the Growth Management Element of the General Plan. It sets a foundation for carrying out City development policies by directing and coordinating future growth to ensure timely provision of public facilities and services. As such, its primary focus is Eastern Chula Vista where large tracts of vacant land are to be developed. The program document sets forth guidelines for relating development phasing to facilities master plans at the project level, and establishes requirements for facilities guarantees at various stages of project planning and review. e. Growth Management Ordinance (Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 19.09): Enacted in May 1991, codifies Growth Management intents, standards, requirements, and procedures related to the review and approval of development projects. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 200S-2010 Page 41 of 68 /1-/27 The principal foundation of the City's various measures is recognition that large scale future growth creates tremendous demands for public facilities and services, which if not adequately addressed, will result in shortages detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare. Development of the Growth Management Program involved preparation of several facilities master plans sufficient to support the land use base of the updated City General Plan consistent with adopted Threshold Standards. Preparation of those master plans included a comprehensive survey and analysis of existing conditions and levels of service. Threshold Standards are applicable Citywide, although the Growth Management Program is targeted toward Eastern Chula Vista where large vacant tracts of land are being developed. Through the Implementing Ordinance (Chula Vista Municipal Code, Chapter 19.90) discretion is reserved to exempt those projects which through their size and/or location do not possess potential to significantly impact facilities and services. This level of significance is defined through the environmental review process on each project which specifically measures related facility and service needs, and in comparison to Threshold Standards performance, identifies if mitigating actions are necessary. In such instance that a project, due to its location and/or timing, is required to provide a facility(ies) exceeding its needs, a benefit assessment is made to determine the amount and/or location of additional developments being served, and appropriate financing mechanisms and reimbursement agreements are established. The City's ability to accommodate Regional Share allocations is not impacted, as the measures do not establish any form of building cap. Rather than attempting to artificially limit growth, the measures are aimed at ensuring adequate and timely services and facilities for growth produced by market forces. 4. Building Codes and Code Enforcement The City's Planning and Building Department administers and enforces the Uniform Building Code which ensures construction in accordance with widely adopted health and safety standards. The City does not vary from these standards. The City of Chula Vista administers code enforcement programs designed to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens. The City's Planning and Building Department, in conjunction with the City Attorney's office undertakes abatement proceedings for deteriorating and substandard housing or illegal housing units. The City's Code Enforcement Division of the Planning and Building Department currently detects and abates violations to the State and County Housing and Health Codes as they relate to substandard housing. The Code Enforcement Division administers a pro-active program of community outreach in an attempt to prevent Code violations from reaching a point of costly City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 42 of 68 /1- 122 remedy. Additionally, the City has an established housing rehabilitation program that provides loans and grants to low income homeowners. S. On- and Off-Site Improvements The City has a variety of requirements established by both the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, such as development standards and off-site improvements. These requirements are those necessary to ensure adequate livability and lasting value in housing such as sewers, streets, curb-gutter-sidewalk, lighting, drainage, recreational open space, parking, etc. The City allows for the reduction of standards to help offset costs for senior housing projects. The City also considers financial participation in the construction of infrastructure as a method of "additional incentive" under the State's revised Density Bonus Provisions. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 43 of 68 /1 1-' -- I ___.:. 0../ H. FAIR HOUSING - Regional Issues The Fair Housing Council of San Diego, a private fair housing group, is under contract to serve as administrator for fair housing services in Chula Vista. In 2003, the County of San Diego Conducted a Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI), which included the following impediments and recommendations relevant to Chula Vista: 1. Education and Outreach Impediment: Educational and outreach literature regarding fair housing issues, rights, and services on websites or at public counters is limited. Approximately 38 percent of the Fair Housing Survey respondents indicated that they had been discriminated against did not know where to report their complaints. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should provide links to fair housing and other housing resources with current information on their websites. Public counters should also prominently display fair housing information. Timeframe: By the end of 2005. Impediment: As many individual homeowners enter the business of being a landlord by renting out their homes, many may not be aware of current laws. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should make a concerted effort to identify one- to four-unit residences within their jurisdictions that are used as rentals and target education and outreach materials to this segment of the market population. Timeframe: Ongoing, consider funding allocations to pursue periodic mailing to owners of small properties. Impediment: Many fair housing violations tend to be committed by small "mom and pop" rental operations. These property owners/managers are often not members of the San Diego County Apartments Association. Outreaching to this group is difficult. Recommendation: Jurisdictions and fair housing service providers should work with the San Diego County Apartments Association (SDCAA) to expand outreach to the "mom and pop" rental properties. Discuss with SDCAA if it is feasible to establish a lower-tier membership for two- to six-unit owners to encourage access to SDCAA education programs. Timeframe: To the extent feasible, take proactive efforts to expand outreach to owners of small rental properties. Begin discussion with SDCAA and fair housing service providers in 2005. 2. Lending and Credit Counseling Impediment: Hispanics and Blacks continue to be under-represented in the homebuyer market, and experienced large disparities in loan approval rates among the 19 jurisdictions. Specifically, low and moderate income Black loan applicants achieved City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 1<11'--;'''"' ..... '< 7'; ~ Page 44 of 58 significantly lower approval rates than White applicants at the same income level. This pattern was also identified in the 2000 Als. Also, several lenders had high rates of loan applications due to incomplete information, suggesting inadequate follow-up with potential homebuyers. Recommendation: Provide findings of this AI and other related studies to the Community Reinvestment Initiative (CRr) Task Force to follow up with discussions and actions with lenders. Timeframe: Upon adoption of this AI in 2004, provide a copy to the CRI Task Force. Impediment: Many of the reasons for application denial, whether in the rental market or in the home purchase market, relate to credit history and financial management factors. Recommendation: Provide findings of this AI and other related studies to the Community Reinvestment Initiative (CRI) Task Force to follow up with discussions and actions with lenders. Timeframe: Upon adoption of this AI in 2004, provide a copy to the CRI Task Force. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should collaborate to provide education and outreach on Credit History and Financial Management. Timeframe: By 2005, identify an agency with a capacity and experience in conducting outreach and education on Credit History and Financial Management. Consider funding a regional program using CDBG or other housing funds, as appropriate. 