HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 2005/06/23
~~f?
~
~~~~
"dre under penalty of perJur) .J
:;pioyed by the City of Chula Vis. "
-'ffice of the City Clerk and that! POSt,.s
ciocument on the bulletin board aceo'"".~ to
:~::~ ~;~i~m:~;ed '. '. "f!rtv;
CITY OF
CHUlA VISTA
City Council
Patty Davis John McCann
Jerry R. Rindone Steve Castaneda
Stephen C. Padilla, Mayor
Staff
David D. Rowlands, Jr., City Manager
Ann Moore, City Attorney
Snsan Bigelow, City Clerk
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, GROWTH
MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISION, AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
June 23, 2005
4:00 P.M.
JOHN LIPPITT PUBLIC WORKS CENTER
1800 MAXWELL ROAD
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers: Castaneda, Davis, McCann, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla
Growth Management Oversight Commissioners: Arroyo, Garcia, Krogh,
Munoz, O'Neill, Palma, Spethman, and Chair Nordstrom
Planning Commissioners: Felber, Hall, Horn, Madrid, O'Neill, Tripp and
Chair Cortes
PUBLIC HEARING
The following item has been advertised as a public hearing as required by law. If
you wish to speak on the item. please fill out a "Request to Speak" form and
submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
I. REVIEW OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION'S 2005
ANNUAL REPORT
Page 1 - Council/GMOClPlanning Connnission Agenda
June 23, 2005
The Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) has finalized its 2005 annual
report regarding compliance with the City's quality of life threshold standards. The
report reflects the outcome of analysis of information presented by various City
departments and external agencies regarding the impacts on growth on each of the II
facility and service topics covered by the threshold standards. The report addresses each
threshold in terms of current compliance, issues, and corresponding recommendations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission adopt the following resolution:
A. RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE 2005 GMOC
ANNUAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDING ACCEPTANCE AND
APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL
Council adopt the following resolution:
B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING THE 2005 GMOC ANNUAL REPORT AND APPROVING THE
RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN; AND DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO UNDERTAKE ACTIONS NECESSARY TO
IMPLEMENT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED IN THE
"2005 GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS/PROPOSED IMPLEMENTING
ACTIONS SUMMARY"
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 future discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to
three minutes.
ADJOURNMENT The Growth Management Oversight Commission and the Planning
Commission adjourn to their respective Regular Meetings. The City Council adjourns to an
Adjourned Regular Meeting on June 28, 2005, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, and thence
to the Regular Meeting on July 12, 2005 at 6:00 p.m.
Page 2 - Council/GMOC/Planning Commission Agenda
June 23, 2005
SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOPIMEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ItemJ
Meeting Date 06/23/05
ITEM TITLE:
Report Review and Consideration of the Growth Managernent Oversight Commission's
(GMOC) 2005 Annual Report
Resolution Of The Planning Commission Of The City Of Chula Vista
Accepting And Approving The 2005 GMOC Annual Report And
Recommending. Acceptance And Approval By The City CounciL
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Chula Vista Accepting The
2005 GMOC Annual Report And Approving The Recommendations Contained
Therein; And Directing The City Manager To Undertake Actions Necessary To
Implement Those Recommendations As Presented In The "2005 GMOC
RecommendationslProposed ImPleKctions Summary"
Director of Planning and BUildm~
City ManagerP (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
REVIEWED BY:
On May 25,2005, the GMOC fmalized its 2005 Annual Report to the City Council regarding compliance with the
City's eleven Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards. The report covers the period from July I, 2003 through June
30, 2004, identifies current issues in the second half of 2004 and early 2005, and finally assesses threshold
compliance concerns over the next 5 years. The report discusses each threshold in terms of current compliance,
issues, and corresponding recommendations. In addition, the GMOC has forwarded a set of recommendations
regarding the forthcoming update of the growth management program. A summary of the GMOC's
recommendations and staff's proposed implementation actions is included as Attachment I. The workshop will
give the GMOC an opportunity to discuss their findings and recommendations with the Planning Commission and
City CounciL
RECOMMENDATION:
I) That the Planning Commission:
a) Adopt a resolution accepting and approving the 2005 GMOC Annual Report as presented herein
and recommends approval by the City Council; and
2) That the City Council:
a) Adopt a resolution accepting the 2005 GMOC Annual Report and approving the
recommendations contained therein; and direct the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to
implement those recommendations as presented in the "2005 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed
Implementing Actions Sununary" (Attachment I).
Page 2, Item-1.
Meeting Date 06/23/05
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission will provide comments and
recommendations at the workshop.
DISCUSSION:
This years GMOC Annual Report covers the 11 quality of life thresholds as typically reviewed. In addition, the
GMOC's recommendations in regard to the "Top to Bottom" review of the growth management program is also
enclosed. This review was initiated by Council and has been evolving over the last two years including work on
the update of the growth management element of the General Plan. The recommendations presented here are a
product of city staff, outside consultant, and GMOC contributions.
1. Summary of Findings
GMOC Development Forecast
The forecast for growth from 2005 through 2009 reflects an average of approximately 2,100 dwelling unit
completions per year, with minor fluctuations on an annual basis.
The ability for this amount of growth to be maintained over the 5-year period will be determined by the strength of
the economy and housing market, but it will also be affected by the timing of major roadways and other
infrastructure and facilities needed to support that growth. Completion of State Route 125 is particularly
important in supporting this 5-year forecast.
Current Threshold Compliance
Not In Com liance
Police (Urgent)
Fire/EMS
Libraries
In Com liance
Police (Emergency)
Schools
Traffic
Parks & Recreation
Fiscal
Air Quality
Sewer
Drainage
Water
Anticipated Future Threshold Compliance Throu!!h December 2009
Threshold Threshold Likely to be Met Potential for Future
Non Comnliance
Fiscal X
Air Quality X
Sewer X
Water X
Page 3, Item...!
Meeting Date 06/23/05
Libraries X
Drainage X
Parks and Recreation
Land X
Facilities X
Police
Emergency X
Urgent X
FirelEMS X
Traffic X
Schools
CVESD X
SUHSD X
2. Summary of Key Issues
Thresholds Not In Compliance
Library
At the current time the library growth management threshold of 500 gross square feet per 1,000 population has
been exceeded. According to the Growth Management Program "Should the GMOC detennine that the Threshold
Standard is not being satisfied, then the City Council shall fonnally adopt and fund tactics to bring the library
system into compliance. Construction or other actual solutions shall be scheduled to commence within three
years. "
The Library Master Plan calls for the construction ofa 30,000 square foot full-service, regional library in Rancho
Del Rey to begin by the end of2005. This library would be constructed on City-owned property located at East H
Street and Paseo Ranchero. This library is expected to be open by summer 2007. The addition of30,OOO square
feet of library will meet the library standard for several years to come.
Because construction ofthe new library is scheduled to be started within 3 years the GMOC does not see the need
for a recommendation for further action at this time.
Police
The threshold for responding to priority 2/urgent calls has not been met. Urgent calls are a misdemeanor in
progress; possibility of injury; serious non-routine calls. Urgent calls are defined as domestic violence or other
disturbances with potential for violence; burglary alarms. Police response is for immediate response by one or
two officers trom clear units or those on interruptible activities (traffic, field interviews, etc.)
FirelEMS
The FirelEMS response time threshold was not met. However, the Fire Chief eXplained that the cause of the
threshold failure was not growth related. The Chief indicated that the actual travel time to the site has decreased
Page 4, Item....!
Meeting Date 06/23/05
trom 3 minute 43 seconds to 3 minutes 32 seconds. If growth were responsible for the increase in overall response
time one would expect that either traffic or increased distances would result in longer travel times. This has not
occurred.
Two years ago the GMOC recommended that the Fire Department establish a management tool by establishing a
daily reporting function of trip response time by each station by trip. This was reported to have been implemented
and the GMOC was advised that it was providing useful information for diagnostic purposes.
Apparently, with the change back to City dispatching, that particular functionality has been lost. The GMOC
believes that being able to track each trip on a daily basis is an indispensable management tool and essential for
establishing accountability.
The GMOC is recommending that the City Council directs the City Manager to work toward reestablishing a daily
report function that provides a written summary of each "Emergency Response" trip by station and identifies the
dispatch, turnout, and travel time components. Chief Perry concurs with this recommendations.
In addition, last year the GMOC recommended an investigation as to how changing requirements since 1989 have
impacted turnout times. That recommendation was approved by Council and GMOC is waiting for the findings.
3. Growth Management - Summary of Proposed Changes to Thresholds and Implementing
Measures
These recommended changes are being presented to Council so that comment and guidance can be provided.
Once approved in principle these changes will be used to craft the updated growth management ordinance and
program document. It is anticipated that these documents will be brought forward to both the Planning
Commission and Council in August or September 2005 for fmal action.
Implementing Measures
Moratorium Recommendations:
That the moratorium be applied to building permits and not new tentative maps as currently written.
Statement of Concern Recommendations:
Can be issued for "problem" as opposed to "serious problem".
Statement is directed to the City not the "Responsible Agency"
A resolution to the "Responsibility Agency" is not required to be considered.
In the future a "Statement of Concern" can be used for any threshold.
Master/Strategic/Specific Plans Recommendations:
Master/Strategic/Specific plans will be deferred to as appropriate for defming key defmitions as may be used in
facility and service related thresholds.
Master/Strategic/Specific plans will be developed to, in part, provide the phasing and financing plan
necessary for a threshold to be met.
Page 5, Item...!
Meeting Date 06/23/05
ThresholdJImplementing Measure Changes
Fire/EMS
Recommendations:
Clearly states that the travel time component of response time ends when the response vehicle arrives at the
address.
If threshold fails but master plan implemented on schedule then failure is due to management of resources as
opposed to beiog growth related. The solution is directed at improving management.
Police
Recommendations:
A priority 2/urgent call threshold failure will not require the consideration of a moratorium. A Priority 2 threshold
failure can be addressed through a "Statement of Concern" with related recommendations and request for
mitigating qualitative data.
Traffic
Recommendations:
The GMOC may issue a Statement of Concern if the traffic threshold is forecasted to possibly fail withio 3 years
with recommendations as appropriate.
An urban level of service standard for traffic should be adopted for designated urban areas.
Parks and Recreation
Recommendations:
Apply the 3 acres of public park per 1,000 population of new growth citywide.
Allow for an io lieu fee to be substituted when land assembly is impractical with the fees collected used for
parkland and facilities as identified io the Parks Master Plan.
The term "adequately staffed" added to achieve consistency with the Library threshold. In addition, the term
adequate hours of operation will also be ioc1uded in the threshold. An annual report will be provided by the
Recreation Department to the GMOC on these topics. A Statement of Concern with recommendations may be
issued if the GMOC identifies a problem.
Library
Recommendation:
Adequate hours of operation will be added to the threshold. An annual report will be provided by the Library
Department to the GMOC on both adequate staffing and hours of operation. A Statement of Concern with
recommendations may be issued if the GMOC identifies a problem.
Schools
Recommendations:
ClarifY the threshold language so that the term "accommodate" refers to physical attributes and not the quality of
the education provided.
Page 6, Item..!
Meeting Date 06/23/05
Allow for sub-area assessments.
Although it is understood that the provision of schools is the responsibility of the school districts, if a Statement of
Concern is issued, it will focus on ways the city can assist the school district(s) in addressing the identified
problem.
GMOC Organization
Role of Planning Commission
Recommendations:
Require that a copy of the GMOC Annual Report be sent to the Planning Conunission, as opposed to being sent
through the Planning Commission to the Council.
The report will be sent to the Planning Conunission for their information and not require action as currently stated.
5. Conclusions
To assist Council in evaluating and acting upon the GMOC's recommendations, a concise summary of the
GMOC's recommendations and corresponding staff responses is presented in Attachment I (this will be labeled as
Appendix A in the GMOC Report). Staff requests direction rrom Council regarding implementation of those
recommendations as outlined in the right-hand column of Attachment l. The GMOC 2005 Annual Report is
included as Attachment 2. Additional appendices to the GMOC Report contains the Public Outreach Event Write-
up, Growth Forecast, and Threshold Compliance Questionnaire/supplemental reports presented to the GMOC by
the various City Departments and outside agencies as Attachment 3. Note the Chairperson's cover memo is
included in the GMOC Annual Report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None at this time. As specified follow-up actions are brought forward to the City Council, fiscal analysis of these
actions will be provided.
Attachments:
I - 2005 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed hnplementing Actions Summary (Will be included as
Appendix A, in the 2005 GMOC Annual Report).
2 - GMOC 2005 Annual Report inclusive of Chairperson's Cover Memo.
3 - Appendices (This will be included under separate cover, as Volume II, 2005 GMOC Annual Report,
Appendices B, C, and D, in the fmal report).
.....-......_...1 ~
r'" if!.
I
...__.J~~ SAYBL
(.......... .., j,.\lM3~1:I~~~
.ji ",,~~s#
"
._....:..J
.11
~,
'"
II
,
,."
"1
"
-
'"
_.~ ~
! c'
,
;
;
;
,
!
,
,
,
,
,
i
,
,
I ._;
I,..,
IIII~!I~
.~, '"
i'~
Ii
;~
.
.
I
.
<
\
.
~
1.8Q5 FREEWAY
'0
\,
,
'.
"",
1I"t"d.~<ft' ,
..-..-..-..---..,
!
;
;
;
!
i
;
~.\
\
, \
\\ \
, \
\ \
"'.,,_'_"_H_"_".
"!!'!j' II"'"
, . 'H!;
1'/'II'I'I!1
h j 11'1 ..
,,, 1,-
1l,lli'li
i!111I!i'
'1,1. \'1,1
'I' 'I"
'I! '-/"1
"'! 'II'
II! !I,;
~
~
o
.+.
I
~J
\...-../
.",
"".~..o>l~ r"
.
. i'",,~~
.
-;, ..
Q1:I\\'I1.
"
'" .
.
'"
\
1;,
.
\
o.
.....
~
....0
'"
o
'w)~
~$!"\"IIo""
.
,
.
I
o
6tI\~~
'; r-.",30S
\
'; \r1'~
'" I''''~
... 'Il~..1)i"I
E }.".t<...~3
<
~
.
.
\
.
,
"
ii'
!
~
z
CiPA.s~o
~ lAO~1tq
o
't\,
\,
~S"6
",,0
if
.....,,~#
'€.
"'-
l'
o
....0
O~
"',
\
\
i
('............j
\
,
\..................."\,-...
<!p ..J
~ ~\\~ ,,"\
" ,,,...;;;.
'1 \ ~
,~ ,....\
......... ~..,;;
,.",,, '~('f
" ,~ ! i
/ .
i ~
i '
\
I,
'", /-'01 ..'do"'~ ....1
~ .--
~" /..<:'
/ ...-f'(,.
.oo..,'\I\~(..~ ..... ;: "
.,.0 \,\.....1 \''i..'t II. 1l'1
~ -,'j t
, ,.
(j
"
\
~.
".~3""..j
, \
<
.
r-".....,~"
'-
'"
i'",.",\.l!I'O"-
. .
.
'I\"'O~'J"'~,
.
\--....::,.",
r~'
\ .l....\ '
\1 \
". ....\
\
i,...""\.
\
'0
'"
"0
.ef\)
"",
."
',",
r~,
<
~
,
'"
\
,
,
,
,
'.
"'"
'",
.
-;,
Dc;L~~;.
~
(~..~......_~
\ ( .;;
\.-..........1..... \....
''i. )
\ (
\.rJ
.
\
>
o
o
"
>
~
\.
<
\
<
o
c
.
o
g
~
.
~
!!
!P
.
.,."
.>
/'
t
i
~
~
(~
i-J..
/'
t~S~'"
"
,..
J"
~~
I .".,'
i,.""'~
ill
j
.
<
~
~...........
~..,o
l\
~ .....1
."
.~ 3> roo
~;:aO
?m 0
"3> C
"en m
C
i'i','JhH!mli'!f!'ih',iiiilii!ii'!iilii H
I ' ~i'" 'ii'" '. ''''i''I'1 '," ,
oil 'g ~h ion .....~ Qc: . ,{,I..... S
i !> :lil!',.j fn~: "ill, ,"j fHilj! !
J! II! 11' ilii" !. II! .
! 'I il; III 1!!!1 11. Ii ~ !~, I
"i !II fj- iiJ!t II, Ie 'Ii!
i i ! II~~ 'I' ;! 11~1
Z 90 ~ ;-I z '^ Z !J1 Z ~ Z :-> z !" Z :-
0 0 0 0 0 0
?:i ~ ~ ~ ?:i ?:i ?:i 0
" " " " ?:i
" " " " " " " i "
0 Ii 0 ." 0 ( 0 t"' 0 Il 0 If 0 "
~ i3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 I~
., is' i3
i3 .,
[ ., i3
" " ., g " e!.
::; ::; ::; ::; ::; ::; "
... ::;
0.- 0.- ., 0.- 0.- ;j;' 0.- 0.- 0.-
~ ~ I:' ., '" ~ '" '" ~. 0.-
- ::T. oo - - - '"
g" o. Q. g. ~. o. o. -
~ 0 g o.
" " " "
'" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" "
r>
...
'" N
.,
- Q
0' [;;cri
I:'
r'I~
0:;::;
;:::0
;:::~
l"'1..-j
z=
~;:::
>>
..-jZ
....>
o~
~l"'1
--;:::
....l"'1 :t>
;:::z
"'Ci..-j "tJ
"tJ
t""o m
l"'1< z
;:::l"'1 c
~ 90 ~ ;-I ?:i '^ ~ !J1 ~ ~ ~ :-> ?:i !" ~ :- l"'1:;::; X
" " ZrLJ
'" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ..-j....
'" '" '" '" '" '" '" :t>
g 0 0 0 0 0 0 ....~
" " " " " " z=
Ii '" ." '" I '" t"' '" I~ '" 100 '" ~ '" I[
" " " " " " " ~..-j
" ., " " ~, ::; " ~ " ::;
... '='
0 0 0 ... 0 0 0 S. >r'I
- ,.. - - ., - - '" -
... oo ... ... ... ... ... ... 01 ... r'lo
" ., " " ~, " " "
.0 I:' .0 .0 '" .0 .0 .g .0 =:1;:::
" " Q. " S oo s. s ~, s.
". ". ". ... ... ... ". - ...
" " ~ " " " " " " 0;:::
0.- 0.- '" 0.- f'" 0.- 0.- 0.- 0.-
r> z....
... rLJrLJ
'"
~ rLJrLJ
~, 0....
0
I:' ;:::0
;:::~
>~
:;::;;:::
-<0
r'I
'-'
:"-~
....,
~;;-
s
'"
n=,=,~
~ ~ 0
g-e~
-.s =
~ '" "
~ = !":I
(t) ~ ~
Q..., "
~~
.., =
, ~
'0 ..
..,
g.
i'i""
S,
'"
~
o
'0
'0
o
~
8-
~
o
1'i
..,
o'
c
~
';1
g.
i'i""
S,
"oJ
s.~
.,
::to ......