3. Housing for Persons with Disabilities Impediment: Housing choices for persons with disabilities are limited. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should expand the variety of housing types and sizes. In addition to persons with disabilities, senior households can also benefit from a wider range of housing options. To allow seniors to age in place, small one-story homes, town homes or condominiums, or senior rentals may be needed. Timeframe: Ongoing effort to promote variety of housing. Re-evaluate housing policies as part of the 2005-2010 Housing Element update. Impediment: Discrimination against people with disabilities has become an increasing fair housing concern, which is supported by general literature, statistical data, cases filed with DFEH, and recent audits conducted in the region. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 45 of 68 /,,-, - i!~I~1 Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider promoting universal design principles in new housing developments. Timeframe: Ongoing. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider using CDBG, HOME, and other housing funds available to provide monetary incentives for barrier removal of non- compliant complexes. Timeframe: Develop a realistic strategy to improve housing accessibility and allocate funding in 2005 as part of the five-year Consolidated Plan process. Recommendation: Fair housing service providers, supportive housing providers, or other regional agencies as appropriate, should collaborate and develop a list of apartments that are ADA-compliant and provide vacancy information for persons with disabilities. Timeframe: Collaborate to include the development and maintenance of such a database as part of the fair housing services work scope. Seek to launch database in 2006. 4. Lead-Based Paint Hazards Impediment: Lead-based paint hazards often disproportionately affect minorities and families with children. While lead-based paint issues pose a potential impediment to housing choice, testing of lead hazards is rarely performed when purchasing or renting a unit. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider requiring lead-based paint testing as part of their homebuyer and residential rehabilitation programs. Timeframe: Consider expanding lead-based paint testing to home-buying programs as part of the Consolidated Plan process. 4. Regional Collaboration Impediment: While collaboration was identified in the 2000 Als, only minimal success has been achieved. Recommendation: Encourage fair housing service providers to collaborate and support each others' activities, so that similar activities are available to residents across jurisdictions. The Fair Housing Resources Board (FHRB) should continue to function as a collaborative to coordinate fair housing services for the region. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 46 of 68 /C/-!3:1. Timeframe: Ongoing Recommendation: Jurisdictions should consider the service gaps identified in this AI and revise work scope with fair housing service providers to ensure equal access to fair housing services. Timeframe: 2005 and annually thereafter. 5. Reporting Impediment: Fair housing service providers report accomplishments and statistical data in different formats based on the requirements of each jurisdiction. Ethnicities and income data are also track differently across jurisdictions. Inconsistent reporting makes tracking trends difficult. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should develop a uniform method of reporting to incorporate into each sub-recipient contract to ensure that proper documentation is available regarding ethnicity, income level, and types of calls received based on HUD's reporting categories. Timeframe: Develop reporting format in 2005. Impediment: While education and outreach efforts are a clear priority of all agencies involved, a review of sub-recipient contracts, Action Plans, CAPER reports, and annual accomplishment reports indicates a lack of quantifiable goals, objectives, and accomplishments to gauge success or progress. Recommendation: In response to HUD's recent memo on performance measures that should be outcome based, Consolidated Plan, Action Plans, CAPERs, and sub-recipient contracts and annual reporting should identify specific quantifiable objectives and measurable goals related to furthering fair housing. Timeframe: Annually, jurisdictions and sub-recipients should work on developing outcome-based performance measures, in addition to statistics on clients served. 6. Fair Housing Services Impediment: Fair housing services vary across the region based on the agency providing the services and the work scopes of each sub-recipient contract. Differing levels of funding may also be an explanation accounting for variances in services. Recommendation: Jurisdictions should collaborate with fair housing services providers to ensure an adequate level of service is available to all residents. Some jurisdictions may require additional services due to their special circumstances. However, a basic level of City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 47 of 68 /(J~r / ~ '--: . i ~/~...... services should be established. Jurisdictions should also consider the appropriate levels of funding for the provision of these services. Timeframe: Evaluate service gaps annually and budget as appropriate. Annually update the service area map for use regionally to provide the public with clear information on service providers and types of services available. Impediment: While a few cities include auditing in the scope of work required by the fair housing services providers, no specific criteria are established to ensure audits are performed on a regular basis. Sales audits and lending audits are rarely performed. Recommendation: Ensure that audits are conducted within the County on a regular basis. Timeframe: To the extent feasible, set aside funding for audits in 2006 and every two years thereafter. Specifically, rather than acting individually, consider pooling funds to conduct regional audits and work collaboratively with fair housing service providers to pursue FHIP funds for audits and testing as HUD funding is available. Impediment: While tenant/landlord disputes are not fair housing issues in general, providing dispute resolution services may prevent certain situations from escalating to discrimination issues. Recommendation: Incorporate tenant/landlord dispute resolution into fair housing contracts. Encourage mediation services by qualified mediator as part of the fair housing contracts. Timeframe: To the extent feasible, set aside funding for audits in 2006 and every two years thereafter. Specifically, rather than acting individually, consider pooling funds to conduct regional audits and work collaboratively with fair housing service providers to pursue FHIP funds for audits and testing as HUD funding is available. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 200S-2010 14'- /-:17' Page 48 of 68 7. City Specific Issues The regional San Diego AI also reviewed Public Policies of the various jurisdictions under the County's jurisdiction and listed the following land use policies, zoning provisions, and development regulations that may affect the range of housing choice available the city of Chula Vista: 1. The Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance does not include a density bonus ordinance consistent with State law. 2. The Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance does not expressly address licensed residential care facilities consistent with the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act. 3. Licensed residential care facility serving seven or more persons are not explicitly permitted by right or conditionally permitted in any residential zoning district within Chula Vista. 4. The Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance does not expressly permit transitional housing or emergency shelters. 5. Chula Vista has not established procedures for obtaining reasonable accommodation pursuant to ADA. It was recommended that the City should consider amending its policies and regulations to address the various potential impediments identified. As part of the upcoming Housing Element update, the City will be evaluating the above potential impediments, and mitigate if necessary and feasible, in order to comply with the State Housing Element law regard mitigating constraints to housing development, addressing housing needs of special needs population, and providing for a variety of housing for all income groups. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 49 of 68 Iq~. /35 I. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS The following section of the needs assessment describes the City's Eligible non-housing community development needs, including . Infrastructure Improvements . Community Park and Recreation Facilities Improvements . Community Services . Accessibility Needs . Economic Development . Strategic Planning Area 1. Infrastructure Improvements Infrastructure projects using CDBG funding must be conducted in eligible low to moderate income census tracts. Over the next five years the City will consider these types of projects on an as needed basis. Specific Infrastructure programs that have typically been funded include: . Drainage Improvements . Park Lighting Improvements . Annual ADA Curb Ramps . Annual Sidewalk Rehabilitation Project . Street Improvements . Audible Pedestrian Signal Modifications 2. Public Facilities Improvements At this time, the following list of projects facilities are considered to be in need of improvement and maybe considered by the City for CDBG funding over the next five years: 3. Public/Community Services Providing community services is an essential part of the City's community development strategy. CDBG and non-CDBG funds will continue to be budgeted for programs addressing community services, which may include: . Youth Services . Senior Services . Disabled Services . Homeless Services . Abused and/or Neglected Children . Battered and Abused Spouses . Substance Abuse Services City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 50 of 68 ! 1- /3& 4. Accessibility Needs Persons who are physically disabled, including blindness, and persons who suffer from brain impairments due to disease, accidents, or resulting from birth, often have accessibility needs. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) went into effect in January 1992 and provided comprehensive civil rights protection to persons with disabilities in the areas of public accommodation, employment, state and local government services, and telecommunications. The design, implementation, and maintenance of all park facilities must comply with ADA. Persons of all abilities must have the opportunity to participate in recreational activities. The City of Chula Vista continues working toward compliance with ADA. All city hall facilities have been modified to ADA standards. CDBG funds will continue to be budgeted for pedestrian ramps and toward upgrading playground equipment, parks facilities, and community parks. 5. Economic Development In the early and mid-1990s, Chula Vista, along with the rest of the nation, suffered from the decline in economic activity. This had the impact of reduced property tax fees and sales taxes, the major sources of local revenue. During this decline, Chula Vista's largest employer, Rohr Inc., lost over 5,000 jobs as a result of defense industry downsizing. These layoffs had a ripple effect which damaged our small business sector, and resulted in increasing retail vacancies. During the latter part of the 1990's and into the early 2000's, Chula Vista rebounded and has continued to experience increases in sales tax and property tax revenues. As, the Community Development Department has been active in providing market-rate and affordable housing, maintaining a balance of jobs to this new housing will be a goal during the next five years. It is the City's goal to provide a variety of economic development activities that create and retain jobs that will benefit low to moderate income households in order to reduce/prevent poverty and enhance the quality of life. Activities that may receive funding during 2005-2010 may include: micro-enterprise assistance, job training services, exterior fa<;ade improvements to buildings in need of improvement and technical assistance to businesses. 6. Strategic Planning Areas The City has five redevelopment project areas established under California Community Redevelopment Law with the stated purpose of combating blight and encouraging the rehabilitation, rebuilding, and redevelopment of the project areas. The City of Chula Vista has one of the most active and progressive redevelopment programs in California, City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 19- /37 Page 51 of 68 with close to 3,000 acres designated under state law. The Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency oversees Chula Vista's redevelopment activities. The Agency's governing board is comprised of the City's mayor and four council members, although it operates as a separate legal entity from the City Council. The five established project areas are: Bayfront, Otay Valley Road, Southwest, Town Centre I and Town Centre II. CDBG funds will be used in a strategic manner that will compliment other City efforts in these areas to provide a maximum benefit to residents. Brief descriptions of the five areas are as follows: . Bayfront Redevelopment Area: Established in 1974, Chula Vista's Bayfront Redevelopment Area was designed with the goal of encouraging development along the City's bayfront while insuring that recreational access to the waterfront is maintained. Key Bayfront businesses include two marinas, several restaurants and more than 30 start-up environmental firms in the City's incubator. In addition, redevelopment success has already been seen in the 1995 decision of BFGoodrich [then Rohr Inc.], to construct its corporate headquarters in the area. With more than 250 prime coastal acres in the Bayfront still undeveloped, significant opportunities remain for visitor, commercial, light industrial, office and recreational projects that desire to be part of Chula Vista's waterfront success. . Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area: Chula Vista's 770-acre Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area, located in the southeastern corner of the City, is a gateway to Chula Vista from Otay Mesa and the Mexican commercial border crossing. Established in 1983, this project area's light industry and nearby cultural and recreational uses are bringing regional recognition to the Otay Valley's unique advantages. Recent Redevelopment Agency assisted projects in the Otay Valley Road project area include the Chula Vista Auto Park and Gold Coast Engineering. Gold Coast, an aerospace metal fabrication firm, expanded its Chula Vista operations in 1991 by adding 77,000 square feet to their existing facility. Funding for this project was accomplished with industrial development bonds facilitated by the Agency. . Southwest Redevelopment Area: The City's newest project area, Southwest, was created in 1990; its 1,100 acres are zoned for limited industrial and thoroughfare commercial projects. Significant progress has been made on the redevelopment of several Southwest properties, including Palomar Trolley Center, an $11 million community retail center located at the corner of Palomar and Broadway. Easily accessible by the San Diego Trolley and the City's bus system, the center serves as a gateway to the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. . Town Centre I Redevelopment Area: Established in 1976, the 138-acre Town Centre I Redevelopment Area was created to revitalize the Chula Vista City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 52 of 68 Ie; -I;;;> c . :J..:i downtown, the historic heart of the Chula Vista community. The Redevelopment Agency has invested over $3 million in CDBG and redevelopment funds for street improvements, parking and general public facility rehabilitation in this area. The Agency's assistance has helped attract more than $41 million in private investment to this area, while maintaining the "old village charm" of Chula Vista's downtown. Private projects completed or underway include Park Plaza, a mixed-use retailjoffice/multi-plex center, and Gateway Chula Vista, a 300,000 square foot mixed-use office/commercial center that will be Chula Vista's and South San Diego County's largest office complex. . Town Centre II Redevelopment Area: Chula Vista's Town Centre II Redevelopment Area was established in 1978 to include the 55-acre Chula Vista Center, the City's regional shopping mall. The project area was later expanded to include 10 non-contiguous parcels in the City's central core, including the Civic Center, the Public Works Yard and Eucalyptus Park. The Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency helped finance the renovation of Chula Vista Center and financed improvements that led to the development of the WalMart-anchored 200,000 square foot South Bay Marketplace shopping center. The $15.8 million expansion of Scripps Memorial Park Hospital was completed in 1999. During the time frame of this plan, the Redevelopment Agency will be undertaking the planning and identifying a Strategic Planning Area (SPA) for the Southwest Redevelopment Area. Over the year, CDBG funds have been used for street improvements, lighting, and curbs, gutters and sidewalks. The Southwest Redevelopment Area includes the Montgomery Area, which was annexed from the County of San Diego in 1990. Single family rehabilitation activities and infrastructure projects have been underway to attempt to bring this area in compliance with City code standards. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to budget sufficient funds to keep up with the demand. It is the intent of the Redevelopment Agency to select pockets within the Montgomery Area to implement a SPA. Once the areas have been identified, a strategic plan will detail the scope of work. It is estimated that approximately $10 million in CDBG funds will be used for this purpose in the form of a Section 108 loan. Additionally, other programs such as Paint Our Town and the HUD 203K Program will be offered to residents located within the SPA. With the use of Section 108 loan funds, rehabilitation of this area will take effect much more quickly than the current method of catch-as-catch-can. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 200S-201O Page 53 of 68 11- I?/i IV. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN The Five-Year Housing and Community Development Strategic Plan describes: [1] the general priorities for assisting households; [2] strategies and activities to assist those households in need; and [3] specific objectives identifying proposed accomplishments. The Strategic Plan also addresses the following: Anti-Poverty Strategy; Lead-Based Paint; Institutional Structure; Reduction of Barriers to Affordable Housing; and Coordination among Agencies. Housing and Community Development Resources The City plans to use a variety of resources to address housing and community development needs as identified in the needs assessment. These resources include, but are not limited to Federal . Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) . HOME Partnership Funds (HOME) . American Dream DownPayment Initiative Funds (ADD!) . Emergency Shelter Grant Funds (ESG) Local . General Funds . Low/Mod Income Housing Funds (Redevelopment Housing Set-Aside) Housing and Community Development Objectives and Projects Due to lack of resources, it is not possible to address all the needs of low income and special needs populations for housing and services in the community. Therefore, the City has selected the following priority needs on which to focus the City's resources in the next five years. These priorities were established taking the following two concerns into consideration: [1] those categories of low and moderate income households most in need of housing and community development; and [2] which activities will best meet the needs of those identified households. The following helps to define the level of priority for each need in the community: City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 54 of 68 /1- IlfO . HIGH represents a commitment to address the need in the Five Year Strategic Plan. . MEDIUM if funds are available, activities to address this need may be funded during the Five Year Plan and the City will take other actions to assist in the location of other sources of funds. . LOW indicates the City will not fund activities but will consider certification of consistency for other entity's applications for federal assistance. . NO SUCH NEED indicates there is no need or that this need has already been substantially addressed. Priority needs areas are indicated by type of household (renter and owner) and by the type of housing problems, such as housing cost burdened or overcrowding. The Consolidated Plan Priority Needs Summary, contained on the following three pages, establishes Chula Vista's priority housing, homeless and community development needs for the five-year period of the Consolidated Plan. These priority needs were identified using information from the 1995-1999 Consolidated Plan, the 1990 Census, local social service needs assessments and providers, and the City of Chula Vista. The description of Chula Vista's priority needs which follows the table focuses on those activities identified as High or Medium Priorities from Table 6. The implementing programs identified rely upon funding availability from federal, state, county and local resources. The summary is divided into the following general categories of priority need: Housing Needs; homeless needs; public facility needs; infrastructure needs; public service needs; accessibility needs; historic preservation needs; economic development needs; other community development needs; and planning. For housing needs, the number of housing units to be assisted is estimated. For all priorities, the estimated dollars needed that will be used to address priorities is estimated. The description of Chula Vista's priority needs which follows the table focuses on those activities identified as High or Medium Priorities. Priority - Housing Needs This section describes Chula Vista's strategies for addressing housing needs which are identified as High or Medium priorities. Geographic Distribution of Funds Housing assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City. Homeownership activities, rehabilitation of owner-occupied and rental housing, and mixed income rental housing acquisition and development can occur in any area of the City exhibiting need or project feasibility (subject to program guidelines). Site selection gUidelines of the City ensure that all units are built or acquired in areas of the City where there is adequate services such as schools, health care, transportation and or recreational services. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 55 of 68 /1-1'1/ Priority 1: Targeted Groups: Five-Year Ob' ectives: Performance Measure: Maintain and preserve the City's aging housing stock Low to moderate income persons (31 to 80 percent of the median) 100 Housing Units (20 housing units per year) Number of Households/Housing Units assisted as a proportion of the total low to moderate income households with housing problems in the City that were built prior to 1970 Implementing Programs: Community Preservation Program: Code Enforcement is a complaint-driven program, which targets private residential (single-family detached and attached) and commercial properties located within low to moderate-income census tracts (targeted areas). CDBG funds are used to pay the salaries of the four Code Enforcement Officers, who are assigned to the targeted areas. The officers focus on complaints received in the targeted areas. Funds also pay a portion of the salaries for a Code Enforcement Technician, and a City Attorney in proportion to the amount of time those staff members spend on complaints in the targeted areas, along with related overhead expenses. This program is differentiated from the City's usual code enforcement activities by its dedication of four of the City's 11 Code Enforcement Offices to the program. General funds are used to fund all other code enforcement personnel and activities. The Code Enforcement program works in collaboration with the City's revolving loan program (CHIP) that provides loans to low and moderate-income households to correct many of the violations found by code enforcement officers in the targeted areas. Residents are informed of the CHIP program at the time of inspection. Housing Inspection Program: The Housing Inspection Program is the City's proactive approach to prevent the decline of the affordable rental housing stock for low and very low- income residents. This program is in response to serious health and safety violations occurring in multi-family housing units. Under this program, two City housing inspectors are assigned to make routine scheduled inspections of rental dwellings containing three or more units located within designated target areas. This program ensures that all rental-housing units meet minimum standards of habitability as set forth in State law. CDBG funds will be used to pay for the salaries of these two inspectors assigned specifically low to moderate-income eligible target tracts. The