<: =-
(I) '"
~ ~
en .,
'" ~
en =
" ::1-
~ S
Rg-
'<",
~:g
Ei' ~
g Q..
~
o
cr"
5.
0::
S'
""
'0
~.
~
en
:"-~
...=
~;1
~
=
~....,~::!.
5~g"~=S
.., c =
~ @ ~ e
0" 0 S
;:]. a-
c 5'- _ ~
S '" " Q..
" -- UQ ~
:r-_O"':t.
(1, ::r" (D 0
~ (I) " ~
o ::r..
a..Q~
::: = (JQ
g ~ 8.
~ ~--
-. 0
g.~(')
""'I:: E.. EO
-. -::1.
~ ,,<,
g.8s:-
" " '"
C en ~
~ g:cr.9.
:::I ""t.-<
=- "g
'< ~
5' g- ~
g. "
c ., ~
go Q.. ~
0.. 0 .....
""'g.;:s
g' Ef
(I)
o ~
""'0
., 0::
~
Q..
"
S-
"
~
() n
() ~. ~.
~. "
" 0
" 0 "
0 " ~
"
" E;
~ en '{'
?'
........
NQ
...~
S ='='
"S!.O
~ ~
~=
~a::
~ ~
~>
(I) ~
~ I"J
:; ~
'" I"J
'" ~
z
o
;0
(I)
"
I
5.
~
o
"
en
....
....
z
o
~
"
o
~
(I)
"
Q..
'"
~
g"
en
'"
B-
=
g.
'"
;0 ....
~ .... p
.... (I)
en ..,
~ '0
'8 0 ..,
" .,
" en S
en '" (I)
(I) " " (I)
" =- S-
o =
~ = ..,
@ - (I)
'" .g
.g "'.
~. 8-
Q..
....
p
..,
..,
.,
S
(I)
o..o~~
_....... (1) ::T'
en en '"
"'t::S(1)............
~~&.-+
o("')........;:r'
=:r'::r..... (1)
'" "'~
.-+ "' _. n
Ei t11" _.
" S""...,
o (0 ~ "<;
~cra 0.. n
. (I)
~ :::I ~. g
~()<<'=
-'< "
~~(i~
~ (1) '8 0.-
~-ij:4. =t'
~ 0 (I)
_. ~"
"" ~
"en en
(1) (1)" (")
'" "............
u -'::r'
o !:t 15 (1)
.g -6' ~ n
o ::r_.
~a"~o.<
-'<'0
~ "'7'
:n ;!:. 0 ~
a s. "
_. 0.. ~
0(1)""
" en (1)
., ..,
~ ~ ~
Q..::I 0
-'::1: ~
Q.. (I) 0
g. :~ ~
::1'> ~
(1) 0
en ~
'" '"
~_'"1 ...,
(1) '< Q..
00 (l"'C;-.o
'-<..., (T.I N
CIJ 0 ~
~ en 0
S 1'i 8 ..,
'-'~~~
S" (1) g
Q g ~ (i
(1)~ "
~ :r-;i s
.-+ G (t) 3
=-n (1)
(I) ~>Tj"
.., _. 0.-
,g a ~
~ -< o'
Fit g t:' =
. o...g _.
o '" en
.., ;;.
~ '"
'" :3 '0
5.g~
~ 0
~ -.';1
(i CIJ E;)'
::r("')(t
o c
c ::! ~
~ (1) 0
--as
0-'<0
Ei "
>; ~ ::+-
(I) 0 0
" .., ..,
g~:n
o..:s =;
en "" (1)
~ ~. 1t
~ :r-~
~ S
:3 a:: (1)
gens.
~.
'-0
N
N
=
~~
~~
00
s::~
~>-3
Z=
~~
>-3z
....>
OC"'J
Zt"J
~s::
....t"J
s::z
'"d>-3
t""o
t"J<
~t"J
z1!;;
>-3....
....C"'J
z=
C"'J>-3
>~
~O
~s::
Os::
Z....
'J'J'J'J
'J'J'J'J
d....
s::~
s::---
>~
~O
~
'-'
)>
"tI
"tI
m
Z
C
><
)>
s ::> i:':Pc
o ""
>-i ~t"J =
~ ..... 0 n
....... o. ~ \'t)
~ .; ..
- - a
"'Q"
?NS,
- .,
~~
" "
'" "
::T",
o ..
0:
~
2"
...
"
~
"
o
-
...
"
.D
'"
::;.
"
5'
"
n
o
"
'"
0;
"
...
~
o.
"
o
""
.,
-c
2-
".
"
"
"
I
-
n
o
"
n
51
?'
,j;o.
'"
'"
a.~::t:i
., --
ft~=r
""" "
. _. tII
'" ::T
,,"0
'" -
" ""
o~
~
a '"
~ cr
Jq~
" a
~ .,
" '"
-c;
o ...
""'0
@ -
~ ~
~ S
~"E..
., "
'" a
o "
'0 "
'0 -
o "
'" ""
" 0
"""
-
o '"
g-g.
_. "
" ""
.. "
~ "
o _
&if
::T"
'0""
~ ::T
~~
3 g
., 0
~ ~
"
""
.,
-
o.
"
~Q~::1
('C (11 n ""I
::1 e; = ~
-,zatrJ
if",ai:::
""'I S" \'t) CZJ
" -" "
'" Q.
'0 '" .,
0__
::s ::r'-'
~ ~ g
~ g:. ~
::T"
A' ~
".,
<:
3. !!.
(i ~.
'" "
.,
-n
5'0
",@
., 0
"""
Erg
~ -
?' 0
""
...
"
~
o
"
'"
"
-
~.
"
"
""
'"
'0 ...,
~ 5
8'
S g
., 0
" s
g s
. "
"
""
.,
-
g'
_.
'"
.g;
"g
o
'0
;:I.
~
-
o
S
o
8.
-
S;
'"
@
""
"
'0
~
g
:;;.
.,
'0
'0
...
o
'0
;:I.
.,
-
"
-
o
g
8.
-
S;
'"
...
"
""
"
'0
~
"
"
-
,j;o.
'"
N
,j;o.
....
..,
=-
..,
"
'"
=-
"
5:
'"
-
....
i3
'CI
(;"
a
"
1:1
....
So
IJQ
>-
"
....
_0
"
1:1
'"
~
"
"
a
a
"
1:1
Q.
"
Q.
0-
..,
~
=-
DO
1:1
IJQ
"
"'s:
" .,
~ ~
n "
_. ...
" -c
.. -
"E.~
., '"
~ ~
g cr
'" "
'" Q.
~ ~
~g.
....g
., "
g:-~
" .0
'"
s S.
-'0
"""
g,,~
cr''O
" :3
S 5.
~g.
5'
"
'0
::T
.,
'"
S.
..
~
""
~i:::
w~
-
"
...
cr''7i:1:'-c
(tI'-::::"\'t) -
~ ~ n ~
00 __ Q =
8.. ~ e ~
-.'0 S
::s s;-' \'t)
~ =:I =
n '" Q.
-..., .,
~<:;Q;
....,. ~"
'<; -"
... cr' '"
(1) rD ..
~o.
" "
""(;'
g.;j
~ ""
50
O:ey
?' ...
""
"
'"
"
S.
..
~
'<
""
"
'"
8
-
o
"
'"
.,
'"
S
~
n
q.
n
g
n
51
'"
n
q
n
o
"
n
51
'"
r:Ji
-
~
"
s
"
"
-
o
""
n
o
"
"
"
3,
n
~
cr
"
'"
'"
"
""
8'
...
~
'<
-
::T
...
"
'"
::T
o
15=
8 ::>
" ...
~. ('tI
""'"
" 0
@ ~
"" -.
. 0
"
n
q
n
g
n
51
?'
-
o
-
::T
"
<:11
-
.,
-
"
s
"
"
-
:;;.
e:
...
"
n
-
"
""
-
o
-
::T
"
n
q.
"
s
-
::T
"
~
'"
'0
o
"
'"
6'
"
::>
..
"
"
n
'<"
~
'"
'0
o
"
'"
g
q.
::>
..
"
"
n
'<"
:;;.
"
o
-
...
"
.D
'"
::;.
"
""
-
o
cr
"
n
~
n
o
"
n
51
?'
n
~
"
o
"
n
51
'"
N
Q
~8i
("")0
O~
~~
M>-3
Z=
~~
~~
,....>
Oc;'}
~M
;::;~
~M
"'dZ
t"'>-3
MO
~:S
M ,-,
Z~
>-3~
""'0
Z=
c;'}>-3
>("")
("")0
~~
O~
Z,....
en en
en en
~,....
~O
~~
~~
<0
("")
'-'
:t>
"
"
m
Z
!2
><
:t>
@@:>::oit"'.
'"Oo..(tI .
s:: 0 0 t':I =-
_. -..0 <0 ...
- ..... " e ..
S ~ !:;." ~
(D _. 0 ~
::;j =::::::. ~
__ __::r 1:1
. v 0 Q.
" Ei ..
>'"0 00 ~
oo8oQ
S" S. ~?
ft 0.. 0
"""
~ Q. ~
::s e- ~
~ 0 g.
"""Q::1
nE'::cr"
go"
gn~
a g ~
~ ..... 0.
&~O
.....
~ ~ g-
8 0..__
~g-[
" .. ::r
::1 0. 0
o.,,~
~..c P.
_. "
o " :>
~ (t ~
3 ~ ~
" " ::1
E!i::1
cr'S s::
(() ~ e..
'" "" r<
S"(D"Q-"
a:J ~ .,
s 8.Q
~ 0: tJ
s::~.a
_. 0 ~
~ '"C ::4-
e ~ 8
g ~ g
ur ::s --
. ~ Uj'
g g
1:'.......
_ 0
"""
""""
o 0
::;.~
0.0.
C;;'
" .....
" 0
'" .....
ga. :::r
::1 "
"" -
::r"
o "
" 0
;;J ~
o "
"""::1
o 0.
~ ~
~ o'
C". ::1
g ~
~ 0.
~ ~.
~==
" cr"
'" "
,j:o
t...
0,
-QI:'..r<..,
g"""'5';:r-
o ~ 0 '"1 ('p
e 0 -." .....
8n5~"
(D ~ __ 3
::1oo.Ef~
~::S8.fA~
o' _.5"0
::ss=-=-.g
CJ:I ~ s=- po ~
3 (D 0 ft
" ;;. 8'-<"
'< ..... ..
~.g, ~ ~ ~
(jj' ~ 0 ~. ~
00. s: o' 0.-
~ .::s:-;
0.. >~ ~
~>E:lg"o..
..... "
if",g!'f8"
~ ,q; 8
~(t-~~
08@0.;:r-
n g -g..2 0)'
s.:..... ::4. 65 ~
" ....."
::s 0 ~ (1) 0
:::t.~=..:::r'::s
t:h -OVJ
(;) cr'S::-'
ClJn(1)~~
~ @ "d 0 g
'E! (") a ~~
o ('1) <: 0
cr" a -."" ~
(1 fr~::;.'
? ~ ~~.:
~':T' 0 ::r'
::r (1) ::; ('tI
" _. '"-
CIJ 3 ::::
s.:~ 0"
" " ~
::1 "
:::to :to ~
t:hoo
" " -
o.~"
_. ~ ::1
::1 _.
-- st _.
::r ::1
"'="" ~
""d (D (1;-
" '" "
~"
CI1 0 (t'
~??o
" " .....
CIJ ft 0
fto..cr'
- ..... "
::B-o 00
~~&
'"
c: :::to
~ e-
o."
0'0.
- ~
""::r
~ "
es::1
!J .,
0.8-
!J "
0.::;
fta
:=.;8::
a-:'-<
" _.
'" '"
'"0
~
.,.
"
::1
0.
'"
"
"
-
"
!:;.
o
::1
t:I
1
"
::1
.....
"
o
::1
"
Ei
on
n C;;' ~
o " _
~o~
",::1 "
o ~. ::s
g.~c;:l..
_. g '"
g ..... g
- ~ d
~~~.
0" 0
0><::1
-00'0
o C". "
. ::1 ""
"" ~
'"g 8
o "
.., ::1
_. .....
'"
_. "
o 0
::1 ::1
'" "
~~
::1
::to ...,
::!1::r
" "
0.""
Ef a
n;S.
::r g::,
" 0
"::1
<0'
_. -
S- !J
E'::::1
13 '"
n' g
-a'(p
1:'.."
~.:>::oi "=
..;-"" " ..
"<:; '"C n ..,
~-<"<O~
s.:_e~
" ::r e =
. (D nI Q.
w6.::oi
" .. "
" ....."
~ o':!
'" = '"
o I;I'J !a.
~.. ""'0
"" <0
" =
2:
n'
""
~
""
"
-
-
"0
o
o
""
o
""
E..
!:;.
o'
::1
o
.....,
::1
"
~
'!'I
o
~
'"0
"
~
!J
0.
~
"
@
!:;.
o'
::1
t:I
"
I
"
::1
.....
"
o
::1
"
Ei
on
,j:o
t...
'"
&5"
!J "
C}
~ !J
"
?1 (i'
..,
g.
o
.....,
'"
~
n'
"
'"
.....
"
::1
~
0.
'"
i5
"
0:
cr"
"
"
0.
o
""
.....
"
0.
0'
-
0.
"
'"
'0.
"
"
0.
oo."'::oi ..,
::r",...
C)1 0 n ~
~ 0 g =
g E':: a "
~ 0 ~
o.n=
.....8Q.
o ~
'd ~ o'
o _.=
'" '" "'
~. ~ eo
2:"
'< "
;;;>'"
=.:s-
~ "
;:;.. 8
::r"
_. ::1
::1 .....
Wo
'< .....,
" n
~ 0
'" ::1
. "
"
a
;:;.;
S"-
"
q
"
E!i
"
go
"
'"
::r
o
0:
t!1
::1
""
S
"
"
::1.
::1
""
t:I
"
""
~
"
::1
.....
"
g
"
Ei
on
" t!1
g~
'" _.
~. ~
" "
~ ;j,
~. Jg
5"t:I
5""
"""
..,~
E'::8
'"0"
~:
cr"0
" 5
0."
" -
~ ,,00
.g~
"
p.g
E!i
"
0'
-
"
"
"
'"
.....
S'
""
~
S"-
o
0.
o
0"
~
,j:o
t...
:...
.gg,:>
~(')~
_. 0 ~.
'" ::1 0
~. (") :I.
.., " ..;-
" a '-<:
0. :::N
" " .....
.....<:;:r-
P' ::;"..,
;:r-():
~ 5
ftp:
"
0.;;;>
.., =:
g E;
o "
8 "
~ !J
::1 a"
0."
'" "
o' g:
::1 _
'" "
" '"
::1 ~
0.0.
~ g.
..0 _
" 0
" "
~oa.
8"'"
-
EL 0
.....!:;.
QQ" G
!:;. 3
S' "
"" a
'"0
e-
n
"
(:)
"
""
i
.....
"
o
::1
"
Ei
on
N
Q
~5i
n~
O~
a:9
a:-<
M0-3
~=
>a:
0-3>
....~
0>
~~
'JJM
;::;a:
~~
t"'0-3
MO
~~
~~
0-3~
....~
~=
~l 0-3
>n
nO
~a:
Oa:
~....
'JJ'JJ
'JJ'JJ
~....
a:0
a:~
>~
~....
-<0
n
'-'
~
"'tJ
"'tJ
m
Z
C
x
~
_. '"'J
" =-
8'"
3 ..
~.g
_. 0
g ::I-
~ "
0. ;:J.
" ==
o
~cr'
"' "
"
;:to '"
o "
" g
"'
'" ~
" 0
~ 5'
" "
a.
'< ."
'" 0;-
ris
8. S'
'00
n
o
~
on'
'"
g"
n::g",~c;')
O~2~~
~ s. ~e 0
",.~ " 8 (")
~. (j'-+ tel 0
g 0 [g.~
og~a~
s:- 3. n 5' N'
(\~o=a.
n o.'"t:j ~ c'
o i:j '< =
S ~ 0
" '" ....
;::';05'
"" "
""
00
~ 11::
0.0
on
cr'
!].5"-
" "
00 <'
'" "'
" ~
g",
~,g
g 8-
00cr'
=-"
~
::r",
" "
."g
.,~
" 0
"
S' :t-
oo "
8'
..
5'
"
0;'
."
~
S
00
gj
0.
to
5.
0;:
s.
00
0.
o
"
'"
"
o
~
o
:g
o
'"
"
5'
on'
"
::r
"'
"
00
i'
."
~
s.
00
gj
0.
to
5
0;:
s.
00
0.
o
"
'"
"
o
~
.g
""
o
'"
"
~
or.
'"
"
::r
gj
00
i'
....
:..
"' -
'" ....
~. ~
~en
gog
" "
'" i3
" "
::r"
o ~
2.0
0.....
_. n
'" 0
9". "
" "
~"
S3
S' en'
~ en'
0.'"
0.<'
.. "
" 0.
'" .
'" _.
~.~
~ _.
::r==
" "'"
_. 0
0."
" <'
" '"
~. 0
::;;"
8.."
"g~
o '"
cr'~
~::r
" "
8 "
. ~.
"
~
en
c::
p::
UJ
~
'"
.g
""
o
::I-
'"
..
"
"
~
"
"
0.
"'
~
o.
~
n
<
tr1
en
~
::r
"'
'"
"
o
~
..
"
~
o
"
0.
"
p..
~
5"
"
8'
..
'"
g.
,
~
"
"'
"'
'"
'"
"
'"
'"
8
"
"
~
?'
oo~~
"O~~=-
::r' _. '= Q
~-<8~
_. 8 '"
~ s:- t=
~"=
"' 5' Q.
;:t.. ..
::1. G ....
0"' I:n ...
S. S g
" -'"
fn 0....
0;-
"
00
"
"'
00
"
'"
o
5'
!';.
5'
"
~
"
a
"'^
"
"
o
8
3
o
0.
"'
~
CD,
..
"
CO'
..
'"
en
c::
p::
UJ
~
en
~
UJ
~
'"
.g
""
o
::I-
'"
..
"
"
~
"
"
0.
"'
~
o.
~
n
<
tr1
UJ
~
::r
"'
'"
"
o
~
..
"
~
o
"
0.
"
p..
'"
.g
""
o
::I-
'"
@
"
~
"
"
0.
"'
~
o
~
n
<
tr1
UJ
~
::r
"'
'"
"
o
~
..
"
~
o
"
0.
"
p..
....
'"
:.,
on'
'"
"
"
0.
~
g-
o
11::
o
n
s.:
"
g
51
"
'"
"'
""
..
g.
"
!3
N
Q
[;;~
n~
0::0
~~
t"j>-3
~=
>~
>-3>
....Z
0>
Z~
rJ]t"j
;:::;~
~~
t"">-3
t"jO
~~
t"j ,-,
z::O
>-3~
....~
z=
~>-3
>n
no
:j~
o~
z....
rJ]rJ]
rJ]rJ]
d....