Housing Inspection Program works in collaboration with the City's Affordable Housing Financial Assistance Loan Program (AHFA). This program is offered to owners to correct the violation and is part of the City's ongoing effort to retain affordable rental housing for Chula Vista's very low and low-income households. An affordability clause is placed on the loan, City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 56 of 68 /1- /'12- which requires the units to remain affordable for a minimum of fifty (50) years. This program is funded through Redevelopment Low-Moderate Set-Aside Funds. Together, the Code Enforcement Program, the Housing Inspection Program, and the two loan programs (CHIP and AHFA) improve quality of life and provide our residents with a safe, healthy environment. Priority 2: Provide Affordable Housing Opportunities to low and moderate income households High Priority is assigned to ver{ low and low income family rental units. Medium Priority is assigned to low and moderate income family for-sale units 200 Households (20 households annually) Targeted Groups: Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: Number of households assisted as a proportion of the total number of low to moderate income households in the City. Implementing Programs: A. HOME-American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI): Funds will be used to assist first time homebuyers in conjunction with its existing first time homebuyer programs. Due to the rising home prices in Chula Vista, low/moderate income households have been unable to qualify for home loans; therefore, have not been able to take advantage of the City's First Time homebuyers. As a result, staff will redesign the program to enable low/moderate income households to take advantage of the program. Additional programs that are available to residents using different funding sources include: . Affordable Housing Program (AHP): The City of Chula Vista's Housing Element of the General Plan states that any development over 50 units must provide 10 percent of the units for low and moderate income households, with at least one-half of those units (5 percent of project total) being designated for low-income households . Mobile-home Rent Review Ordinance and Committee: The City's Rent Review Ordinance only allows park owners to raise space rent by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) once per year. Without this control, space rents would continue to rise. As a result, park residents face a severe cost burden. . Section 8 Rental Assistance Payments/Vouchers - The City of Chula Vista in. conjunction with the Housing Authority o(San Diego administers a Section 8 Rental Assistance Program to provide affordable housing opportunities to low income renters . Mobile-home Rent Review Ordinance and Committee: The City's Rent Review Ordinance only allows park owners to raise space rent by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) once per year. Without this control, space rents would continue to rise. As a City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 57 of 68 ;9- ILl 3 result, park residents face a severe cost burden. . Mortgage Credit Certificate Program (MCC) - The Agency administers a MCC program which allows eligible buyers to take 20 percent of their mortgage interest as a tax credit on the federal income taxes. To be eligible for the MCC program in non- targeted census tracts, a household must be a first-time homebuyer, buy a home in Chula Vista, and earn less than 115 percent of area median income . Reissued Mortgage Credit Certificate Program (RMCC) - This program allows and existing MCC holder to refinance their mortgage and continue utilizing the benefit of having a MCC . Lease-to-Own Program - Along with the County of San Diego and other participating jurisdictions as a Joint Powers Authority to offer a lease program. This program allows residents to make lease payments for three years instead of making mortgage payments. Upon the expiration of the lease term, the household qualifies for the home and assume the mortgage. Priority 3: Targeted Groups: Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: Assist non-profit corporations to develop affordable housing for very low and low income households High Priority is assigned to small (2-4 persons per household) and large (5+ persons per household) families that are very low and low income. Medium Priori is assi ned to extremel low and low income elderl ersons 20 Housing Units (5 housing units annually) Units Constructed as a proportion of Regional Housing Needs allocation for the appropriate level income group. Implementing Programs: A. Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs) Set Aside: Using the required 15 percent set-aside of HOME funds, funds will be used for infill affordable housing units consistent with the City's General Urban Core Specific Area Plan. It is projected that approximately 10 single family homes will be developed. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 58 of 68 Jr1 ." '~ (/ - .. "! '1 Priority - Homeless Needs This section describes Chula Vista's strategies for addressing homeless needs which are identified as High or Medium Priorities. Geographic Distribution of Funds Homeless assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City, at the specific location of the service providers. Clients receive services based on income level. Priority 1: Continue to support programs offering transitional housing opportunities for homeless families and individuals Medium Priority is assigned to extremely low income families and individuals 100 homeless persons (20 homeless persons annually) Target Grou s: Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: Number of homeless persons assisted as a proportion of the estimated number of homeless in Chula Vista. Implementing Programs: A. Emergency Shelter Program (ESG) 2005: HUD-funded Emergency Shelter Grant Program (ESG) provides grants to local governments and to non-profit corporations for the rehabilitation or conversion of buildings for use as emergency shelters for the homeless, for the payment of certain operating and social service expenses in connection with the emergency shelter. In 2005 funds will be allocated to South Bay Community Services provides emergency shelter services in two location in Chula Vista. These services aim at homeless families, most of them victims of domestic violence. They aim to develop a comprehensive strength-based family assessment, after which together they develop a treatment plan so the clients can work to re-establish self-sufficiency and end their homelessness. Funds are used for operating costs including child care, bus vouchers and motel vouchers. . County of San Diego Voucher Program: The City of Chula Vista continues to financially support the voucher program administered by the County of San Diego. This program provides hotel/motel vouchers to homeless families and individuals through the winter months of November through April. . Lutheran Social Services Project Hand: the City of Chula Vista provides financial assistance to this program which dispenses food to homeless families and individuals . Thursday's Meal: This program provides meals to homeless families and individuals. Chula Vista financially supports this program. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 'cJ I.' -~ r .e- . /-, -1:? Page 59 of 68 Priority - Special Needs This section describes Chula Vista's strategies for addressing housing for special needs populations which are identified as High or Medium priorities. Geographic Distribution of Funds Special Needs assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City, at the specific location of the service providers. Clients receive assistance based on income level. [Please refer to the Non-housing Community Development Section, Priority 3: Public Services for further details of projects for people with special needs). Non-Housing Community Development Needs This section describes the City of Chula Vista's strategies for addressing non-housing community development needs which are identified as High or Medium priorities. Geographic Distribution of Funds Assistance can be generally described as available throughout the entire City for public services, at the specific location of the service providers. Clients receive assistance based on income level. Funds will be distributed to infrastructure and public facilities projects that take place in income eligible low to moderate income census tracts. Assistance is generally available throughout the entire City for Economic Development activities as assistance is provided based on the number of jobs created or retained, income level of applicants receiving assistance and/or businesses are located in eligible low to moderate income census tracts. Priority 1- Infrastructure: Provide for needed infrastructure improvements in lower and moderate income target areas Target Groups: Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: High Priority is assigned to addressing the need for street improvement, sidewalk improvements and street lighting. Medium Priority is assigned to addressin the need for flood revention/draina e im rovements 10 public facilities Number of public facilities improved as a proportion of the number of low to moderate income households located in the projects census tracts. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 /q-!~ ,;; I' < i ,~_., Page 60 of 68 Implementing Programs: A. Drainage Improvements This project involves the installation of drainage improvements along Emerson Street from Elm Avenue to approximately 800 feet west of Third Avenue and from the existing 5' wide by 3.25' deep rectangular concrete channel west of Fourth Avenue and south of Emerson Street to an existing 42" CMP pipe south of Weisser Way. Right-of- way is required to construct the downstream portion of the project. Some of the adjacent property owners will benefit from the project's implementation, and construction will not occur unless those property owners dedicate easements for the drainage system. Those property owners that will not benefit directly from the improvements will be compensated for right-of-way, if necessary. B. Park Lighting Improvements This project will provide lighting for a walking trail pathway and the parking lot. The added lighting will enhance security and visibility of the area. C. Annual ADA Curb Ramps This is an annual program. This project provides for the construction of concrete wheelchair ramps throughout the City. Existing pedestrian facilities lack wheelchair ramps which limits the mobility of physically challenged residents. The construction of wheelchair ramps will increase the mobility of these residents. Curb cuts are a requirement of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). D. Annual Sidewalk Rehabilitation Project This is an annual program. This project involves the removal and replacement of deteriorated curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and driveway aprons. Some existing street improvements at various locations in the City are deteriorated and in need of rehabilitation. Curbs are broken and do not have gutters. Sidewalks are broken and/or uplifted and driveway aprons are broken and/or spalled. The lack of gutters creates drainage problems which can damage adjacent pavement. Uplifted sidewalks and driveways are potential safety hazards. E. Street Improvements This project provides for the ultimate street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk, as well as pavement rehabilitation. This section of Third Avenue is highly traveled by both vehicular and pedestrian traffic and is sub-standard both in terms of street section and missing sidewalks. F. Audible Pedestrian Signal Modifications Installation of audible pedestrian signal crossing at various signalized intersections within the City. Audible signal will enhance the safety of pedestrians crossing the streets with sight disability. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 61 of 68 /1- /4' 7 Priority 2- Public Facilities: Target Groups: Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: Continue to improve the quality of existing community facilities to serve the needs of lower and moderate income households High Priority is assigned to addressing the needs for community facilities serving youth, park and recreational facilities, and neighborhood facilities. Medium Priority is assigned to address the needs for community facilities providing health care, and those serving children requiring child care, seniors and the disabled. 10 public facilities Number of public facilities improved as a proportion of the number of low to moderate income households located in the projects census tracts. Implementing Programs: A. Neighborhood Facilities B. Parks, Recreational Facilities C. Youth Centers D. Senior Centers E. Other Community Centers Priority 3 - Public Services: Targeted Groups: Five-Year Objectives: Performance Measure: Continue to fund public services at the federally mandated 15% cap Medium Priority is assigned to addressing the support service needs of all lower and moderate (0 to 80 percent) special needs households (persons with AIDS, elderly, disabled, female-headed households, and large family households . Assist 2,500 people with fair housing services 500 youth 500 elderly 500 disabled 100 other s ecial needs rou s as needed Number of People assisted as a proportion of the number of people in need for each special needs category. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 62 of 68 Iq-/~/2 Implementing Programs: Various service providers will receive funding during each of the five years based on applications received requesting funding in each of the following categories: A. Youth Services B. Senior Services C. Disabled Services D. Homeless Services E. Abused and/or Neglected Children F. Battered and Abused Spouses G. Substance Abuse Services Priority 4 - Accessibility/ADA 1m rovements: Target Group: Provide for the accessibility needs of the physically disabled Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: High Priority is assigned to address the accessibility needs of the h sicall disabled 5 facilities Number of public facilities improved as a proportion of disabled persons located within each of the projects eligible census tracts. Implementing Programs: A. ADA Curb Cuts Annual Program - The City of Chula Vista is working to comply with ADA requirements and funds capital improvement projects for the construction of pedestrian ramps in the eligible low to moderate income census tracts. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 63 of 68 /1.. I' - ,:w,/ Priority 5 - Economic Development: Continue to provide proactive business assistance programs to encourage job creation through business attraction, retention, and ex ansion High Priority is assigned to business attraction, retention and ex ansion 20 'obs 5 'obs annuall Number of jobs created or retained made available to low and moderate income people as a proportion of currently unemployed persons. Target Groups: Five-Year Ob"ectives: Performance Measure: Implementing Programs: A. Southwestern College Economic Development Program: Provides Chula Vista micro-enterprises, emerging and small business owners with counseling on government procurement and contracting, and access to electronic bid matching or bid-plan room services. B. Southwestern College Technical Assistance Program: This program will provide Chula Vista small business that have been identified as potential growth companies, with detailed research reports using GIS for the purpose of helping them grow their business through: 1) identification of new markets; 2) data analysis of current market. J. LEAD-BASED PAINT HAZARDS REDUCTION STRATEGY The City of Chula Vista has a two-tiered approach to the evaluation and elimination of lead- based paint hazards where the problem has been determined to be most prevalent. The County of San Diego's lead-based paint hazard evaluation program, known as the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (CLPPP), involves outreach, screening, case management, and public education. The overall lead poisoning program is administered through the County of San Diego, Department of Health Services (DHS). The Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (CLPPP) is a Division of Community Epidemiology. It seeks to prevent lead poisoning among children under age six, through community education, and to provide case management to children identified with dangerous blood lead levels. As a result of Title X - Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, Chula Vista has re- evaluated existing first-time homebuyer and residential rehabilitation programs for compliance. The City currently assists homeowners alleviate lead-based paint hazards through the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP). When lead-based paint is discovered through the rehabilitation of the property, funds are used to remove and dispose of the paint City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 64 of 68 /tl - 1;;('') chips