~o
~~
>~
::o~
><:0
n
'-'
:t:-
""C
""C
m
Z
C
><
:t:-
VOLUME II
CITYOFCHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2005 ANNUAL REPORT
APPENDICES
Appendix B - Workshop Report
Appendix C - Growth Forecast
Appendix D - Threshold Questionnaires and Supplemental Data
1. Fiscal
2. Air Quality
3. Sewer
4. Water
5. Libraries
6. Drainage
7. Parks and Recreation
8. Police
9. Fire/Emergency Medical Services
10. Traffic
1 1. Schools
May 2005
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2005 GMOC ANNUAL REPORT
Threshold Review Period 7/1103 to 6/30/04
To the Current Time
And Five Year Forecast to December 2009
Commission Members
Gary 1. Nordstrom, Chair (Development)
David W. Krogh, Vice Chair (Sweetwater/Bonita)
William Tripp, (Environmental)
Arthur M. Garcia, (Education)
Rafael Munoz (Eastern Territories)
Michael Spethman (Center City)
Steve Palma (Southwest)
Richard Arroyo (Business)
Kevin O'Neill (Planning Commission)
Staff
Daniel Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
Rabbia Phillip, Management Assistant
May 25, 2005
(Note: prior to the acceptance by the City Council, the contents ofthis report represents the findings
and recommendations of the GMOC and are not necessarily those ofthe City ofChula Vista.)
GMOC Chair Cover Memo
. May 25, 2005
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Members of the Planning Commission
City of Chula Vista
FROM:
Gary 1. Nordstrom, Chairperson
Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC)
SUBJECT:
2005 GMOC Annual Report (July 2003 to June 30, 2004, to the Current Time and Five Year
Forecast)
The GMOC is appreciative of the time and professional expertise given by the various City department staff as
well as the school districts, water authorities, and Air Pollution Control District in helping us complete this
year's annual report. The comprehensive written and verbal reports presented to the GMOC illustrate the
commitment of these dedicated professionals to serving the Chula Vista community. Special thanks to Dan
Forster and Rabbia Phillip who provided excellent staff support.
I would like to recognize the commissioners of the GMOC: Vice Chair, David Krogh, Rafael Munoz, Michael
Spethman, Steve Palma, Arthur Garcia, Kevin O'Neill, Richard Arroyo, and Bill Tripp who resigned to accept
an appointment to the Planning Commission. This dedicated and diverse team of citizens read numerous
reports, listened to detailed presentations, and participated in hours of thoughtful discussion about the impact of
development on the "quality of life" in Chula Vista.
Over the last few years the GMOC has been in the lead identifYing ways we can become more responsive to the
community and effective in our message to Council. The most important aspects of those changes has been:
. Holding regular public workshops;
. Focusing greater attention on western Chula Vista; and,
. Having greater future vision, by dealing with current issues and looking critically at the next 5 year time
period.
And, in this report the GMOC has included a section that deals specifically with proposed changes to the growth
management program as a result of the Top to Bottom review. As indicated in the body report, we are seeking
Councils direction and ultimate acceptance in principle to the growth management recommendations presented.
We say in principle as these recommendations will once accepted, be used to craft the updated growth
management ordinance and the updated Program Document, both of which will be reviewed by the GMOC.
As we review the City's growth over the last several years, two things are clear, first there continues to be a
significant level of growth, and second the City has done a remarkable job in providing the facilities and
services necessary to accommodate this rate of development. It is a testament to the current growth
management program, and all the individual actions that have taken place, that we are doing so well. We all
hear the complaints about growth, but I know of no other jurisdiction that has handled this level of growth so
well, and has maintained a desirable city image.
But, we all know we can and must continue to strive to do better.
Eight of the eleven quality of life thresholds were judged by the GMOC to be in full compliance, and one in
partial compliance, these include:
. Fiscal
. Air quality
. Sewer
. Water
. Drainage
. Parks and Recreation
. Police (PI)
. Traffic
. Schools
Three of the thresholds had at least partial non-compliance:
. Library has fallen below the threshold but a program is in place to correct this.
. The Police threshold has two components, Emergency and Urgent response times. The emergency
(Priority I) response time threshold was met but the urgent (Priority 2) response time was not.
. The Fire/EMS response time did not meet the threshold.
The following report includes a more detailed presentation of the eleven threshold standards, identified issues,
findings, and recommendations to the City Council.
I look forward to the joint City Council, Planning Commission and GMOC public hearing/workshop.
ii
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2005 ANNUAL REPORT
Table of Contents
GMOC Chair Cover Memo......................................................................................................................................i
Rel10rt Preface - Oualitv of Life: A Broad OVerview.............................................................................................3
1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................5
1.1 The Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) ...........................................................5
1.2 Review Process......................................................................................................................................5
1.3 Growth Forecast ...................................................................................................................................6
1.4 Report Organization ............................................................................................................................6
2.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE SUMMARy........................................................................................... 7
3.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE ................................................................................................................9
3.1 FISCAL .................................................................................................................................................9
3.1.1 Five Year Fiscal Forecast..................................................................................................................9
3.2 AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................................................10
3.2.1 City Programs for Air Quality Improvement...................................................................................10
3.2.2 Alternative Fueled Vehicles............................................................................................................. 12
3.3 SEWER ...............................................................................................................................................13
3.3.1 Long Term Treatment Capacity ......................................................................................................13
3.4 W ATER...............................................................................................................................................15
3.4.1 Water Availability and Distribution................................................................................................15
3.5 LIBRARIES ........................................................................................................................................16
3.5.1 Library Building Plan .....................................................................................................................16
3.6 DRAINAGE ........................................................................................................................................18
3.6.1 Replacement of Corrugated Metal Pipe ..........................................................................................18
3.7 PARKS & RECREATION ................................................................................................................19
3.7.1 Land Threshold Keeping Pace .........................................................................................................19
3.7.2 School Grounds and Other Recreation Areas ..................................................................................20
3.8 POLICE...............................................................................................................................................21
3.8.1 Priority 1 Threshold Met.................................................................................................................22
3.8.2 Priority 2 Threshold Not Met..................... ........................... ...... .....................................................22
3.8.3 Priority 1 Calls Taking Longer Than 10 Minutes ............................................................................23
3.9 FIRE I EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES..............................................................................24
3.9.1 Maintaining Response Time Threshold .................... .......................................................................24
3.9.2 Reporting Management Tool...........................................................................................................25
3.10 TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................................................26
GMOC Annual Repart
May 2005
3.10.1
Traffic Signal Adj ustment .......................................................................................................... 26
3.11 SCHOOLS...........................................................................................................................................27
3.11.1 GMOC School Recommendations .............................................................................................28
3.11.2 School District Accomplishments ..............................................................................................28
3.11.3 City Assistance ...........................................................................................................................28
4.0 RECOMMENDED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM CHANGES .........................................30
4.1 Background ...............................................................................................................................................30
4.2 Overall Changes - Implementation Measnres .......................................................................................31
4.2.1 Use of Moratorium..... ........ ........ ..... ................. ..... ............ ....... ......... ......... ..... .................... .......... ...31
4.2.2 Statement of Concern....................................................................................................................... 3 1
4.2.3 Use of Master (and or Strategic/Specific) Plans ..............................................................................32
4.3 Threshold And Implementation Measure Specific Changes ...............................................................32
4.3.1 No Significant Changes: Air Quality, Water, Sewer, Drainage, Fiscal...........................................32
4.3.2 Fire and Emergency Medical Services.............................................................................................32
4.3.3 Police ................................................................................................................................. ..............33
4.3.4 Traffic ................................................................................................................................... ..........33
4.3.5 Parks and Recreation....................................................................................................................... . 3 3
4.3.6 Library ................................................................................................................................. ...........34
4.3.7 Schools........................................................................................................................ ....................34
4.4 Organization .......................................................................................................................................35
GMOC Annual Report
2
May 2005
Report Preface - Quality of Life: A Broad Overview
The GMOC's principal task is to assess the impacts of growth on the community's quality of life
and to recommend corrective actions in areas where the city has the ability to act and can make a
difference. This is an important and vital service. No other city in the region has an independent
citizen body, as the GMOC, to provide this kind of report card to an elected body. In fact, the
GMOC has been referred to as the "eyes and ears" of the City Council.
As mentioned, the principal task of the GMOC is to address impacts of growth in areas where the
city can act. And, while critical, this aspect is only one part of what constitutes Chula Vista's
quality of life. A few examples, existing facility needs, such as curbs and gutters in the
southwest, the need has not been created by growth but does impact the residents quality of life.
Street and drainage facility maintenance are not directly growth related, but maintenance issues
do impact the quality of life. Demographic change, when an area of the city has growth in
population without a commensurate growth in housing, means that household size is growing,
and facility and service demands increase. While this is a form of growth, it does not fall within
the formal purview of the GMOC. Other services are outside the city's jurisdictional realm, such
as schools, water, and air quality, and while these issues have thresholds and are discussed within
the GMOC report there is actually very little the City can do either legally or practically. Other
issues such as health care and housing affordability does have a direct effect on the residents
quality of life, but clearly the City's role is limited.
The GMOC takes seriously it's role as monitoring the impacts of growth and reporting to the City
Council. The GMOC membership also believes that they have a responsibility to express
concerns over issues that may not be a part of the formal GMOC purview, but does impact the
quality of life for the current and future residents of the City. It is also recognized that there may
be no recourse, no action that the City can take either legally or practically, to address such
concerns. It is important however for the issues to be raised so that the City Council and the
community has a full perspective regarding the City's quality of life.
The GMOC membership is pleased to say that overall the quality of life in the City of Chula Vista
is being maintained and indeed even improved. Our once "Eastern Territories" are quickly
evolving into one of the most desirable and relatively affordable places to live in the county. The
prospects for redevelopment in the west gives rise for opportunities for physical improvements to
be realized as they have in the east.
At the same time there are trends which are of concern to the GMOC. The issue of health care in
terms of local resources for hospital beds and the availability of emergency room care seem to be
eroding. This is not a Chula Vista specific issue, but one that is affecting many communities
around the country as the dynamics of health care changes.
Some attributes of physical development in western Chula Vista will be addressed as the
redevelopment process proceeds. But, depending upon the rate of this growth, some of the pre-
existing need issues may linger for what many feel is too long. Providing parks, curbs-gutters
and sidewalks for the southwestern area of the city is being done, and this is recognized and
appreciated. So when the GMOC indicates that more is also desired, it is done with recognition
and thanks for the significant achievements we have seen in the last 2 years. And, we recognize
that the tax base provided by our eastern growth has helped to fund these improvements.
GMOC Annual Report
3
May 2005
The issue of crumbling drainage inrrastructure, particularly old corrugated metal pipe, remains a
concern to the GMOC. Although a program is in place which receives funding on an annual
basis, and recent years has seen at least a one time spike in funding, we encourage this steady
effort to continue.
Some community members indicate their ITustration that improvements while planned are taking
too long to be built. Pools for competitive meets are an example. Let us say that the GMOC
shares these sentiments, but at the same time recognize that these are strategic recommendations
that come rrom other Boards and Commissions, which in the case of pools is the Park and
Recreation Commission.
GMOC Annual Report
4
May 2005
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC)
In November 1987, the City Council adopted the original 'Threshold Standards Policy for Chula
Vista establishing "quality-of-life" indicators for eleven public facility and service topics. The
Policy addresses each topic in terms of a goal, objective(s), a "threshold" or standard, and
implementation measures. Adherence to these citywide standards is intended to preserve and
enhance both the environment and residents' quality of life as growth occurs. To provide an
independent, annual, City-wide 'Threshold Standards compliance review, the Growth
Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) was created. It is composed of nine members
representing each of the City's four major geographic areas, a member of the Planning
Commission, and a cross section of interests including education, environment, business, and
development.
The GMOC' s review is structured around three time frames:
I. A fiscal year cycle to accommodate City Council review of GMOC recommendations,
which may have budget implications, therefore the report focuses on the previous fiscal
year for detailed data collection, which in this case is July I, 2003 through June 30, 2004.
2. Pertinent issues identified during the second half of 2004 and early 2005 are also
addressed. This is to assure that the GMOC can and does respond to current events.
3. A five-year forecast covering the period from January 2005 through December 2009 is
assessed for potential threshold compliance concerns. This assures that the GMOC has a
future orientation.
During this process, the GMOC encourages each City Department and outside agency, which has
responsibility for reporting on the threshold status, to review the appropriateness of the threshold
and whether new thresholds and or standards should be considered.
1.2 Review Process
The GMOC has held 14 regular meetings from July 2004 through May 2005. In addition, GMOC
members participated in a City field trip City Departments and outside agencies completed
threshold questionnaires. GMOC members reviewed the questionnaires and, where necessary,
asked department or agency representatives to appear in person to make clarifications and to
answer questions.
The final GMOC armual report is required to be transmitted through the Planning Commission to
the City Council. This occurs at a public hearing typically held in Mayor June.
GMOC Annual Report
5
May 2005
1.3 Growth Forecast
In October 2004 the GMOC "Preliminary" Five Year Growth Forecast was issuedl This forecast
was issued to provide departments and outside agencies with an estimate of the magnitude of
residential growth to be anticipated over the over the next five years. Each department and
outside agency was then asked how their respective public facility/service would be able to
accommodate that growth. The forecast from January 2005 through December 2009, indicated an
additional 12,774 residential units would be permitted for construction in the city, (10,444 in the
east and 2,300 units in the west) for an armual average of 2,088 in the east and 460 units in the
west.
One of the assumptions of that forecast was that "Building caps are not imposed on
development". In essence, the Permit Monitoring Program adopted by the City Council on April
15, 2003 has imposed such a system to be applied from April 2003 through March 2006. The
Permit Monitoring system will lower the number of permits relative to the forecast over that
period. However, as the GMOC forecast is for a five-year period, units that were forestalled by
the Permit Monitoring Program may after March 2006 come forward. In addition, to be
conservative, it is prudent to maintain the estimate of 12,774 residential units over the next 5
years so that facility and service levels are measured against a higher standard. Annual updates
will be provided.
1.4 Report Organization
In Section 2 the report provides summary tables of the threshold findings both for the most
recent review period and what is expected over the next 5 years.
Section 3 provides a threshold by threshold presentation, presents discussions, issues,
acknowledgments, statements of concern, and recommendations as may be made. The
thresholds are ordered roughly according to their level of interest or concern.
Section 4 concerns the GMOC's concurrence with recommended changes in the growth
management program in terms of thresholds, implementation measures, and organizational
Issues.
1 This forecast will be updated prior to presentation to the City Council to reflect actual building permits issued and housing units finaled
in calendar year 2004. The forecast is available on the City's web site.
GMOC Annual Report
6
May 2005
...
'"
~
"0
-
o
-=
'"
'"
...
-=
...
x x x x
x
x x
x
x
x
x
...,
:s
'"
6-
::jj
~
~
~
~ ... ....
00 '"
~
~ ...
0
u Z
"0 X X X
~ -
0
-=
'"
'"
~ ...
~ -=
...
~
~
0
u
~ C> ...,
~ obi)
,:! ~
0 0:: ~ "
= .- 0 ~ <>
.~ "., "- -
Po " t :S ";:
00 0 ~ "- <::
... " ,:! <:: ... '"
~ "~ ~ "~ '" "-
I=i '" -Q
~ - '" ;;;: Q
g '" " "- .Q .Q ::;;: ~c 1:
" 00 o'IJ - '" - c
"[; oj "- ">:: "i:: " "0 ..!:! <> ~
OJ CI .... .... 0:: "" :::: " ~ \P <> '" <>
= ~ " ~ " '"' "~ 0 0 0 " ",..., '"
" - 15 "a ">:: ">:: <H U ..., ~c)S
'" .... oj '" ~ "0 .... ~ ..c: c)S <;
:.;: " i:: .... ...... ~ ~ "
~ ~ ;J Q ~ ~
'" ~ ~ '" ~
.
'"
= '-'
. ~
N '"
.8 <l)
en '-'
o~ fa
- o~
'-'1'3.
~ a
"0 0
gU
fS ~
0.:.8
o '-'
~<:
;:: '"
<l) ~
5'0 g
'" 0
e;; U
.... , <l)
t.8 ~ 0
o a
~z~
1J ~ a
...... t::: 0
o-u
p.,~
"0
0>>
...--
en <l) <l)
<l)~ ::s
J:!....
E-<
"0
o <l)
...!::~'a:)
~a::s~~~~
i:~
"0
o
...
en
<l)
J:!
E-<
OJ
'-'
en
i;;;
o€
OJ
::>
CI
....
<
....
"
..
<l)
'"
....
"
-
oj
~
~
~ ~
"'
"
O!a
.E
;.:J
"
bO
oj
'"
~
.~
....
"
....
<..>
~
-0
a
~
Il<
~ ~
"'"
"
"
'-'I
.~
""
0\3
.;:
<l)
o~
"0
Il<
~ ~
~
~
<l)
bO
oj
!J
~
;fl.
-
00
~
~
"
bO
oj
....
<l)
~
;fl.
r--
'"
~
1=1 '"
~ ::E
g fiJ
0': ....
~ ~
-
~
0':
o
0':
Il<
~
<..>
"'"
'-
oj
~
"'
"0
o
..c:
<..>
'"
~ ~
c-
~
"
"
Ii:
"
~
"
00;;
s:
.;;
'"
6
0-<:
0""
::t;
"
c -
0- <.;
" 0-
::)'"
~ .;::
~Q
,,-
t g
,,0-<:
"o)j
~
'"
c
c
.....
'"
::;j
00
-
o
Ii}
'"
<;
~
~
~
...,
'-'
~
c:o
3.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE
3.1 FISCAL
Threshold:
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual fiscal impact report which
provides an evaluation of the impacts of growth on the City, both in
terms of operations and capital improvements. This report should
evaluate actual growth over the previous 12-month period, as well as
projected growth over the next 12- to 18-month period, and 5- to 7 -year
period.
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual Development Impact Fee
(DIF) Report, which provides an analysis of development impact fees
collected and expended over the previous 12-month period.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current: In Compliance
Future:
Threshold Will Be Met
3.1.1 Five Year Fiscal Forecast
Discussion: The GMOC was provided with a 5 year fiscal forecast. Based upon this
information the city's growth is anticipated to produce the kinds of land
uses that will generate the level of revenue so that the facilities, services,
and maintenance needs that will be demanded by this growth will overall
also be paid for by this growth.
Recommendation:
No recommendations at this time.
GMOC Annual Report
9
May 2005
3.2 AIR QUALITY
Threshold:
The GMOC Shall Be Provided With An Annual Report Which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local
development projects approved during the prior year to
determine to what extent they implemented measures
designed to foster air quality improvement pursuant to
relevant regional and local air quality improvement
strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations,
policies, and procedures relate to, and/or are consistent
with current applicable federal, state, and regional air
quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development related activIties being
undertaken by the City toward compliance with relevant
federal, state, and local regulations regarding air quality,
and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Pollution Control
District (APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall
report on overall regional and local air quality conditions, the status of
regional air quality improvement implementation efforts under the
Regional Air Quality Strategy and related federal and state programs,
and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and
local planning and development activities.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current:
In Compliance
Future:
Threshold will Be Met
3.2.1 City Programs for Air Quality Improvement
The GMOC wishes to highlight the ongoing efforts being undertaken by
the City of Chula Vista to improve local and regional air quality. The
City continues to implement several measures contained in the Carbon
Dioxide (C02) Reduction Plan adopted by the City Council on
November 14, 2000. Following is an explanation of the non-
development related air quality programs identified as Action Measures
in the CO2 Reduction Plan that have been active or updated during the
reporting period:
GMOC Annual Report
10
May 2005
Purchase of Alternative Fuel Vehicles
The City's alternative fuel assets include the operation and maintenance
of the following existing alternative fueled vehicles and fueling stations:
Alternative Fuel Vehicles
. Chula Vista Transit has 25 CNG Busses (a total 6 additional
CNG busses will be delivered in June 2005).
· The Nature Center will receive a dedicated CNG bus in June
2005.
. Six CNG Passenger Vehicles: 4 Vans and 2 Cars.
. Five Neighborhood Electric Cars.
. Honda FCX Fuel Cell Car.
Alternative Fueling Station
. Hydrogen Fueling Facility installed at the John Lippitt Public
Works Center in April 2003.
· CNG Fueling Station at the John Lippitt Public Works Center.
. Public access to CNG Fueling Facility at the John Lippitt Public
Works Center.
Green Power
Renewable Energy efforts include:
. 4 kw Photovoltaic (PV) system at the John Lippitt Public Works
Center.
. 7 kw PV system for Nature Center.
. 30 kw PV system for new Police HQ.
. Additional 4 kw PV system planned at the John Lippitt Public
Works Center in 2005.
. Staff to evaluate installation of IMW PV for the John Lippitt
Public Works Center.
Municipal Clean Fuel Demonstration Proiect
. The City is continuing to work with SunLine to demonstrate
hydrogen Electrolyzer and hydrogen fuel cell bus by 2006.
Funding of $3.4 million from the Department Of Energy (DOE)
and the CEC is pending organization of a regional project. The
regional project scope will procure up to four fuel cell busses for
a two-year demonstration for the San Diego region with Chula
Vista as the anchor.
Municipal Building Upgrades and Trip Reduction
· Facility and infrastructure retrofits are generating savings of 4.7+
MW-hrs/yr.
. The City has replaced 30 refrigerators with EnergyStar rated
units since June 2003.
· Past retrofits include upgrading lights, many HV AC systems and
other appliances with energy-saving devices. Additional
improvements will be made as major capital items will be
replaced or refurbished.
GMOC Annual Report
11
May 2005
. The City has expanded it's website opportunities for the public
to access infonnation and communicate witb staff without
traveling to the Civic Center and other City facilities. Planning
and Land Use applications as well as Building pennit fonns and
specifications are available via the Internet resulting in trip
reduction by City employees and the public.
In addition to the CO, Reduction Plan measures, the City has initiated tbe
following programs:
Transportation Demand Management
. In March 2003, tbe City was awarded a $414,325 grant by
tbe San Diego Air Pollution Control District to develop and
implement a transportation demand management program.
The program includes an express bus from eastern Chula
Vista to downtown San Diego and an express shuttle from
eastern Chula Vista to a trolley stop. Council accepted the
grants in April 2004 and tbe program may begin operation in
Summer 2005.
Light Bulb Exchange Program
. The City partnered with SDG&E to facilitate a light bulb
exchange program targeting western Chula Vista.
Replacement compact fluorescent lights were provided to
600 households in October 2004.
3.2.2 Alternative Fueled Vehicles
Discussion:
While it is recognized that tbe issue of air quality should be addressed on
a regional basis, the City of Chula Vista is moving forward in several
areas to lower energy consumption and emissions. One area tbat was of
interest to tbe GMOC in last year's report concerned tbe acquisition of ar
conversion of City vehicles which use alternative fuels. It has been
reported to the GMOC that a draft policy will be ready for presentation
to the GMOC by the end of tbe second quarter of 2005. In tbe mean
time, interim steps continue to be taken to promote use of alternative fuel
vehicles in tbe City. In November 2004, tbe City leased a Honda FCX
hydrogen fuel cell car. The Cities of Chula Vista, San Francisco, Los
Angeles, South Coast Air Quality Management District and the State of
New Yark are a few of tbe agencies in tbe US tbat are currently testing
tbis technology.
Comment:
The GMOC looks forward to receiving the draft or adopted City policy
regarding tbeir use of alternative fueled vehicles.
GMOC Annual Report
12
May 2005
3.3 SEWER
Threshold:
I. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering
Standards.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan
Wastewater Authority with a 12-18 month development forecast and
request confirmation that the projection is within the City's
purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecasted and continuing growth, or the City
Public Works Department staff shall gather the necessary data. The
information provided to the GMOC shall include:
a. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
b. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth.
c. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
d. Other relevant information.
The Authority response letters shall be provided to the GMOC for
inclusion in its review.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current:
In Compliance
Future:
Threshold Will Be Met
3.3.1
Long Term Treatment Capacity
Discussion:
In about five years the City's current contracted capacity rights with
METRO is expected to be exceeded. However, with an allocation rrom
the Southbay Treatment Plant, additional capacity will be available.
For the longer term capacity needs it is the understanding of the GMOC
that the soon to be completed Sewer Master Plan will form the basis for
reevaluating the sewer capacity fee so that there is sufficient funding to
acquire the additional capacity rights. It is also understood that
negotiations to acquire those rights are ongoing. The GMOC appreciates
the complexity of these negotiations.
GMOC Annual Report
13
May 2005
Average 114.756 I~~~~r-;;;lr;;l
Flow (MGD) L.::.:J~L.::..JL::..JL.::.:JL.::....J
1 Capacity 1119.843 1119.843 1120.875**1120.875**1120.875**1120.875**11 20.875** 1
. Buildout Projection based on the General Plan Update (Steering Alternative). (Adopted General Plan "Buildout" = 26.2
MGD)
. ** Increase incapacity is based on the allocation of additional capacity rights resulting from the construction of the new
Southbay Trearnent Plant.
Recommendation:
That:
(1) the GMOC be advised regarding the allocation of treatment
capacity to Chula Vista ftom the Southbay Sewer Treatment
Facility, and
(2) the status of negotiations to acquire capacity rights for the
City's long term sewer treatment requirements.
GMOC Annual Report
14
May 2005
3.4 WATER
Threshold:
I. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability
letter from the Water District for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water
Authority, the Sweetwater Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water
District with a 12-18 month development forecast and request
evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and
continuing growth. The Districts' replies should address the
following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering
both short and long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now
used or committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
e. Other relevant information the Districts desire to communicate to
the City and GMOC.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current:
In Compliance
Future:
Threshold Will Be Met
3.4.1 Water Availability and Distribution
Discussion: Both of the major water districts serving the City of Chula Vista report
that they will be able to meet the water demands of anticipated growth
over the next 5 years.
No Recommendations at This Time
GMOC Annual Report
15
May 2005
3.5 LIBRARIES
Threshold:
The City shall construct 60,000 gross square feet (GSF) of additional
library space, over the June 30, 2000 GSF total, in the area east of
Interstate 805 by buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not fall below the citywide ratio of 500
GSF per 1,000 population. Library facilities are to be adequately
equipped and staffed.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
CURRENT
Not in Compliance
FUTURE
Threshold Likely Met
3.5.1
Library Building Plan
Issue:
Given the population growth of the community the ratio of gross square
feet of library space has fallen below the threshold standard of 500 gross
square feet per 1,000 population.
The Library Master Plan calls for the construction of a 30,000 square
foot full-service, regional library in Rancho Del Rey. This library will be
constructed on City-owned property located at East H Street and Paseo
Ranchero. This library is expected to be open by summer of 2007.
According to the Growth Management Program "Should the GMOC
determine that the Threshold Standard is not being satisfied, then the
City Council shall formally adopt and fund tactics to bring the library
system into compliance. Construction or other actual solutions shall be
scheduled to commence within three years."
As stated above, construction of the Rancho del Rey library is expected
to commence this calendar year and be completed by summer of 2007. If
this schedule is met there is no need for additional action.
Acknowledgement:
The City has taken a proactive position and is continuing to actively
pursue the Rancho Del Rey Library PlanninglBuilding Plan Program and
has placed as a priority the identification of construction funding. A
GMOC Annual Report
16
May 2005
target completion date of 2007 has been set. The principle reason for the
delay was to await notification of whether a library construction grant
had been received. Unfortunately, the city was not successful in being
awarded that grant.
GMOC Annual Report
17
May 2005
3.6 DRAINAGE
Threshold:
Stonnwater flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering
standards.
The GMOC shall annually review the perfonnance of the City's stonn
drain system to detennine its ability to meet the goals and objectives
listed above.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current:
Threshold Met
Future:
Threshold Likely Met
3.6.1 Replacement of Corrugated Metal Pipe
Discussion: For several years the GMOC has supported and strongly encouraged the
City's effort to replace aging and in some cases dilapidate corrugated
metal pipe (CMP). In fact, the GMOC has urged that more be done.
While the failure of CMP is not a growth related issue, when the pipes
fail and there is insufficient drainage, this certainly affects the
communities quality of life. The GMOC is pleased to see that increased
funding is being applied to this problem.
CMP Replacement/Rehabilitation
Fundinq
Fiscal Year Budget
2002 $893,989 1
2003 $832,000 2
2004 $481,462
2005 $615,500 3
2006 $3,000,000 4
1) FY 2002 included Storm Drain Funds and Traffic Relief Funds. All Storm Drain Funds after FY
2003 are utilized to offset the City's costs for managing Irs mandated NPDES program. The
Traffic Relief Funds were state funds that have been discontinued.
2) FY 2003 was the last year Storm Drain Funds were available for capital purposes.
3) In the current fiscal year, the funds to be expended are for a complete inventory and analysis of
the City's system, including televising all 88,000 lineal feet of CM? pipe. Additional amounts yet
to be determined will be expended to repair a CMP failure on First avenue near H Street.
4) The amount depicts the amount already borrowed by the City for this purpose and a priority list
will be created after the inventory/analysis is completed this year.
GMOC Annual Report
18
May 2005
3.7 PARKS & RECREATION
Threshold:
Three acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate
facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east ofl-805.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current: In Compliance
Land: Actual: 3.01 acres per 1,000 residents east ofl-805
Facilities: Actual Facilities - Based on Parks Master Plan
Future:
LAND:
FACILITY:
Will Be Met
Threshold Likely Met
3.7.1 Land Threshold Keeping Pace
Discussion:
Current eastern Chula Vista parkland inventory will provide adequate
acreage to accommodate up to 92,520 persons with the 3 acres per 1,000
standard.
The 18-month forecast calls for an eastern Chula Vista population of
106,500 (an increase of 14,000), therefore current inventory will need to
be increased by 42.00 acres however, the net need is 40.65 acres to meet
the 18-month forecast. Within 2005 there is scheduled to be an additional
41.57 acres of park available, namely:
. Sunsetview Park and Santa Venetia Park, 18.77 acres
. Veterans Park, 10.5 acres
. Horizon Park and Windingwalk Park, 12.3 acres
It should also be noted that there will be three other parks under
construction by the City during 2005. These parks are:
. Montevalle Community Park (Rolling Hills Ranch);
. SaItcreek Community Park; and;
. Mountain Hawk Neighborhood Park (EastLake).
All of these parks should be completed in 2006. Upon their completion,
the amount of park acreage to persons should comfortably exceed the
threshold standard.
Approximately 133.57 park acres are forecasted to be constructed
between June 2004 and December 2009 time trame. This translates to an
eastern Chula Vista parkland inventory of 395.05 acres, which is capable
.
GMOC Annual Report
19
May 2005
of accommodating a total of 131,700 persons. With the eastern Chula
Vista population forecasted to be 128,675 in December 2009, there will
be adequate park acreage.
3.7.2 School Grounds and Other Recreation Areas
Discussion:
In regard to calculating the 3 acres per thousand standard, the city only
counts active recreation areas such as developed parkland typically
known as neighborhood, community, and regional parks. The city does
not count school recreation areas when calculating whether the 3 acres
per 1,000 population ratio standard is being met. However, these areas
are used for recreation purposes and are significant in their acreages.
The two school districts have a combination of over 450 acres of
recreational space within the City of Chula Vista.
In addition, the City owned municipal golf course along the Sweetwater
River is a public recreation area but is also not counted toward meeting
the 3 acres per 1,000 population standard. In like manner the Otay
Valley Regional Park, some of the Sweetwater River "Area" , the city
owned property adjacent to the KOA site, and areas along the reservoir
are not counted toward meeting the 3 acres per 1000 person standard.
Private open space, such as golf courses and home owner association
pools and open space are also not counted.
The GMOC is not advocating that these areas be counted toward meeting
the threshold, only that they be recognized as providing a community
resource. The recognition of these areas provides for a better context
when assessing the availability of recreational land resources.
GMOC Annual Report
20
May 2005
3.8 POLICE
Emergency Response': Properly equipped and staffed police units shall
respond to 81 % of the Priority I emergency calls throughout the City
within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an average response time to
all Priority I calls of five minutes and thirty seconds (5.5 minutes) or less
(measured annually).
Threshold:
Urgent Response': Properly equipped and staffed police units shall
respond to 57% of the Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within
seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all
Priority II calls of seven minutes and thirty seconds (7.30 minutes) or
less (measured annually).
THRESHOLD FINDING:
CURRENT:
Emergency response within 7 min.:
Emergency response average time:
Urgent Response within 7 minutes:
Urgent response average time:
FUTURE:
Emergency response within 7 min.:
Emergency response average time:
Urgent Response within 7 min.:
Urgent response average time:
Threshold Met
Threshold Met
Threshold Not Met
Threshold Not Met
Threshold Likely Met
Threshold Likely Met
Threshold Likely Not Met
Threshold Likely Not Met
Threshold Standard Percent Time Average Time
Emergency Response 81.0% 7 minutes 5:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 57.0% 7 minutes 7:30 min./sec
Actual
Emergency Response 82.1% 7 minutes 4:52 min./sec.
Urgent Response 48.4% 7 minutes 9:50 min./sec.
I Priority I - Emergency Calls. Life-threatening calls; felony in progress; probability of injury (crime or accident);
robbery or panic alanns; urgent cover calls trom officers. Response: Immediate response by two officers trom any
source or assignment, immediate response by paramedics/fIre if injuries are believed to have occurred.
2 Priority 2 - Urgent Calls. Misdemeanor in progress; possibility of severe injury; serious non-routine calls
(domestic violence or other disturbances with potential for violence); burglary alarms. Response: innnediate
response by one or two officers ftam clear units or those on interruptible activities (traffic, field interviews, etc.).
GMOC Annual Report
21
May 2005
3.8.1 Priority 1 Threshold Met
Recognition: The GMOC wishes to recognize that the Police Department has steadily
reduced their Priority 1 response times over the last several years to once
again clearly meet the growth management threshold.
3.8.2 Priority 2 Threshold Not Met
Discussion:
The Priority 2 Threshold has not been met. The last time the threshold
was reached was in FY1996/97. While the GMOC agrees that there is
more to the quality of police service than response times, response time
is an established community norm that is expected to be met. If it is not
met (as will be discussed in section 4) there should be quality of service
measures that can be directly associated with a Priority 2 response
presented to the GMOC as evidence that in total there remains an
acceptable level of service.
The Police Department has requested GMOC support for various
upgrades/improvements. While the GMOC is not opposed to any of
these, it would be beneficial to understand how implementation of any of
these initiatives will specifically improve Priority 2 response times.
Suggested Recommendations Comments
That' the GMOC continue to support the The model assists in meeting response time
dispatch staffing model and the Dispatch thresholds for priority calls for service.
Manager ConceDt.
That the GMOC support continued use of the Both will enable the department to respond to
patrol staffing model and the advance hiring calls for service, and seek a 1:1 ratio of
program. officer time spent responding to citizen-
initiated calls for service to officer-initiated
activities, and a zero vacancv factor in catrol.
That the GMOC continue to support planned It is imperative that the Department continue
upgrades of police technologies, such as to build a solid technology infrastructure in
MDCs, wireless data transmission to patrol order to service a growing community.
vehicles, and global cositionina svstems.
That the GMOC continue to support research Research staff have looked at several of
and evaluation of Internet crime reporting; these ideas over the past year and expect to
alternative deployment tactics; such as continue to research various options over the
revised beat configurations, bike patrol; and next 18 months, with the aim of maximizing
an aerial platfonn. both the effectiveness and efficiency of the
Decartment.
GMOC Annual Report
22
May 2005
3.8.3 Priority 1 Calls Taking Longer Than 10 Minutes
Discussion:
During the current reporting period,S. 7% of priority I calls (63 of the
1,106 calls available for analysis) had response times greater than 10
minutes. The most frequent type of PI calls with response times over 10
minutes were robbery alarm calls, which are almost always false'. Other
P I calls with response times over 10 minutes included attempted
suicide/overdose calls; and fraud now calls. The most typical reasons for
P I response times over 10 minutes were (I) lengthy distances had to be
traveled to provide a response; and, (2) a limited number of units were
available to respond.
lA 2002 study of robbery/duress alarm calls to the Department found that 99.7% were false.
GMOC Annual Report
23
May 2005
3.9 FIRE / EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Threshold:
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical
units shall respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes
in 80% (current service to be verified) ofthe cases (measured annually).
THRESHOLD FINDING:
CURRENT:
FUTURE:
Not in Compliance
Potential for Future Non-Compliance
Percent
80.0
Time
7 minutes
72.9
7 minutes
3.9.1 Maintaining Response Time Threshold
FIRE/EMS - Emergency Response Times Since 1994
Years Call Volume % of All Call Response w/in 7:00
Minutes
FY 2003-04 8,420 72.9%
FY 2002-03 8,088 75.5%
FY 2001-02 7,626 69.7%
FY 2000-01 7,128 80.8%
FY 1999-00 6,654 79.7%
CY 1999 6,344 77.2%
CY 1998 4,119 81.9%
CY 1997 6,275 82.4%
CY 1996 6,103 79.4%
CY 1995 5,885 80.0%
CY 1994 5,701 81.7%
Discussion: The Fire response time threshold has not been met since FY 2000/01.
Although, Fire Chief Doug Perry has indicated to the GMOC that the
reasons for the delay are not growth related. Chief Perry points to the
fact that the travel time component has not increased in time but actually
improved as has dispatch. If growth was responsible Chief Perry
maintains that it would be reflected in increased travel time due to either
GMOC Annual Report
24
May 2005
distance or traffic. But this has not occurred. It is in turn-out time where
the increased delay has been experienced. Therefore the issue is one of
procedures and management.