and to repaint the house. The City utilizes the Low and Moderate Income Housing Funds for this purpose. The City expects to use HOME funds to rehabilitate some homes. With the newly implemented lead-based paint legislation, Chula Vista has designed a lead- based paint hazard program to provide information to Chula Vista residents and measures to limit the impact of lead-based paint. Additionally, the City's first-time homebuyer program has set aside funds to assist with lead- based paint issues. Currently, $24,000 is available for homebuyers purchasing homes that do not appear to contain lead-based paint. If a home has identified lead-based paint issues, the loan is increased to $40,000 to assist in abating the lead-based paint. The San Diego Housing Commission (SDHC) also offers a variety of home improvement programs for low to moderate income residents of San Diego. Some programs are specifically targeted to reduce or remove hazards in the home. K. ANTI-POVERTY AND STRATEGY COORDINATION The City is developing an economic development strategy to expand economic and employment opportunities for low to moderate income residents in order to help alleviate poverty. In addition, the City supports a range of programs that to address poverty including: . Technical assistance to develop the job training and skills . Public assistance payments . Social Services such as legal assistance, child care, health care, transportation, housing, education, and services for the elderly and disabled who are on fixed incomes. L. BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING As detailed in the Housing Needs Assessment of Section III, Chula Vista does not have any public policies which have a significant negative impact upon the availability of affordable housing in the City. Listed in the Needs Assessment are procedures which mitigate some public policies in order to promote the development of affordable housing. These procedures include: . The City has and will continue to use "fast track" processing to expedite projects, such as those providing affordable housing in order to provide developers with a substantial savings of time in achieving complete project approval and the start of construction; and . In order to mitigate the financial effects of City fees, the City/Agency will continue to consider subsidizing or reducing certain fees for affordable housing projects where such subsidies or reductions are necessary to create the required project economics. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 65 of 68 / tJ - il;) / M. INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE There are many organizations which playa role in implementing the City's five-year strategy. The coordination of these organizations in implementing the five-year strategy rests with the Community Development Department of the City. City staff continues to work with the San Diego County Housing Authority to provide Section 8 rental assistance and to build public housing in Chula Vista. On a regular basis, City staff attends several regional-wide consortiums to discuss and maintain up-to-date on issues involving our communities, including the CDBG and HOME programs. The CDBG Administrators meet on a quarterly basis to share information and cutting-edge programs either in the process of being developed or have been developed. This sharing of information has led to this group receiving an honorable mention in HUD's Best Practices publication. N. PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENT INITIATIVES The San Diego County Housing Authority owns and operates all of the public housing units located in the City of Chula Vista. The Housing Authority has formed a Public Housing Resident Association in order to increase resident awareness and involvement in the enhancement of their housing environment and operations. City of Chula Vista Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2010 Page 66 of 68 /1 -" /""'""') :/ -- 2005-2006 PROGRAM SPENDING PLAN CDBG, HOME, ADDI and ESG ADMINISTRATION Amount Available $459 905 [20% of Entitlement) Tab No. Organization PragramJProjec:t funding 1 City of Chula Vista-Comm Dev. City Staff Administration $ 417,905.00 3 Fair Housing Council of San Diego Chula Vista Fair Housing Program $ 41,000.00 4 Regional Task Force Regional Task Force on Homeless $ 1,000.00 Totals $ 459,905.00 ;q. /53 ATTACHMENT C PUBLIC SERVICES Amount Available $344,928115% of Entitlement) Tab No. Organl~atlon - .. ~. -,. ..~---- - , Program/Project FundlnS u a 'IS a Ire 19 ers oun.o Ion .. ... . . , "an. om . c s 0 'In.ness -. :.: -.' $ 2.500.00 ua IS 0- ecrea Ion 12 $ 11.000.00 13 ommunr y oa ora rve $ 30.000.00 14 $ 3.500.00 15 $ 5.000.00 16 lego $ 25.000.00 17 $ 19.000.00 18 $ 8.000.00 20 $ 6.000.00 21 $ 5.000.00 22 ounse Ing CV$. $ 25.000.00 23 5.000.00 24 ou ervlces Family Violence Prevention and $ 16.000.00 24 Intervention Coalition 16.000.00 25 Youth Services Network $ 30.000.00 25 Youth Services Network $ 13.000.00 25 Youth Services Network $ 5.000.00 25 Youth Services Network $ 6.468.00 25 Youth Services Network $ 6.600.00 25 Youth Services Network 29.000.00 26 South Ba Senior Collaborative $ 12,705.00 26 South Ba Senior Collaborative $ 12.000.00 26 South Ba Senior Collaborative $ 4.460.00 26 South Ba Senior Collaborative $ 6.500.00 26 South Ba Senior Collaborative $ 3.500.00 26 South Ba Senior Collaborative $ 12.500.00 26 are en er South Ba Senior Collaborative $ 10.400.00 Total Public Services $ 344.928.00 I erapeu IC 8rvJces '. 8.000 00 $ 7.795.00 //\ /'--" /t . ~ ~1 {./ --" ....1 27 City of Chula Vista-Planning & Bldg. 28 City of Chula Vista-Planning & Bldg. Community Preservation Program $ Housing Inpsection Program $ Total Communi Projects $ 284.790.00 100.000.00 384 790 00 CIP [City) Tab No. Organization Program/Project funding 30 City of Chula Vista-Recreation Otay Recreation Deportment $ 220,000.00 33 City of Chula Vista - Generol Services Emerson Street Drainage Improvements (EI $ 267,500.00 34 City of Chula Vista - General Services Pork Lighting Improvements (Hilltop) $ 160,000.00 35 City of Chula Vista - General Services Annual ADA Curb Romps $ 254.402.00 36 City of Chula Vista - General Services Annual Sidewalk Rehabilitation Project $ 125,000.00 37 City of Chula Vista - General Services 3rd Avenue Street Improvements (Orange $ 50,000.00 38 City of Chula Vista - General Services Audible Pedestrian Signal Modifications $ 25,000.00 Total CIP (City) $ 1.1 01.902.00 Economic Development 1Tab staff No. Organization Program/Project Reccamenclatians m nit I - T hni IA it n .00 40 Southwestern Com u y Col ege MIcro Enterprise ec co ss s 0 ce $ Total Economic Development $ 8.000 8.000.00 /? -/::.,':; REVISED -r~) C; 41 City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. 42 City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. 43 South Bay Community Services City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. City Staff Administration ADD I-First Time Homebuyer Program Office Rent - CHDO Operation 15 % CHDO Set-Aside Assistance in Production of Affordable Housing Affordable Housing for Low Income Families $ Total HOME and ADDI $ $ 99.211.00 $ 34,958.00 $ $ 154,200.00 $ 633,388.00 44 City of Chula Vista-Comm. Dev. 45 South Bay Community Services 105,315.00 1,027,072.00 Emergency Shelter Grant [ESG) Amount Available. $87,011 Jab - - Staff - No. Organization Program/Project Reccomendatlons 47 City of Chuia Vista-Comm. Dev. Administration $ 4,350.00 48 ISouth Bay \.-ommunlty Services I \.-osa Nueva Vida $ 82,661.00 Total ESG $ 87.011.00 . " J .,~ ......, MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA March 29, 200S 6:00 P.M. An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda, Davis, McCann, Rindone and Mayor Padilla ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Rowlands, City Attorney Moore, and City Clerk Bigelow PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE PUBLIC HEARING I. CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM, THE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSillP PROGRAM, THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM (ESG), AND THE AMERICAN DREAM DO~AYMENTPROGRAM The purpose of the public hearing was to offer the residents, non-profit organizations and other interested parties an opportunity to comment on the various funding requests. (Director of Community Development) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Community Development Specialist Davis reviewed the public hearing procedures and stated that staff would return to Council on AprilS, 2005 with the funding request recommendations. Oral Communications was taken out of order and conducted prior to presentations by the CDBG applicants. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Brian Taraz reported on the unprecedented growth of an indigenous Wild Cucumber plant that he discovered while hiking locally. His research indicates that there are approximately 5,000 Wild Cucumber plants growing in abundance in the City, and, although the plant is listed as poisonous, there have been no documented cases of poisoning. He also mentioned some of the known uses for the fruit. !C)~/5"'7 ATTACHMENT D PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) At 6:11 p.m., Mayor Padilla proceeded with the public hearing. Helen Stokes recognized Ms. Davis for her excellent work with the Community Development Block Grant funding applications. The following persons spoke in support of their programs: Nancy Kerwin - Chula Vista Firefighters Foundation - Random Acts of Kindness Pam Brunson - Charles I. Cheneweth Foundation - Community Access ProgramlTherapeutic Services Mary Jo Buettner - Child Care Coordinator - Chula Vista Community Collaborative Bob White - Chula Vista Veterans Home Support Foundation - Mechanical Lifts for Bedridden Patients Sylvia McKinney - Dress for Success San Diego - Professional Women's Group Jennette Lawrence - Family Health Centers of San Diego - KidCare Express Mobile Medical Unit III Ann Perry - Lutheran Social Services - Caring Neighbor Raquel Pedersen - Lutheran Social Services - Project Hand Anthony McKiney - Play It Cool Music Foundation - Play It Cool in School Program Donald Lynn - South Bay Community Services - Thursday's Meals Ed Valerio - Sweetwater Education Foundation - Compact for Success Marc Gotbaum & - YMCA Family Stress Counseling Services - YMCA Kinship Edna Lyons Support Services Kathryn Lembo - South Bay Community Services - Family Violence Prevention and Intervention Coalition Kathryn Lembo & - South Bay Community Services - Youth Services Network Mary Jo Buettner Amy Weeks - Meals-on-Wheels- South Bay Senior Collaborative Mayor Padilla encouraged staff to seek ways to increase collaborative efforts among the various agencies in order to avoid a duplication of services and extend CDBG funding. He also encouraged members of the community to contact legislative delegations to protest reductions in CDBG funding. Councilmember McCann stated that he would support the full funding request for the KidCare Express Mobile Medical Unit III and the Boys and Girls Club of Chula VistalLauderbach facility refurbishment project. Deputy Mayor Davis urged the community to contact regional legislators to urge continuation of CDBG funding, which provides for those who need it most. Councilrnember Castaneda stated that he would review all the applications but would pay particular attention to agencies and collaboratives that provide services directly to the community. He encouraged the South County organizations to also contact their local agencies for assistance. Page 2 - Council Minutes /(? -/56 March 29, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) Councilmember Rindone stated that he would focus on applicants who provide services directly to the community and expressed the need for staff to monitor the percentage of services by the various agencies that go directly to Chula Vista residents. He a1so spoke in support of the full funding request for the construction of classroom facilities at the Otay Recreation Center. No formal action was taken by the Council on this item. ADJOURNMENT At 7;21 p.m., Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of April 5,2005 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ~ 1>>. 6-LJ~' (.J~. .) Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk Page 3 - COW1cil Minutes 1/' 15"" / ./ .. I '7 March 29, 2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) 14. REVIEW OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM, THE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM (ESG), AND THE AMERICAN DREAM DOWNPAYMENT PROGRAM, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SPENDING PLAN FOR THE 2005-2006 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL ACTION PLAN Applications for funding were received trom local organizations and City departments in January of this year. The public service applicants were invited to present their formal requests to the Council on March 29, 2005. Staff has prepared funding level recommendations for each of the projects or programs. (Director of Community Development) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Community Development Specialist Davis presented the various funding recommendations. At 6:08 p.m., Deputy Mayor Davis left the meeting. ACTION: Councilmember Rindone moved to direct staff to return with the CDBG funding requests, taking into consideration the following recommendations: 1) Tab 5 - Allocate $2,500 for a one-year trial period to Chula Vista Firefighters Foundation, Random Acts of Kindness; 2) Tab 16 - Allocate full amount of $25,000 to Family Health Centers of San Diego, KidCare Express Mobile Medical Unit III; 3) Tab 21 - Allocate $5,000 for a one-year trial period to Sweetwater Education Foundation, Compact for Success. 4) Tab 26 - Allocate full amount of$12,705 to Meals-on-Wheels, South Bay Senior Collaborative; City Manager Rowlands suggested that staff return with a recommendation to reduce the City ofChula Vista-Recreation, Therapeutic Services trom $35,000 to $7,795, seek other funding sources for the program and use $27,205 to re-allocate to the CDBG program. With regard to Tabs 27 (City of Chula Vista-Planning & Bldg., Community Preservation Program) and 28 (City of Chula Vista-Planning & Building, Housing Inspection Program), the Council requested a report ftom staff on how the funding would be utilized. Additionally, City Manager Rowlands stated that funding for the two programs could be absorbed into the General Fund on a gradual basis, which would tree-up funding for other community-based projects in the future. ATTACHMENT E Page 7 - Council Minutes /1- /00 April 5, 2005 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) Councilmember Rindone spoke about the possibility that the Legislature will eliminate the entire CDBG program, and he asked staff to come back with suggestions on measures the Council could take to address the issue. Regarding Tab 29 (Chula Vista National Little League, Youth Baseball Field, Phase II), Councilmember McCann asked staff to seek ways to fund the program in the future and to work with the applicant and Recreation Director Martin to find future funding. Councilmember McCann seconded the motion and it carried 4-1, with Deputy Mayor Davis absent. OTHER BUSINESS 15. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS There were none. 16. MAYOR'S REPORTS . Consideration of a request ITom Southwestern College for support and assistance in the 2005 National Youth Sports Program. ACTION: Mayor Padilla moved to refer the request to the City Manager's Office. Councilmember Rindone seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0, with Deputy Mayor Davis absent. 17. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Rindone spoke about the first University Task Force Blue Ribbon Committee meeting and expressed excitement about the project, which will raise the quality of life for the youth in the community by advancing their educational opportunities. Councilmember Castaneda described some of the activities he observed during a recent ride-a- long with the Police Department's "Tough on Crime" unit. He expressed the need for additional methods to assist law enforcement, such as by enacting legislative ordinances to prohibit further check-cashing establishments, limit alcohol licenses, and enforce curfews. He also stated that overtime Police Officers should be placed on permanent status. He congratulated the Council, City Manager Rowlands, and Police Chief Emerson for tackling the various problems head-on. Councilmember Castaneda spoke regarding e-mails he has received ITom constituents regarding the Espanada Project, stating that there appears to be a misunderstanding or misconception regarding the project's disposition and development agreement (DDA). He explained that the DDA is merely a review of the business deal between the City and the developer and does not concern project design. Considerations with respect to building design and environmental matters would be discussed at a later time in open meetings with the public. Page 8 - Council Mioutes /f/"/b/ AprilS, 2005