At the same time the GMOC was briefed on the establishment of a New
Station 8 while keeping the temporary station operational.
Chief Perry believes that within two years response times should be at or
very near the threshold level.
3.9.2 Reporting Management Tool
Discussion:
Two years ago the GMOC recommended that the Fire Department
establish a management tool by establishing a daily reporting function of
trip response time by each station by trip. This was reported to have
been implemented and the GMOC was advised that it was providing
useful information for diagnostic purposes.
Apparently, with the change back to City dispatching, that particular
functionality has been lost. The GMOC believes that being able to track
each trip on a daily basis is an indispensable management tool and
essential for establishing accountability.
Recommendation:
That the City Council directs the City Manager to work toward
reestablishing a daily report function that provides a written summary of
each "Emergency Response" trip by station and identifies the dispatch,
turnout, and travel time components.
.
GMOC Annual Report
25
May 2005
3.10
TRAFFIC
Threshold:
City-wide: Maintain Level of Service (LOS) "c" or better as measured
by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments,
except that during peak hours a LOS "D" can occur for no more than two
hours of the day.
West of [-805: Those signalized intersections that do not meet the
standard above, may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but
shall not worsen.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current
Threshold Met
Future
Likely Met
3.10.1 Traffic Signal Adjustment
Discussion: When conducting the Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) it was
discovered that the Heritage Road segment between Telegraph Canyon
and Olympic Parkway, was not performing to the appropriate level of
service, that is it registered an LOS of E which in not acceptable. The
finding was unexpected as traffic free flow speed reflected an LOS of A.
Upon investigation it was assessed that the problem lay in the long
delays at the intersection that was resulting due to the traffic signal
timing. That timing is now being corrected.
GMOC Annual Report
26
May 2005
3.10 TRAFFIC
Threshold:
City-wide: Maintain Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better as measured
by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments,
except that during peak hours a LOS "D" can occur for no more than two
hours of the day.
West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections that do not meet the
standard above, may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but
shall not worsen.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
Current
Threshold Met
Future
Likely Met
3.10.1 Traffic Signal Adjustment
Discussion: When conducting the Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) it was
discovered that the Heritage Road segment between Telegraph Canyon
and Olympic Parkway, was not performing to the appropriate level of
service, that is it registered an LOS of E which in not acceptable. The
finding was unexpected as traffic free flow speed reflected an LOS of A.
Upon investigation it was assessed that the problem lay in the long
delays at the intersection that was resulting due to the traffic signal
timing. That timing is now being corrected.
GMOC Annual Report
26
May 2005
3.11 SCHOOLS
Threshold:
The City of Chula Vista shall annually provide the two local School
Districts with a 12-18 month forecast and request an evaluation of their
ability to accommodate the forecasted and continuing growth. The
Districts' replies should address the following:
I. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities.
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
4. Other relevant information the Districts desire to communicate to the
City and GMOC.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
CURRENT: Capacity to accommodate students used now or committed.
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT _
Threshold Met
SWEETWATER UNION IDGH SCHOOL DlSTRICT-
Threshold Met
FORECAST: Ability to accommodate forecasted growth - Funding and
site availability for projected new facilities.
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT _
Threshold Likely Met
SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DlSTRICT-
Threshold Likely Met
GMOC Annual Report
27
May 2005
3.11.1 GMOC School Recommendations
Discussion: Over the years the GMOC has not been hesitant to raise issues and
concerns regarding schools. One only has to review the language in past
reports to appreciate the degree of alann that the Commission has !Tom
time to time expressed. This year represents a dramatic change in tone.
Apprehension and alarm have been replaced with confidence that we are
moving forward in a pragmatic and comprehensive manner. Therefore,
the GMOC is taking the unprecedented action of not making any school
related recommendations for this year.
3.11.2 School District Accomplishments
Discussion: The GMOC is impressed with the level of accomplishments that both
school districts have achieved. The financing and construction of new
elementary schools are a testament to the functioning of a well oiled
machine. In just a couple of years the Sweetwater Union High School
District has moved trom behind the curve to being ahead of it, and all
indications are that they will remain in that position. The completion of
the Long Range Facilities Master Plan illustrates how older schools will
be brought up to standard and how continued growth will be
accommodated. These efforts underscore the GMOC's emphasis that
school capacity involves many interrelated factors that define an
adequate physical environment. The GMOC is confident that we are
moving on the right course.
The financing of future improvements remains perhaps the most critical
challenge facing both school districts. This challenge is being met with
strategic programming and innovative proposals which deserve a close
reVIew.
3.11.3 City Assistance
Discussion: The city is restricted by state law !Tom moderating or slowing growth
due to the impacts on schools. At the same time the City has responded
to the needs of the school districts by providing data on new growth and
facilitating the planning and permit process for construction of new
school facilities particularly regarding High School 13. The City has
also worked with developers to insure that the necessary roads and
utilities are in place when needed to support school construction
activities.
The GMOC is please to see this level of interagency cooperation and
how it is resulting in success. While the school districts and the city are
separate political entities with different sets of responsibilities we are in
GMOC Annual Report
28
May 2005
the end one community with the common goal of improving the quality
of life for all our residents.
The GMOC is hopeful that this positive relationship will continue and
that all reasonable efforts at how we as a community can achieve our
goals will be pursued.
GMOC Annual Repart
29
May 2005
4.0 RECOMMENDED GROWTH MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM CHANGES
4.1 Background
As a component of the Growth Management Program the GMOC is tasked with a number
of responsibilities, among these include:
. Whether any new threshold should be adopted for any issue is appropriate for its
goal.
. Review and make any appropriate recommendations concerning the means of
achieving the enforcement outlined.
In concert with this the City Council on April 15, 2003 asked that a "Top to Bottom"
review be conducted regarding the growth management program. In June of 2003 the
GMOC within it's annual report concurred with this call for a review. Since that time the
GMOC serving in the Inftastructure and Services Subcommittee for the General Plan
Update, was able to comment upon and recommend approval for the updated Growth
Management Element within the General Plan. Following that the GMOC has been
actively engaged with city staff and outside consultants in considering recommendations
for more specific growth management program changes.
Consistent with the points above, the focus of the GMOC has been the thresholds and the
means of achieving their enforcement, or what is termed "Implementation Measures".
These two aspects, thresholds and implementing measures, are key to how the growth
management program works, particularly at the GMOC level. The thresholds are
reasonably well understood as a set benchmarks for a service or facility with a monitoring
function to measures how growth may degrade this over time. The second part is, if the
benchmark level drops below the acceptable set level what is done about it? This is
embodied in the "implementing measures". Naturally, it is critical to view these two
factors in tandem, as it is the implementing measure that is really what directs the nature
and extent of public sector response to a threshold failure.
The following recommendations for changes in the City's growth management program
have been endorsed by the GMOC. These recommendations are being presented as an
opportunity for Council to provide guidance on direction. Council is being requested to
approve the recommendations in principle
While listing a set of recommendations and requesting Council's acceptance, the actual
specific language that will become the updated thresholds and implementation measures
will be brought forward by City staff in the form of an updated growth management
ordinance and Program Document. It is intended that the recommendations contained
herein will in some cases provide specific language and in other guidelines to follow.
Both the ordinance and Program Document will be reviewed and commented upon by the
GMOC prior to being submitted to Council.
GMOC Annual Report
30
May 2005
4.2 Overall Changes - Implementation Measures
4.2.1 Use of Moratorium
The current Growth Management Program document has a provision that if there is a
threshold failure for Police, Fire, Traffic, and Parks (after 3 years), "the City Council
shall schedule and hold a public hearing for the purpose of adopting a moratorium on the
acceptance of new tentative map applications."
Recommendation: This is recommended to be changed to more clearly reflect the
intent that the use of a moratorium is to be a consideration. To accomplish this the
language is recommended to be changed to: "the City Council shall schedule and hold a
public hearing for the purpose of considering the adoption of a moratorium. .."
Further, the moratorium would be placed on building permits not tentative maps.
Building pennits are more applicable as there may already be thousands of units with
approved tentative maps, and therefore a moratorium on new tentative map applications
would have no effective result.
4.2.2 Statement of Concern
Currently, when a threshold fails or if there is a "serious problem" regarding a threshold
that is the responsibility of an outside agency a "Statement of Concern" is issued by the
GMOC. Once issued the City Council is required to consider the adoption of a resolution
reflecting that concern to be directed to the responsible public agency. This applies to
water, air quality, schools, and sewer.
Recommendation: There are two recommended changes. The "serious problem" is
changed to just "problem" and that once a "Statement of Concern" is issued, the GMOC
may make specific recommendations to the City Council regarding what actions the City
may take to assist in resolving this problem. The specific requirement to issue a
resolution to the "responsible public agency" is recommended to be removed, although
this can still be a recommendation. This sets a better interagency tone, as it focuses
attention on what it is the City can do. As such this approach builds a more constructive
relationship.
In addition, it is recommended that the term/heading "Statement of Concern" be used in
application to all thresholds, if there are issues or concerns that the GMOC wishes to
bring to the Council's attention. This reflects what already occurs in practice and
remains-an important outlet for the GMOC. Note, the range of what can be expressed in
a "Statement of Concern" can be defined. Currently, the GMOC review process is
supposed to coincide with the CIP program so that GMOC recommendations can be
considered in the capital budget process. In a few instances there may be more
programmatic kinds of impacts when terms like "adequately staffed", as is currently in
place, may lead to a comment. A "Statement of Concern" may also advise use of a
permit metering system when a threshold is anticipated to fail given development trends
so as to avoid the need to consider a moratorium.
GMOC Annual Report
31
May 2005
4.2.3 Use of Master (and or Strategic/Specific) Plans
Master Plans exist or are being developed for Police, Fire, Parks and Recreation, Library,
Sewer, and Drainage.
Recommendation: While these documents are not part of the threshold, they (or their
update), are recommended to be called upon to provide the definition of key terms (like
what is adequately equipped and staffed for libraries) so that there is no ambiguity and
the GMOC has clear guidance. It is preferable that the GMOC does not feel obliged to
come up with their own definitions.
Of particular note, these plans and their implementation and financing strategies must be
approved by Council and as such they are already established public policy. Therefore,
the action by the GMOC will not result in additional budget implications.
Further, master plans will establish what will be required to meet the growth management
tbresholds. If the plans are being implemented and the tbreshold is not being met, the
problem may not be growth related but rather one of management of resources. If
however the problem persists, the validly of the plan should be called into question.
This is sigoificant, since if the problem is not growth related the use of a moratorium is
not employed. The focus becomes the more efficient use of resources not managing
growth and therefore not a direct GMOC issue, although any failure for any reason will
remain a quality of life concern that can be expressed in a "Statement of Concern".
4.3 Threshold And Implementation Measure Specific Changes
4.3.1 No Significant Changes: Air Quality, Water, Sewer, Drainage, Fiscal
Editing may be required for clarity and updating but the essence of the threshold will
remain unchanged.
4.3.2 Fire and Emergency Medical Services
Recommendation: That the Threshold be more clearly defined for growth
management purposes as arriving at the building address which has been the current and
historic practice. This is inserted to deal with the issue if response time ends when you
are at the curb or at the door. This will become more pertinent as additional mid and
high-rise residential structures are added to the city, as it will take additional time to
reach the door, say on the II th floor. This effectively keeps the growth management
response time threshold consistent.
Recommendation: A multi-step implementation measure is prescribed.
I. If the plan is not being implemented per schedule but the threshold is
met, no action is required.
2. If the threshold fails but the Master Plan is being implemented on
schedule, then it is a management and not a growth issue.
GMOC Annual Report
32
May 2005
3. If the threshold fails due to growth related issues and the plan is not
being implemented per schedule, then there is the consideration of a
moratorium as is currently the case.
Note: the Fire-EMS Master Plan may have a response time standard that is shorter than
the growth management standard. But, it will remain the growth management standard
which sets the benchmark that should not be lowered due to growth impacts. It is the
GMOC's position that the updated Fire Master Plan response time threshold will be a
goal set for design purposes. The growth management standard is meant to represent a
minimum level of service and is not being changed.
4.3.3 Police
If the Priority I calls do not meet the response time standard then the same process as
currently defmed applies, which is to consider a moratorimn. Currently, if the Priority 2
call response time is not met due to growth related circmnstances, this also results in
consideration of a moratorimn.
Recommendation: It is recommended that when a Priority 2 threshold fails a
"Statement of Concern" is issued where the GMOC can offer suggestions on how to
correct the problem and not necessarily consider a moratorium, which is viewed as an
extreme measure for a Priority 2 failure. In addition, the GMOC is in agreement that the
quality of service provided on the scene shares a place with response time as being an
important quality of life measure. A way to adequately measure this quality of service in
a growth management context remains elusive. However, the GMOC may request
qualitative measures of Priority 2 service as a possible balance for not meeting the
response time standard.
4.3.4 Traffic
Two major changes.
Recommendation: If the GMOC determines that the traffic threshold wiWmay fail
within 3 years a "Statement of Concern" is issued. Currently, the GMOC has no formal
voice to address a forecasted failure. This provides a critical signaling mechanism to
Council so that, if they choose, Council can consider whether to impose growth
moderating mechanisms such as a permit metering system.
Recommendation: Given the distinct nature of urban or urbanizing areas it is
appropriate that there be a traffic threshold level of service designated for an "urban street
level of service" . While the GMOC has not endorsed a specific level of service proposal
the justification for such a "dual" system is recognized.
4.3.5 Parks and Recreation
Recommendation: The significant change is to create a city-wide parks threshold
based on the 3 acres per 1,000 standard for additional growth both east and west. If
assembling 3 acres per 1,000 proves impractical an in lieu fee based on the value of the
GMOC Annual Report
33
May 2005
land can be applied at City discretion. Those fees will be used to purchase parkland and
facilities as identified in the updated Parks Master Plan.
Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation threshold already indicates that
"appropriate facilities" will be provided, it is recommended that added to this will be that
facilities are adequately staffed (consistent with the Library threshold) with appropriate
hours of operation. The GMOC believes that having a facility does not necessarily meet
the threshold unless it is open to service the community. Appropriate facilities will be
defined in the updated Park and Recreation Master Plan. Staffing and hours of operation
can be presented to the GMOC in an annual report that outlines staffing and operating
hours by facility, indicating changes from last year, next years plan, with comment on
how this provides adequate service. A separate Implementation Measure for these items
is proposed to be a "Statement of Concern" and will incorporate language so that this part
of the threshold will be recognized as being potentially subject to wide fluctuations based
on a number of criteria.
4.3.6 Library
Recommendation: The library threshold already includes "adequately equipped and
staffed". It is proposed that "with appropriate hours of operation" be added for the same
reason it is being proposed to be added to the Parks and Recreation threshold. Staffing
and hours of operation can be presented to the GMOC in an annual report that outlines
staffing and operating hours by library, indicating changes from last year, next years plan,
with comment on how this provides adequate service.
The Implementation Measure is split between the square footage requirement and the
equipment, staffing and hours of operation concern. For the latter, as with Parks and
Recreation, a separate Implementation Measure for these items is proposed to be a
"Statement of Concern" and will incorporate language so that this part of the threshold
will be recognized as being potentially subject to wide fluctuations based on a number of
criteria.
4.3.7 Schools
Recommendation: The school's threshold is recommended to be changed so that it
specifically indicates that "accommodation" refers to the physical facilities not programs.
It also allows for the analysis of sub-areas, to specifically consider the situation in the
east as opposed to the west. This may have implications for differentiating financing
schemes, the impacts of differing generation rates, and the adoption of non-traditional
building footprints.
The Implementation Measure will remain a Statement of Concern, but the focus, as
referenced earlier, will be that the GMOC will recommend or suggest through the City
Council ways that the City may assist the school district in addressing the identified
problem.
GMOC Annual Report
34
May 2005
4.4 Organization
The basic structure and organization of the GMOC as referenced in the current "Program
Document" is recommended to remain largely as is with edits to reflect the changes
approach that have evolved over time.
One procedural change is recommended. It is recognized that the Planning Commission
has an important role in understanding the growth management program and how this
may influence their recommendations to Council on various approvals. Having a
representative from the Planning Commission on the GMOC remains an essential aspect
of our membership and greatly assists in inter commission communication. Further, the
Planning Commission should remain as a participant in the yearly GMOC, Council, and
Planning Commission annual report workshop.
Recommendation: Currently it is stipulated that the annual GMOC report be
forwarded to the City Council via the Planning Commission for their action. This is
recommended to be changed so that the Planning Commission receives a copy of the
GMOC annual report at the same time it is sent to Council, but for their information not
action.
Two reasons, fIrst the GMOC is an independent commission and should therefore be on
equal standing with all other city commissions, where our recommendations go directly
to Council and are not required to be acted on or have to be sent via another commission.
Second, currently when a moratorium is imposed it is directed at tentative maps.
Tentative maps are acted upon by the Planning Commission so that in this case a GMOC
recommendation would potentially influence a Planning Commission function and should
legitimately be reviewed by them for their "action". However, the use of a moratorium is
now being recommended to be shifted to building permits which are not subject to
Planning Commission review.
GMOC Annual ReportI
35
May 2005
.
Appendix B
Workshop Report
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
May 12, 200S
6:00 p.m.
Public Meeting Room
OJ Police Dept. 315 Fourth Avenue, OJ 91910
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
Summary
The Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Gary Nordstrom convened the workshop
at 6:05p.m. and asked the commissioners to introduce themselves. He
commended the City for being one of only two cities in San Diego County with a
Growth Management Program. Chairman Nordstrom also made special mention
of the City staff liaison, Dan Forster and the GMOC secretary, Rabbia Phillip.
He explained that the exercise for the evening is to review the City's Growth
Management Program and the GMOC's role in that regard. Following that Dan
Forster will present information on the Top to Bottom Review .The
Commissioners will then address and answer any questions from the members of
the community present.
The Chairman gave a brief outline of the history of the Commission, its founders
and the work it undertakes. With the help of a PowerPoint presentation he
displayed the issues that the commission had addressed for the current year. He
explained the standards and the thresholds used and the areas over which the
Commission had authority and those, which they do not, such as air quality and
schools. He indicated that there was cooperation between the GMOC by the
governing entities for those "eternal" agencies.
Chairman Nordstrom briefly reviewed each of the thresholds, the GMOC
recommendations and mentioned the City staff persons and external agency staff
who made presentation to the GMOC.
The Chairman invited questions, none were raised.
He turned the meeting to Dan Forster to present the "Top to Bottom" review.
Dan explained that approximately 2 years ago, the City Council had given city
staff a directive to conduct a top to bottom review because it had been fifteen
years since the program had been created and a comprehensive look was
prudent. A consultant was hired who suggested changes to be made, but
concluded that the overall program was working well.
Dan used' a PowerPoint to present some of the changes being proposed. The
growth management element of the General Plan has been revised to support
Growth Management Program changes. The growth management ordinance,
which contain the thresholds will get revised and also the program document
which describes the implementation of the program. Dan proceeded to list the
various proposed changes.
]:\Planning\GM0C\2OO1-2005\COMMUNITY WORKSHOPrev.doc
Page 1 of 2
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
May 12, 2005
6:00 p.m.
Public Meeting Room
OJ Police Dept. 315 Fourth Avenue, OJ 91910
Ms. Patricia Aguilar raised several questions regarding the Growth Management
changes. She referred to the slide presentation #32, and asked for clarification
on the Specific Plan, whether the consultant will have to define the terms,
describe how the thresholds will be met and establish a financing plan. Dan
affirmed that will be so, although financing plans for areas with redevelopment
and infill will be different from the standard PFFA.
She asked for clarification on how the General Plan Update connects with the
dual traffic thresholds and levels of service. Dan stated that concurrent with the
General Plan there will be a defined level of service for urban areas that will
ultimately be embodied within a new growth management ordinance.
Ms. Aguilar commented on the "in lieu" fees, which she felt should be spent on
parks in the area where it is collected. A sentence should be included to read
that "in lieu fees collected on the west side should be spent on the west side of
the city", Dan stated that the clear intent was that funds collected through such
a program would be used to developed parks and amenities to service those who
paid the fee including their fair share for the cost of regional recreation facilities
which all of the communities will share.
On the issue of schools, Ms. Aguilar asked what is meant by "generation rates".
Dan Forster stated that the school district applies differing generation rates for
different areas.
Ms. Aguilar asked about what the GMOC was doing regarding controlling the rate
of growth, since this was a tool that Council asked to be included in the "top to
bottom" review. Jim Sandoval responded by stating that there is a monitoring
program, for projects; also there was language in the General Plan which gives
Council the ability to work at other means to put caps in place, even if these are
not tied to the thresholds. Ms. Aguilar requested that this Commission establish
a new mechanism to do this. The Chairman stated that this should be discussed
at the Commission's future meetings.
Mr. Peter Watry asked for clarification on the response time for the Fire
threshold. Dan confirmed that the stated time was inclusive of dispatch, turn-out
and travel time. Mr. Watry, one of the founding members of the GMOC, also
commented positively on how well the Commission has continued to function
since its inception.
The Chairman thanked everyone for their attendance and participation and
adjourned the workshop.
J:\planning\GMOC\200+200S\COMMUNITY WORKSHOPrev.dex;
Page 2 of 2
Appendix C
Growth Forecast
City of Chula Vista
2005 Annual Growth Management Review Cycle
24-MONTH and 5- YEAR
RESIDENTIAL GROWTH FORECAST
Years 2005 Through 2009
May 2005
City of Chula Vista
2005 Annual Growth Management Review Cycle
24-MONTH and 5-YEAR
RESIDENTIAL GROWTH FORECAST
Years 2005 through 2009
INTRODUCTION
As a component of the City of Chula Vista's Growth Management Program, the City's Planning
and Building Department provides annual growth forecasts for two time frames: 24 months and 5
years. Providing this information enables City departments and other service agencies to assess
the probable impacts that growth may have on maintaining compliance with the City's eleven
growth management quality of life threshold standards. With this data, these bodies will be able
to report possible threshold impacts to the Chula Vista Growth Management Oversight
Commission (GMOC). The 24-month forecast covers the period from July 1, 2004 through June
30,2006. The five-year forecast spans the calendar years from 2005 through 2009.
This forecast is commonly referred to as the Growth Management or GMOC forecast. It is
important to note that this forecast:
. Does not represent a goal or desired growth rate;
. Is not a recommend cap;
. Is what is expected to occur given a set of explicit assumptions ( presented on page 2).
Based upon the results of the City's growth management review process, the GMOC will provide
a set of recommendations for the purpose of maintaining the City's quality of life threshold
standards. Those recommendations can include the addition or acceleration of capital projects,
hiring personnel, changing management practices, or slowing the pace of growth.
This year's forecast report highlights anticipated growth in the west and eastern portions of the
City. Traditionally, most of the emphasis of the forecast was directed to the east, as that is where
the vast majority of growth is taking place and will continue to take place for the next decade.
However, based on the level of private sector interest and the potential capacity being created
through the General Plan Update, there will likely be an increase in in-fill and redevelopment in
western Chula Vista, and as such should be noted. It should also be noted that this forecast
report focuses on physical changes as evidenced by the addition of residential units. Western
Chula Vista is also undergoing growth in the form of demographic change as household size
increases and more than one family may live in a residence. Such growth is not necessarily
reflected in this report.
CONTEXT
As was widely reported in the media, in the year 2001, the City of Chula Vista was the yth fastest
growing community of its size in the nation. The San Diego Association of Governments'
(SANDAG) Preliminary 2030 Growth Forecast indicates that the South County subregion will
continue to host a substantial amount of the region's projected growth over the next 25 years.
This growth stems mainly from the limited General Plan capacity in several cities in the county, as
well as from the lower average price of housing in areas south of 1-8. Based largely on the
amount of vacant land within master planned projects in Chula Vista's eastern area, SANDAG
projects that the City will add over 20,000 housing units and over 60,000 new residents between
the years 2004 and 2030.
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 1 of 11
As in the last several years, this report reflects a substantial inventory of potential development as
a result of continued strong regional demand for housing and South County's increasing role in
meeting this demand. Historically (Figure 1, also see Exhibit 1) the rate of housing construction
in Chula Vista has fluctuated from a few hundred a year to thousands. In the years between
1993 and 2001 there was a steady increase from under 500 units to a peak of over 3,500 housing
units receiving building permits. Since 2001 the annual number of unites receiving permits for
construction has fluctuated between 2,200 and 3,300.
The City acted to moderate growth in April 2003 by instituting a Permit Monitoring Program. This
program established the maximum number of permits that can be issued for selected major
projects in eastern Chula Vista over three 12 month time periods, running from April 1 to March
31, beginning in 2003 (Figure 2). This action is intended to moderate growth over that 3 year
period so that the City's Growth Management traffic threshold is not exceeded. The Permit
Monitoring Program will have an effect over the number of units that can be permitted through
March 2006. The longer-term forecast is unaffected.
Even with a leveling growth rate and the Monitoring Program, the level of anticipated growth
remains significant. In order for the City of Chula Vista to accommodate this growth and maintain
the quality of life there must be the concurrent development of public facilities and services. It is
the role of the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) to assess if the established
quality of life standards are being met and to make recommendations to the City Council to insure
future compliance. This forecast document is provided to the City Departments and outside
agencies that are responsible for maintaining the thresholds. These departments and agencies
are then asked whether they can support the forecasted growth.
Forecast Assumptions
Forecast assumptions are:
1. That construction of SR-125 proceeds.
2. There are no additional building caps imposed on development.
3. That public policy regarding development remains otherwise unchanged.
4. That Growth Management thresholds are not exceeded.
5. That the housing market remains strong in Chula Vista.
6. The General Plan Update draft Preferred Alternative, as of October 2004, will accurately
guide development for forecast purposes over the next 5 years.
7. A 4 year college/university has committed to develop the University site by 2009.
8. The forecast assumes a normal project regulatory processing schedule.
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 2 of 11
Figure 1
Number of Units Permitted 1980 Through 2004
4,000
3,500
3,000
500
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Year
Figure 2
Limits on Monitored Projects
Year
(April! to March 31) Units Permitted
4/1/03 - 3/31/04 2,475
4/1/04 - 3/31/05 2,375
4/1/05 - 3/31/06 1,780
Total 6,630
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 3 of 11
EASTERN CHULA VISTA
24 Month Forecast
Annually, the City requests developers to indicate the number of housing units they expect to
receive building permits for over the next 24 month period. Based upon the response (Figure 3a)
the City can expect to experience continued significant housing development. During the 24-
month period from July 2004 through June 2006 housing developers anticipate the issuance of
building permits for over 5,000 dwelling units. During just calendar year 2005 the figures reflect
building permit issuance for nearly 2,700 dwelling units.
While such growth has the potential to occur, historically these "raw" numbers have been
consistently optimistic resulting in overstating actual growth by a factor ranging between 18% and
20%. In that regard, the developer forecast for year 2005 housing permits should be reduced to
reflect the likely amount. However, because the Permit Monitoring Program has placed a limit on
permits, the developer forecast is already tempered relative to previous years.
Figure 3a
EASTERN CHULA VISTA
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT "RAW" DEVELOPER FORECAST
OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS PERMITTED
July 2004 - June 2006
This is not a City of Chula Vista forecast and should not be quoted as such. These numbers represent developer
expectations and have historically been approximately 18% higher than actual.
PROJECT 24 Month Forecast Calendar Year 2005
MF SF Total MF SF Total
OT A Y RANCH
Otay Ranch Co. 731 661 1,392 323 200 523
McMillin 160 199 359 76 34 110
Brookfield Shea Otay 406 547 953 198 279 477
EASTLAKE 518 595 1,113 398 300 698
ROLLING HILLS RANCH 128 341 469 360 168 528
SAN MIGUEL RANCH" 345 317 662 250 0 250
BELLA LAGO 0 124 124 0 84 84
TOTAL 2,280 2,784 5,064 1,605 1,065 2,670
MF = Multiple units under one permit, SF = One unit per permit.
... Tri-Mark Pacific did not provide a 2 year forecast, forecast is estimated by City.
Year 2009 IS Year) Forecast
Preparing a 5-year forecast always incorporates a significant degree of uncertainty. The current
forecast period, years 2005 through 2009, offers an even greater challenge given the improving
but sluggish national economy, the continuing war against terror and possible future domestic
attacks, and interest rates still near record lows with some upward movement likely.
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 4 of 11
It is anticipated that the next 5 years will produce as many as 10,444 additional housing units
permitted for construction in eastern Chula Vista, for an average annual rate of approximately
2,100 units. This number is derived from a variety of sources including housing market
absorption rate studies; development utilization plans, and estimated project-processing
schedules (Figure 4).
Essentially, by the year 2009 the only site in eastern Chula Vista available for major residential
development will be the remaining Otay Ranch area. Based on the draft Preferred Alternative of
the General Plan update as of October 2004, there will be approximately 10,000 units remaining
to be permitted (Figure 4). Given the current rate of growth eastern Chula Vista could be built out
around 2015.
WESTERN CHULA VISTA
Western Chula Vista has not shown significant increases in housing since the growth
management program was instituted. This situation is expected to change due to an increased
level of infill, redevelopment, and possible density increases through the General Plan update.
Growth in eastern Chula Vista is made up of a series of planned communities being built by a half
dozen major companies, each with development schedules that can be quantified, and has an
established market trend, making it relatively easy to assess. Western Chula Vista presents just
the opposite situation. With the exception of the mid-bay front development proposal there are no
current master planned areas, there exists a plethora of potential development sites each with
their own opportunities and constraints, multiple potential investors, and a market for new housing
that is largely untested.
In the short term there are several projects in the approval process that constitute up to an
additional 300 units that could be permitted within the next calendar year (Exhibit 2). In the mid-
range, units that could be permitted between 2006 and 2009, there are several large and small
private sector project proposals that are in various stages of discussion but without a formal
approval or commitment to proceed.
In addition, a rough analysis by SANDAG has indicated that between the years 2000 and 2030,
assuming some land use intensification, there could be a net increase of 6,000 residential units in
western Chula Vista. This equates to an average of 200 units a year net increase although the
SANDAG estimate indicated that the added numbers would be skewed to latter years.
Although somewhat speculative, it is prudent to assume that residential development will increase
in western Chula Vista, so that facility and service providers can be aware and prepare for this
influx. Greater forecasting precision can be expected in coming years as the General Plan
update and Specific Plans are completed and the infill/redevelopment process proceeds and
housing markets are established.
Based on the information today, it can be indicated that over the next 5 years we can expect an
increase of 2,300 multi-family residential units in western Chula Vista with the potential that some
single and multi-family units may be demolished as part of redevelopment efforts.
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 5 of 11
Figure 4
Five-Year Residential Unit Growth Forecast 2005 Through 2009
Forecast of Units Permitted Approximate Units
2005 to 2009 Remaining After 2009
Projects MF SF Total MF SF Total
Otav Ranch 4,863 3,507 8,370 9,357 888 10,245
Eastlake 536 315 851 0 0 0
Rollino Hills Ranch 88 458 546 0 0 0
Bella Laoo 0 140 140 0 0 0
San Miauel Ranch 245 292 537 0 0 0
Sub- Total 5,732 4,712 1 0.444 9,357 888 10,245
Western Chula Vista 2,300 0 2,300 10,900 0 10,900
Total 8,032 4,712 12,744 20,257 888 21,145
PERMITS BY YEAR
A year-to-year estimate of how many building permits will be issued has been developed for
general planning purposes, but should not be relied upon for exactness. The total number of
permits that will be issued over the next five years is reasonably certain however many variables
may and will affect what the actual annual distribution will be. Figure 5 and 6 illustrates a
possible growth path over the next 5 years.
Figure 5
Approximate Number of Residential Units Receiving Permits
Years 2005 to 2009
Years
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
East 2,098 2,144 1,789 1948 2,465 1 0,444
West 300 500 500 500 500 2,300
Total 2,398 2,644 2,289 2,448 2,965 12,744
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 6 of 11
Figure 6
Residential Units Receiving Building Permits 1996 to 2004 Actual
and 2005 through 2009 Forecast
4,000 .. Actual ~ .. Forecast ~
3,500
3,000
.i!! 2,500
'2
::>
'0 2,000
~
m
.Q
E
"
z 1.500
1.000
500
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 6A
Number of Forecasted Residential Units Permitted by Area 2005 through 2009
3,000
500
II Eas! E:jWes!
500
500
2,500
2,465
2,000
\SOO
1,000
SOO
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Year
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 7 of 11
The Permit Monitoring Program, as referenced earlier, has placed limits on the number of permits
that can be issued for selected projects in eastern Chula Vista, this includes Otay Ranch Villages
6 and 11, Eastlake III, and portions of San Miguel Ranch and Rolling Hills Ranch. The limit for
the period from April 1 2005 to March 31, 2006 is 1,780. Actual permit will likely exceed this
amount as they include units in western Chula Vista, affordable units and model homes which are
excluded from the Permit Monitoring Program. As of April 1, 2005 there are 638 units that have
been carried forward from previous year's allocation that were not permitted and an additional
200 units remaining that are not part of the Permit Monitoring program. The exception may be for
new projects gaining approval, but these projects are not expected to be issuing permits for
housing units until the latter part of calendar year 2006. Therefore, the maximum number of units
receiving housing permits in eastern Chula Vista is approximateiy 2,600 units.
FORECASTED POPULATION
A population forecast is derived using the number of homes constructed. The California State
Department of Finance estimates that Chula Vista has on average 3.048 persons per household.
Assuming that this factor is accurate and remains valid over the next five years, and assuming a
3% vacancy rate, Chula Vista can expect a total population of approximately 255,200 persons by
the end of 2009 (Figure 7 and Exhibit 1).
This is estimated as follows:
. At the end of 2004 the California State Department of Finance (DOF) estimated a Chula
Vista population of 217,543.
. It is forecasted that an additional 12,774 units may be permitted also with an assumed
97% occupancy between 2005 and 2009.
Using the DOF factor of 3.048 persons per housing unit, the analysis as illustrated in Figure 7,
indicates a population of over 255,200 by the end of 2009.
Figure 7
Year
2004
2005-2009
Population Year end 2009
Pro"ected Po ulation Chan
Additional Units
12,774
e Table 2004 to 2008
Po ulation
217,543
37,678
255,221
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page 8 of 11
EXHIBITS:
1 Historical Growth Table
2 Major Projects Map
.
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page9of11
EXHIBIT 1
HISTORIC HOUSING AND POPULATION GROWTH
CITY OF CHULA VISTA 1980 - 2004
And Forecast for 2005 Through 2009
No. % Chanae No. % Chanae No. % Chanqe
1980 407 374 84,364
1981 195 -52% 496 33% 86,597 2.6%
1982 232 19% 129 -74% 88,023 1.6%
1983 479 106% 279 116% 89,370 1.5%
1984 1,200 151% 521 87% 91,166 2.0%
1985 1,048 -13% 1,552 198% 116,325 27.6% 1
1986 2,076 98% 1,120 -28% 120,285 3.4%
1987 1,168 -44% 2,490 122% 124,253 3.3%
1988 1,413 21% 829 -67% 128,028 3.0%
1989 1,680 19% 1,321 59% 134,337 4.9%
1990 664 -60% 1,552 17% 138,262 2.9% 2
1991 747 13% 701 -55% 141,015 2.0%
1992 560 -25% 725 3% 144,466 2.4%
1993 435 -22% 462 -36% 146,525 1.4%
1994 700 61% 936 103% 149,791 2.2%
1995 833 19% 718 -23% 153,164 2.3%
1996 914 10% 820 14% 156,148 1.9%
1997 1,028 12% 955 16% 162,106 3.8%
1998 1,339 30% 1,093 14% 107,103 3.'1%
1999 2,505 87% 1,715 57% 174,319 4.3%
2000 2,618 5% 2,652 55% 183,300 5.2%
2001 3,525 35% 3,222 21% 190,300 3.8% .
2002 2,250 -36% 2,923 -9% 199,700 4.9% .
2003 3,143 40% 2,697 -8% 209,133 4.7% .
2004 3,300 5% 3,043 13% 217,543 4.0% .
2005 - 2009 12,744 255,221 ..
(1) Montgomery Annexation
(2) 1990 Census Figures 135,163
. Reflects Department of Finance (DOF) comprehensively revised population figures for the end of the
referenced year.
.. Population is approximate based on the number of units permitted between 2005 and 2009 less an
assumed 3% vacancy rate and assuming that there are 3.048 persons per unit. While a number of these
units will be underconstrucion at the end of 2008, there
2005 Five Year Growth Forecast, May 2005
Page lOaf 11
C\I
I-
CD
I
G)
a-
..
15
Ie
c:.:t
...
...
CD
-=
a-
lii:
CD
...
:I~
.. ..
<~
=
U
...
-
=
1:1I:
II.
1:1I:
=
i
-
=
....
en
-
-
z.
~.:E
~..I 1..1...1 0>.. ..~.
711 . 6~~
~( . :J:~
U~
S
....
-
- M
~. .
: ; - :1
.!!I= .-
= - -Ii!
=-8. ::ail'ii
,- =a. _..--111 iii
1:'.;: ..,111_.11I...
... = e 11..1 ..... ~
__.-_=-2._
a=.::-III;&8.,..I
.~!I.:. Ie,!!
.u Ii.!! :5 'I.-.a.!!
......a .:II=-
;;==._u___
--
!i ..
--
.!!.!!
.. II ==
!I . _~::IQ
. . ........
. . -i,!:..
:'1-1 !!~!;
~= I-!in::
II! ~ :'fIi .' .. .. IC
=......I""'"I..-..u&liii
::= !I 'iii.!:! ,~=:!=,== :!
_I!.:!,o_._:=a:aa==
CJt-=-~I!'.~..==->>i.
;:j;:j;:j:l~=i5;sgg.
==,~ == ==;;-::::::1 ==
M
II
Ii! ~a;_
.:: .';;.-;:-;:
_'=8'11=:12
i e..::.......-:.....
&....-0.&0...
.s =-- ..
'I o_u~ 'la_ =!! ;II:
--- u.!J=.!J':.-......
-.= It =. :'.'.:1. ,! '1,'1
...11:...........
==.~u..==._..
=M_=--..Mr... ~
-=:1. a,l.I =- .B:::::I,:::::I~::I
=:IE ~ .'== =-fa-;:, === ~ ,:S
~.
.=
II' II
till _a
1- is " =..
i-I :.'I:IIt!-S;;
.:-==1I.j! I:I~;
-1:11II:=51:1:I1'-58._'1:
.~=iiI=a:ao=.::':
...N....IQ.r-..CD~::=
Appendix D
Threshold Questionnaires and
Supplemental Data
THRF~HOID
1. The GMOC shall be provided with an annual fiscal impact report which provides an
evaluation of the impacts of growth on the city, both in terms of operations and capital
improvements. This report should evaluate actual growth over the previous 12-month
period, as well as projected growth over the next 12-18 month period, and 5-7 year period.
2. The GMOC shall be provided with an annual development impact fee report, which
provides an analysis of development impact fees collected and expended over the
previous 12-month period.
QIJF~TION~
1. Please attach a fiscal impact report which provides an evaluation of the impacts of
growth on the City in terms of impact on:
. operations
. capital improvements
Please evaluate these two factors of the last fiscal year, the current fiscal year, and
what is anticipated in five years time. Explictedly indicate how the City's fiscal
health is being impacted by addressing the needs of growth. Please use the Growth
Management 5 Year Residential Forecast in your analysis.
Please see attachment A
Page 1
Administration " "
Civic Center Ex ansion " "
Police Facili " "
Cor . Yard Relocation " "
Libraries " "
Fire Su ression S s. .. ..
Geo ra hie Info. S s. "
Com uter S stems " "
Telecommunications " "
Records M mnt. S s. " "
Recreation Facilities " ..
PUBLIC FACILITIES TOTAL
Please provide bI:itd narrative responses to the fof/owing:
3. In relation to the last column on the Table above, were any DIF updates completed
or are any DIF updates in progress during the reporting period? If yes, please
explain.
Yes x
No_
a. If any DIFs are currently being updated, where are they in the process?
b. How long it's been since each DIF has been updated?
c. Is there a need to update any of the DIFs?
d. Who is responsible for the update of each DIF?
Explain:
Page 2
IDlE
On October 1s', 2003, Staff completed an update of the Transportation DIF, increasing
the fee from $8,180 to $8,290 per single-family dwelling unit. This represents the first
automatic update since the adoption of the annual update methodology in August 2002.
The next automatic update is scheduled for October 1s', 2004. Using the adopted cost
index, staff anticipates an increase from $8,290 to $8,825 per single-family dwelling unit.
Staff is also in the early stages of a comprehensive update to the Transportation DIF
program that will be brought before Council after the adoption of the General Plan
Update, which is anticipated to be completed by April 2005. The Engineering Division of
the General Services Department will complete this update.
SR1?5
Council approved an ordinance suspending (tolling) the Interim Pre-SR 125 DIF in April,
2004. This DIF was established to ensure that sufficient funds would be available to
construct a contingent north-south transportation corridor, should the SR 125 freeway
not be constructed by Caltrans, or not be constructed in time to serve impending
development. With financing now secured and construction of the freeway underway,
staff recommended that Council toll the fee.
Tr:'!ffir. Sign:'!1
In October 2003, the Traffic Signal Participation fee was raised slightly (32~ per average
daily vehicle trip) per the adopted automatic annual fee update. The current fee is
$24.04 per trip, and staff anticipates another automatic annual increase in October of
2004. Staff is in the early stages of a comprehensive update of the Traffic Signal
Participation fee program that will be brought to Council after the adoption of the
General Plan Update, which is anticipated to be completed by April 2005. The
Engineering Division of the General Services Department is responsible for this update.
PlJmpp.d Sp.wp.r [)IF
Staff is in the process of repealing the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Pumped Flows
DIF. This DIF was originally established to fund improvements to the Telegraph Canyon
sewer main due to out-of-basin flows. In October 2002, the fee was amended to include
Poggi Canyon out-of-basin flows, and renamed the Pumped Sewer DIF. Now that the
Salt Creek sewer main has been constructed, there is no need to pump flows out of the
Salt Creek basin. Staff anticipates recommending the repeal of this DIF fee in
November of 2004. The Engineering Division of the General Services Department is
working on this ordinance amendment.
S:'!lt Crp.p.k Sp.wp.r R:'!"in DIF
Staff anticipates presenting Council with an update of the Salt Creek Sewer Basin DIF in
August of 2004, raising the fee from $284 to $1,330 per EDU. This increase of
$1,046.00 is the result of many factors, including: changes in planned use intensities,
environmental and right-of-way constraints, increased depth of sewer trunk line,
increased staff and consultant costs, and intensity of development activity. The
Engineering Division of the General Services Department is responsible for completing
this update.
Pp.dp'"tri:'!n Bridgp. [) I F
Neither the Otay Ranch Village 1, 5, & 6 Pedestrian Bridge DIF nor the Otay Ranch
Village 11 Pedestrian Bridge DIF was updated this fiscal year. During the course of the
next fiscal year, staff anticipates updating the Village 1, 5, & 6 DIF to include Village 2
as well. Staff also anticipates updating the Village 11 Pedestrian Bridge DI.F to account
for both increased project scope and construction costs.
Page 3
P"rk AcqlJisitinn & [)p.vp.lnpmp.nt [)IF
In January of 2004, Council approved a modification of the PAD ordinance allowing the
collection of this fee on permits not subject to mapping. This allows the City to improve
collection of fees from infill and redevelopment projects, both of which generate
increased park demand. Also, as a result of greatly increased land values, staff
anticipates updating this fee from $7,869.00 to $8,771.00 per single-family residence in
July of 2004. Staff also plans to recommend the modification of the PAD ordinance to
allow for an automatic annual indexed fee update, similar to the methodology adopted
for the Traffic Signal Fee and Transportation DIF. The Engineering Division of the
General Services Department is responsible for completing the update.
Public F"cility [)IF
The Public Facility Development Impact Fee has not been updated since the
comprehensive update of November 2002. Staff anticipates completion of the next
update by July of 2005. The Office of Budget and Analysis will be responsible for
completing this update.
Othp.r Sp.wer [)IF
There are no current plans to update the Telegraph Canyon Drainage fee, the
Telegraph Canyon Gravity Sewer fee, or the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin fee. The
Engineering Division of the General Services Department is responsible for updating
these DIF's.
4. What is the status and disposition of the Interim Pre-SR-125 DIF and the funds
that were collected and how does this conform with State law?
As mentioned earlier, an ordinance suspending (tolling) the Interim Pre-SR 125 DIF was
approved by City Council in April of 2004. Tolling the fee provides City Council greater
flexibility to make decisions based on any changed .conditions and development growth
patterns. Should a future need arise to reinstate the fee, Council will have retained the
discretion to do so in accordance with the requirements of State law. In addition to tolling
the fee, the Council also amended the DIF ordinance to allow the expenditure of DIF fees
collected on transportation capacity enhancement programs.
Staff is conducting an analysis to review the cost and benefit of a variety of options to
appropriate the funds collected. Disposition of these funds will be made with City
Council approval and in conformance with applicable State law.
5. The City is anticipating the addition of up to 12,750 additional homes and 38,000
new residents in the next 5 years, are there any changes in City's fiscal policy in
regard to development that should be considered to best accommodate these
additional units and population?
Yes_No x
Please explain, why or why not:
The City's fiscal policy with regard to new development is that new development shall pay
for itself. This policy, of which regular impact fee updates are a part, contains ample
flexibility to allow the City to adjust the amount of revenue from development impact fees
to keep pace with growth impacts on city facilities. Careful cash flow modeling of impact
Page 4
fees ensures that sufficient funds will exist to meet future needs despite unanticipated
growth fluctuations.
FOI lOW-liP ON PRFVIOIIS YFAR'S GMOC RFCOMMFNnATIONS
6. Has a standard procedure been adopted for an annual review of Development
Impact Fees (DIFs)
Yes
No
Pending _X_
Explain:
The GMOC has recommended that DIF updates be prepared annually, with the final report
available in January of each year. DIF updates are now scheduled for October-January of
each year. In many cases, this "annual update" will be accomplished through an
automatic cost increase based upon the ENR Construction Cost Index rather than a full
analysis. To date, annual automatic cost increase methodologies have been adopted for
the Transportation DIF, and the Traffic Signal Participation Fee. Staff anticipates
recommending such a methodology for the Park Acquisition and Development Fee during
the next update.
MANAGFMFNT
7. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
Explain:
8. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes_ No...x...-
Explain:
9. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Page 5
Yes
NoJL
Explain:
Prepared by:
Evelyn Ong, Senior Accountant
Tiffany Allen, Senior Management Analyst
Date:
11/30/04
Page 6
I:
03-/Q-0) 7;,1[
~~~
~
~~~~
--~- -
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DATE:
March 3, 2005
TO:
Growth Management Oversight Commission
VIA:
David D. Rowlands, Jr., City Manager
FROM:
Maria Kachadoorian, Director of Finance
SUBJECT:
Fiscal Overview
The purpose of this report is to update the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC)
regarding the economic and fiscal well being of the City of Chula Vista. It also provides an
evaluation of the impacts of growth on the City over the previous 12 months (7/1/2003 to
6/30/2004) and projected impacts over the next 12-18 month period, and 5-7 years.
Fiscal Overview
In spite of continued State revenue "take aways" and recent economic down turns, the City of
Chula Vista has maintained healthy reserve levels. This is primarily due to increased revenues in
sales taxes, property taxes, franchise fees related to growth in the eastern sections of the City
over the past few years.
The following graph displays the year-end reserve balances compared to prior years. Over the
past fiscal year, the City's reserves decreased from 20.5% to 14.5% of the General Fund budget
due to Council mid-year appropriations related to the new Fire Dispatch Center and related
staffing, outfitting of two Combination Pumpers and the staffing of a second ladder truck. Other
uses of reserves were approved for
electricity and gas franchise consultants to
study the Municipal Energy Utility,
increased worker's compensation costs,
consulting services for University Strategy
and other items. Also impacting the City's
reserves was the State of California's
decision to underfund or keep $3.5 million
of the City's Motor Vehicle License Fee
revenue during fiscal year 2004.
Fortunately, due to healthy reserves and
continued growth in revenues the City has
been able to mitigate the impacts of the
State fiscal crisis.
General Fund Reserves
as of June 30
30.00%
25.00%
20.00% ./
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
GMOC
2004 Annual Fiscal Overview
March 4, 2005
Page 3 of 3
services to the development. All major proposed development projects are required to have a
fiscal impact as part of the review process.
Considering the significant increase in housing prices in the San Diego region over the past 5
years, the City's property tax revenues have increased at very healthy rates. The property tax
generated is therefore greater than the conservative estimates used in the fiscal impact analysis
performed and presented in the PFFP.
Also included in the PFFP are assumptions related to the sale or turnover of homes, which result
in reassessments by the County Assessor and in turn leads to increased property tax revenues.
A survey conducted in December 2003 indicated that 67% of new homeowners in the Rolling Hills
Ranch and Otay Ranch were Chula Vista residents. Therefore, the new developments in the
eastern section of the City appear to have contributed to a higher tax base Citywide. Tax
revenues generated by new development will continue to fully pay for the expanded City services
needed to serve new residents.
Forecast (12 - 18 months and 5 - 7 years)
Based on current fiscal projections, operational expenses, including debt service, is anticipated to
increase by approximately 6% per year over the nex1 5 years. Major discretionary revenues such
as sales taxes, property taxes, franchise and TOT revenues are projected to increase by 9% over
the same period primarily due to continued growth in the eastern section of the City and the
anticipated opening of several commercial centers particularly the Otay Ranch Town Center,
which is expected to rival Fashion Valley in size will offer upscale shopping options for all
South bay residents and cross border shoppers. These base revenues support City services such
as police, fire, libraries and recreation. Based on the forecasted new residential units anticipated
over the same period the revenues generated should be sufficient to fund services for the new
residents.
c
"
"
c
a.
;:
a.
m
"
a.
:i"
'"
ro
"
ii)
"
"
_CD
o
'"
(;;
o
o
...
m-i~:J-I-I
~ OJ iii" CD iU g
C1-100(J)(D~@CD~'TI
=oiU CD g;C::J -=fn"C 'TI
:J !2:m"C 9:~ m.....o m
"'U (1) .., "2. E: I :J m;:a. (D
a (i'~mCi'CD 5"~ ~ a0
a;" i' '< x f/) en c::J 0' (')
a.03~Qo" cnCD:JQ.
ms.~~(f) :;:uo.(J)(D
XI-met) CD iis:1.
"'C N I (I) < CD< - CD
CD 0 (') -. CD a.
5..00) g ~ (J)
~~m en m ~
CD CD fn CD
(II 2' CD
" ."
9: (i;'
" "
"'!!!.
()CJ>
O~
"U
'"
CD
ex,
CD
'"
'"
0>
'"
~
"'-
CD ~
...'"
c.r.N
CD 0>
CD~
~~
0> ~
'" "
"'''
NW
0'"
~9
'"
o
'"
ex,
0>
o
'"
ex,
0>
CD
'"
o
'"
ro
CD
'"
:i"
"
:i"
'"
ro
III
ii)
"
"
_CD
o
"
~
o
'"
'"
CD
ex,
'"
-'"
'"
"
."
-<
o
'"
-
o
...
."
C
Z
o
ro
:.-
s::
z
()
m
Z
."
o
:u
s:
~
6
z
-<
:u
:.-
z
CJ>."
"Uc
Oz
~o
:.-'"
-<CD
6~
z
g
."
~
~~~Q)_r>>
WOtom~
~~~fdo
"C"C"C"C"C
CD CD (D CD CD
...,..,..,.., ..,
:r83~.~.
g.3~~cE
2l.37"COCD
:::!. CD or __
~ a. ~. 3 3
CQ!:1!.-<==
OCCCD'<'<
~a.g~Z
~~<'E.E.
mQ)fi~~
Q ::J CD CD
m.....:J:J
a.--
~ ~ ~
~~~
",,,,,
c"''''
" c C
;:;.:::J:J
;:;:;::;.:
ilia.
"'CD
~m
:T"
CD:T
a.[
3'
CD
a.
a.
CD
"
I/)
g
:.-
3
o
c
3-
o
-
9'
CD
it
!'!
o
CD
I/)
"
~
~
15"
"
o
-
."
CD
!'!
-<
o
=>
"
III
"
@
9'
CD
8
"
~
2
>1-
15"
"
o
-
-
iiJ
3!
"
III
"
a.
-
iiJ
"
I/)
"
o
;+
!!J.
15"
"
3"
"
a
<
CD
3
CD
"
"'
5"
I/)
c
"
"
o
;+
o
-
2'
E
CiI
a.
CD
<
CD
i5"
"
3
CD
il
'"
-I
~
Z
en
,,"tI
-<0
0;U
"'-I
-)>
0-1
""'-
;uO
mz
<C
mm
Z<
C:m~
mr-:r:
enom
)>"t!O
zs::;:;
Cmm
mZ
)(-1
"tis::
m"tl
z)>
Co
-1-1
c:"
;Um
mm
en en
-=t
51
.::!!
:.-
-<
~
()
:r:
s:
m
z
-<
ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NW~~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~
(J)O'1......0~O......U)CD""-Jc.n,J:I.
~
o
~
r
o
'U
~
"U
m
Z
o
=i
C
;u
m
~
~~"'~~~;uo;:;:o~co"Ucoco
m<i5'gnJ Q) OJ Q)....11) 11)..:<....001>> COO')
~~w~~~3~~S.3~~3~Q"'?
~~-Iooo"'CrC/)C/)"'Ca: .
o~~C/)C/)o~I-~~mo~~g
~aQ)-.<C.o-.mom~~.mC/)~-
2Lm;;<g::J E: ft(J) c: ~"c.ScE c::CD ~
0,=0 Il) 1l):J :2.;::U9!.coS I m "'j""~~
:J ~s:==C;;:J 0 ro-;C mm~CD g.
"'tIO'g; ~ BrCC OJ ~~OI:~U'I,tu
iii"=r....o-.D)_Iii_-OC.::Im CD-C)::]
:Jm o':J:E-IarmC/):::::J::JQCC
::J_"11) ::::!.TT:J m-'C""::::J ~(J) [U'lm
::J (J) ::J s::: s::: (I) a. .., n . -'. '."
_cc . {J):::J::T c.. en 0 (")
(QQ)-O~[ :t:JrQ)~o:::J?"
." ~.., (J) S' i' :J .... C ...
aCDOQQ -cc-CCO::r cE
cc ""O~ ...,..., IU - CD CD t:D (I) CD
':"!Q)QJClO :::Jmo -'0:
w~3""'" Q.tu 0).....
3[ a~'"
~ ~ I ~
~ 0- ~.
o 0
;:>.1>>
::;::J
CT'<
o 0
C ::J
::J
a.
3"
"
<
'"
'"
co
...
'"
co
co
'"
co_"""
m'Q)......
co '" 0
'" co '"
~ "'~
'" ...~
.w.w ()T(J)
""-J..J:Io.U'1u,to
CD(J)(J)c.nW
c.nWQ)tD01
'" '"
'" -'"
u, ......~
1\.)0).....,.0')
OtDWO
CD W.(.o)
ococo
o~:.....
c.n~01~
c.n 0 c.n.......
~~~~$
:i:"'o'[iirQ
S2 <::::J <D
c.n1lJ :::J
5"~~3CD
m~IJJ<~
;::I CD ~"2.
~ ~~ ~ ~
c5 :J < !!!.. :J
CD;USOC
o.Q,-<"'C
3-b~~g-
"'C '::T -. s: -
a =cS CD CD
< a.
CD
3 Q
CD ~
a.
'" '"
"""'"
c.nc.n-""'"
......'"
~ '" co
'"
_co
"'~
"''''
'" '"
~
(.oJ w. 0...... ~UJ~N
N ......w...... ......mww mwmo......
O(DCD.....,.(J)(J)OOc.n~CDWc.n.....,.CDOOOCDN(D
p~~~~~~999~~~~~woo~9m
ooo~oooooo~~~o~~o~~o~
ooooooooooo~oo~~o~~o~
ooooooooooow~o~oo~oo~
'"
o
o
"0
o
o
0'"
00
co'
00
cf!.cf!.
~ ~ ~
owwooooooo
o~!:>>ooooo~o
ci:>>~cccccoc
o~oooooooo
cf!.cf!.'#.r/.cf!.cf!.cf!.cf!.cf!.cf!.
~
~o~o
~omo
~ci::oc
~00)0
cf!.cf!.cf!.cf!.
o
"""
Ci
~
i;J",
00
00
"''''
:: ~
o~o
~ ~ ~
i;Ji;Ji;J
000
000
"'~~
o 0
""" """
o 0
~ ~
N~N
000
000
"'...'"
00
"""'"
ON
~"""
NN
00
00
'" '"
000
"""""""""
000
~ ~ ~
N::a:::a:
ococo
ococo
~coco
0..-.....0 0
~oo~ ""'oJ
~~~~ ~
---- -
~..-..-..-............
o~~~~~
O<D~~~~
~~cn~~~
o ~
"""~
~~
i;Ji;J
00
00
o~
'"
w
'"
co
"0
o
o
'"
:..,
'"
~
"0
o
o
oo~o
oooo~
cccc~
oooo~
r/.r/.cf!.cf!.cf!.
"U
;U
o
'-
m
o
~
o
m
~
o
;0
'U
~
5
z
m
X
"U"U
m;u
zo
0'-
-m
~o
C~
;U
m
~
~
o
m[
0:0-
-"
"'"
we
0"
0::J.
...!!I-
15"
::J
:0-
"
"
a ~
~c
~m
15"
::J
'"
."
5 ?f!.
0.0
~-
CT"U
'< a
-I (D"
o!).
'ii
~
g.:J"
ma:
g.~
m'<
a.
."
-<
Q
W
Ci
...
o
'ij
m
><
"'0
m
z
c
=i
c:
;0
m
In
-I
~
Z
C/I
.,,"'11
-<0
c;;U
W-I
->
c-l
....-
;;u0
mz
jiic
zm~
c:<o
mmI
C/lbeJ
>"'IIC
z s: r
Cmm
mZ:....
)(-1
"'lis:
m"'ll
z>
!2o
-1-1
c:."
;;um
mm
C/IC/I
':::j
!2
."
-
~
I
;:
m
z
~
OJ
C
::J
III
c:
e,
CD
a.
m
::J
a.
:'r
ee
OJ
OJ
OJ
::J
o
_m
o
C)
-
'"
o
-
o
....
m
oo(J)X
_c:"O
=u :J'" -0 CD
m "0 ::J
""0..,==0-
""mCD;::;:
.2. X (fJ ~
CD -0 Q) CD
o CD :J (f)
..... :J a. ..
m"'en
X m m
"O"';:!
1;-
m
'"
...
~
_CJ1
--J
o
00
Co
--J
CD
~
-....
"'~
"'....
:""-01_
00 CJ1
~8~
::J !2
fir"T1
CD "T1
'" m
-m
m'"
OJ 0
3 0
[~
o
CD
a.
.!"
--J
"'....
00
o,-~
00'"
0'"
OJ
m
cc
5"
::J
S"
ee
OJ
OJ
OJ
::J
o
_m
o
--J
-
o
~
-
o
'"
...
~
....
-....
'"
CJ1
'"
'"
CD
"T1
-<
o
w
-
o
....
"T1
C
Z
o
OJ
)>
~
Z
()
m
z
"T1
o
;C
s:
)>
-i
o
Z
en"T1
;UC
~z
~O
O~
'il'"
~'"
C) 0
"b.o,~O>OJ
oo<oCJ1f".J
00 I'\,) (J) 0
"'C"'O"'C "'C ""C
CD CD CD CD CD
..., .., .., .., ..,
::j" 8 3 ~. ~.
g 3 ~c.5 c.5
~3J::mm
~CDQ)--
w""'3mQ)
- Q" -- 3 3
~~-<~~
~~~CDm
CIIOc:..c..c
m~<'EE
Qm~~~
CDQ~CDm
CD .....::::J :J
0.--
~~~
~~~
ee ::J ::J
c:eeee
::J c: c:
;::;::2. ::!.
- -
OJ a.
~m
OJ or
o 0
::r::r
m m
0.0.
)>
3
o
c:
~
o
-
5'
m
it
~
o
m
'"
o
~
-6"
-
0"
::J
o
-
"T1
m
~
...
"T1
Q
"'0
a
<
Ci
S"
ee
-
~
OJ
::J
'"
"0
o
;:j.
~
15"
::J
or
~
..
CD"
'"
S"
5'
m
m
OJ
'"
CD
~
::J
-i
m
~
~
ff
~
CD"
'"
en
;U
~
'"
CJ1
o
o
::J
'"
-
~
c:
o
-
0"
::J
00"
a.
m
OJ
'<
m
a.
:;;
-nZ
-(-I
m
8;0
oS:
""'C/I
;0;0
m....
<N
mCII
zc
c:men
m<~
C/lmm
>ro
zOc
c"'tJr
mS:~
xm
"'tJz
m::
zs:
c"'tJ
->
-10
~-I
m-n
C/lm
m
~
-i
)>
()
:I:
s:
m
z
-i
OJ
'ltOJ,-
"'", 0
0", OJ
Co:J
"'<~
.J,.CDO
<oo.~
01C"D]
0'< :J
:J 0 '"
00'"
CD c: 0
" :J ~
~ Q. a
- cr
_m CD:J
~~g
DE"
~~
0"
:J
'"
i:.o
o
p
o
o
o
~
:".
.j>.
*'
.
'ltOJ,-
"'", 0
0", OJ
~a::J
"'~o
oo.~
we-OJ
0'< :J
:J 0 '"
<-0'"
c: c: 0
:J:J ~
CD 0 a
....10.=,,-
_CD CD :::::J
"''''0
02.-
as."
....10. cr
:J
-""
o
o
p
o
o
o
'"
Co
~
ex>
~
o
o
CD
'"
"
:::!"
~
0"
:J
o
-
,-
o
OJ
:J
,-
o
OJ
:J
)>
3
o
c:
~
:;-
CD
iD
~
;:c
OJ
CD
r-
o
)>
z
en
~
o
~
,-
o
"1J
m
X
"1J
m
z
o
=i
c:
;:c
m
en
...
0>
'"
~
o
.j>.
en en
~~
s:s:
'" '"
.j>..j>.
ex> 0>
en:;-
;:CCD
N::!.
",3
-"en
D3 13
:J ~
g.",
-" '"
'" -"
CD OJ
;:c"
CD =
s"~
~ "1J
:J"
0>
'"
"''''
.j>.0>
'" '"
"'.j>.
0>'"
'" 0
0'0
00
00
~ ~
00
00
00
00
?ft.'#.
00
"" ""
00
~ ~
- -
"''''
00
00
~o
"1J
;:c
o
<-
m
o
~
o
m
en
o
;:c
"1J
~
(5
Z
m
X
"1J-"
m-<
zo
o~
-0
~.j>.
c:
;:c
m
~
o
~ ![
o )>
-",
0>'"
wa
0",
0:::1.
.j>.!!!.
0"
:J
)>
",
",
a -"
So
~ c:
9lm
0"
:J
'"
.!i'#.
~o
0-
o~
OJ .2.
_" CD
:J "
OJ ~
<0-"
CD c:
oi5.
-CD
-"0.
en
" -
:J":J
CD ;::;.:
c. Dr
c: =
(i)'<
0.
."
-(
Q
c.>
-
Q
01>0
Q
"1J
m
><
"1J
m
z
c
=t
c:
;:0
m
en
."z
-(-I
m
0;:0
to>
oS:
oI>ocn
;:0;:0
m....
<N
men
Z C en
c:mo
m <:r:
cnmm
)>1"'"0
Z 0:=
C "m
mifi~
><z
"-I
m_
zs:
c"
-)>
-10
!ij-l
m."
cnm
m
)>
~
o
:r:
s:
m
Z
~
CD
C
'"
'"
c:
C.
~
c.
m
'"
c.
S'
ce
tD
'"
ii>
'"
o
_CD
o
'"
-
W
o
25
...
m-'i1~
x 3.. CD Q)
~~g-3!
:J ctI .., 0
o.gL2!.cn
e: m G)cC'
()-Ioro~Q)ffi
--'-cn:J:J-
"'U D) ::::r.. CD .....""Tl
""0 ffi ~ a. CD
actm (1)
........., X en
CD 0""" 0
g. c CD 0
m-:J =
X '" CD
""" CD 0
CD CJ) CD
'" c.
p.
<I>
N
m
CD
'"
:...
W
o
--J~~
CO"'--J
"''''co
wt..:>'N
~ W CD
CJ)..::;~
~
N-'"
W--JCO
OW CD
-0') c.n 0
N '" '"
--JO~
tD
CD
ce
S'
'"
S'
ce
tD
'"
ii>
'"
o
_CD
o
--J
25
~
25
W
~
-!
:;0
>.."
.."
..".."C
c(5Z
Z 0
OenN
-N
GJ",
Z
>
r
co
W
j'J
W
N
co
"
-<
o
'"
-
o
.j>.
"
C
Z
o
!II
)>
~
Z
o
m
z
"
o
;U
;s::
~
o
z
>
3
o
c:
~
o
-
5'
CD
0;-
!'!
<I>
o
CD
'"
Q
'C'
~
o'
'"
o
-
.."
CD
!'!
N
,...
o
...
"""
CD
~
~
~
'C.
.."
o
~
o
~
",-
~
~
'"
=I:
1r
'"
cO'
'"
!!!.
'"
CD
CD
C.
'"
~
CD
'"
c:
""
S'
ce
-
a
3
S'
o
~
CD
'"
'"
CD
C.
~
~
'"
31
o
<
o
~
3
CD
o
'"
c:
'"
CD
C.
0"
'<
'"
CD
::;:
C.
CD
<
CD
o
"""
3
CD
;:t
-I
,,~
-<."
0'"
~o
~en
;0(;)
mZ
<)>
ml""
~ 0 en
m mo
en<I
mm
)>1""0
Z Oc
o " hi
mS:w
xm
"Z
m-l
Z-
oS:
-"
-I)>
co
;0-1
m."
enm
m
en
~
o
I
s:
m
Z
-!
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WWWWWWWWWWW~~NNNN
~~~~OOOOOOOIDIDID~mW
~~~OIDOOm~~N~~~~IDW~
~
o
~
r
o
1J
m
><
1J
m
Z
o
=i
c
;U
m
en
enen-menenenenen~en~~en~~~
~'~'~3~'6'~.~'~'@~'@@~'~@@
~~M~ffiffi~ffiffi~ffi~~ffi~33
--m~-T---O-OO-~OO
~~~(IIco~~~en~enen~~enen
OOWB'g~E~ooo~'0~'6'oo06'6
~~~~~crw~m~m~~m~~~
--_~m~=~=m=mm=o~~
~ 21._. 3 ..., a. 0 w 0 OJ T W - - m -
CDCD~!:!":m!:!":"1Jt:!':5'O!:!":::::J;;U'J
5'O~CD~wO!:!":OmOooCDO__~
~703_CD::::JO::::Jo::::Jm_m7~~~
g!"'U<-o::To ::::J131 om::JOCD
::T~3g>~~<~mQ~~L~g3
~~CD::::J~~~moo;~CD::::J~~::::JC
< ::::J~~U'J ~.- ~a.~"'U=~"O
CD~~m "1JO"1J~moCDWC_~
~~w-OQwo-~m""",~~~oo3 m
-.....::::J...,"""I 0 CD mm-' a.
~~-mmm3r3-oo0ooffi CD
oCD:r:U;t5:Jmgm ;o"'eD30ro
<no. _rocn""QJ"" a. CDe.
cno'-o ~.:::tId::::C:;:: m-
(J)I>>W'Od7;)>=a.oa. i5" :J::::tJC/)
_-NOCCD:J -mc;"
()::::J:J~ en ~ "U,<CD
CD a. c: ::r a ~
~- CD CD <.c
~ :r: ~ OJ
. 3
Z
II>
3
CD
en
cC.
~
'"
."
'" ~ w
ex> ~~'" ~ '" '" a ~ a C>>NC11--UJ
-"" _~_I\.)_-.....I_-lt._J::,...w _0> '" '" P) .J::,.. _01 _0 _CD
W "" ())OJ::,..-.JtO W 0> ~ mOQ)J::,..Q)l\J
~ CJ'ICONO-...JNm-.....lmN OCXICO<DNtD....Io.
0> O>NOW--W<D-.J<OW J::,..(X)(DOJcoom
....10.....10.....10.....10. ....Io.....Io.....Io.....Io.....Io.__(]1 ....10.....10.....10.-..1
O>-.JCOOCDO>NW-.Jmommwomm
PPPPPP9999~9~0~~m
OOOOOOOOOO~O~O~OID
0000000000~00000~
0000000000~00000~
1J
;U
o
'-
m
o
~
o
m
en
o
~
1J
~
(5
Z
m
><
1JTI
m-<
Zo
Ow
--
~o
c""
;U
m
~
o
m gr
0)>
-"0
0>"0
- ~
wo
0"0
c=:!.
""s.
o.
~
"T1
-<
CI
Co>
-
CI
....
Q
"'II
m
><
"'II
m
Z
C
::j
c:
;:II
m
III
-I
"'II~
-<"'II
0"'11
~O
gCII
;DC)
mz
<>
mr
ZOen
Cmo
m<I
CIImm
>ro
ZO:;;;
O"tJm
m s: w
><m~
"tJZ
m-l
Z-
oS:
_"tJ
-I>
Co
;D-I
m"'ll
CIIm
m
CII
)>
"0
"0 TI
a c:
"0 ~
~ c:
'" am
a 01
p .!" o.
a a ~
a a '"
00 00 00000000 a 00 00
C" >Ii. )>
'< c ~
~o
~ -
~1J 0
cr .2. I
en CD ~
-. 0 m
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ Z
a a CD '" a a a a a a 00>01 a "" a ex> ~ TI ~
a a ~ 01 ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ 00"" ~ '" ~ ~ !!!.c:
0 0 a 0 a a 0 a a a OWO 0000 oR )>
a a a a a a a a a a o~o O~oN -(II
* * * * * * * * * * ?f:.?f:.?f:. ?f:.?f!.?f!.?f!. TIe.
a a 00 a a a a a a ~ a 00 a en
'" '" "'''' '" '" '" '" :::' '" a ~ "'''' '" 0
0 - -- - - - 0 - - - - - 0
a 00 a a'" a '" a a a a 00 ::T~
~~ ~~ ~ ~o ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CD ;:;.:
NN NN i\3 i\30 i\3 a NNN - - - - - e. -.
'" '" ~ "'~ c ~
00 00 a oW a w 00 a a a CD OCD iD'<
00 00 a a a 000 a a CD a CD
"""" ww w w '" W"'~ ~ "" CD "'CD e.
00
~::f
w~
~CD
--<
o
:;;
,
Q
"
~
"
m
z
o
=<
C
;II
m
en
<D<D
.......
en--<
-"
3m
.,,'Q
-OJ
~-g.
'-t()
" OJ
c=;~
'< 0
~:J
,,()
o :T
12 OJ
_. :J
:J
!!!.
3"
u
$.
'"
..
N
.w
~
~
N
NO
NOO
<DCD
N<D
w
"'
....~
"'<D
00
ON
00)
00
~
....0
"'0
0,0
0)0
?ft.*-
~~
<D<D
<D<D
....w
"
;II
o
'-
m
()
--<
o
m
en
()
~
"
--<
(5
z
m
X
"."
m-<
Zo
ow
-0
c!...
;II
m
--<
o
~~
o )>
-u
o)u
(;30
au
c:=!,
...e.
o.
:J
)>
u
"!<."
o c:
u-
~ c:
![ro
o.
:J
'"
;#.
Q
.,."
a
om"
,,!4
."
c:
:J
C.
"
C.
en
g."
(0;+
~~
(j)'<
c.
."
-<
o
'"
Ci
....
Q
"
m
X
"
m
z
o
:::j
c:
;c
m
~
C
:J
OJ
c:
C.
~
c.
m
:J
c.
".
co
'"
,.
or
:J
o
."
~
~
m---<
x;3.()
u"
()OCDroO
=U~5.sa.~.
-u-;:::;':m::J
~'~~3~
!4@ ~;r
m "
x " '"
u,. ()
"'< 0
5.3 =
e:~ 51
en ::: (Dc.
'" 0
o
w
;II
"
2'
:J
C.
".
co
()
o
"
..
'"
"0
'"
'"
~
....
~
1\.)_ VJ f\.J
CW(.,J <.J1Q
~"""N -1\.)(0
cooo ......ew
......~ ......w
'"
"
co
".
:J
".
co
'"
OJ
or
:J
o
."
o
....
~
o
w
...
"'
N
.'"
CD
....
'"
--<
()
0."
$!C
_Z
zO
~~
mN
g
."
."
-<
o
w
~
."
C
Z
o
'"
)>
!I:
z
()
m
z
."
o
;II
0::
)>
--<
(5
;z
)>
3
o
c:
,.
g,
5'
"
it
CD
..
."
",Q
~ 8
:f ~
" -
'" ~
'" c:
()g
" 0
:J :J
coo
~ -
,.--<
:J "
c.(j)
O'CQ
~ OJ
OJU
u:T
o()
"OJ
cr~
:J 0
g,:J
_0
:T:T
" OJ
g.~
OJ !!!.
:J .,.
:J "
!!!.~
~ g:
'" :J
;;"
-OJ
Tm
fgo
"',
. OJ
C.
"
W
,.
:J
C.
5'
"
m
OJ
~
or
,..
"
....
'"
....
<D
u
!J1
OJ
o
ro
o
(1)
'"
Q
-g:
o.
:J
g,
."
(1)
CD
....
m
r-
m
"
.,,~
-<-a
f::t
00
....>
;cZ
m-<
<0
mz
zOen
C:;c()
rn~I
>zg]
z>c
0",
mm
~o'"
-a."
m~
z....
00
:::jo
c:;c
;c>
m-
(/IS;
"
m
s:!
."
-
~
()
I
0::
m
z
--<
)>
"C-c-c-c"'C
CD ro ro ro ro
...,...,...,..., ...,
~8~s's'
c 3 ;::::;:CCtC
en3:I;:CD"CD"
S:(DQ)__
~o3Q)Q)
CC Qr~ 2, 2,
a~(1)-<-<
~a.g~~
Q) ~ :C:' 5. 5.
QQ)~Qj~
coQ~roCD"
co-a a
~n-
-:n!1S=~~
_.:icc:J:J
:iccCCtC
~ro~55
(Dc ;:;:;:::;:
c: =>
:;) ;:::;:
;:;:c-
""
" '"
'" '"
'" a.
s-
~~ ~
mm
"''''
QQ
'" '"
a. a.
cc-->.",,,,
m~~
",mm
C:..>c"c"
"'00
i:>>-CXI -->.-->.
OO(.r.)CXICXI
ooc.noo
ww
O101(.r.).{:::o..{:::o.
""-J""-Jooo
"''''000
"''''
i:>> ~CXI I'V
......~
oow
.
"a.
",,<1>
~;-
::r0
'" ::r
a.~
"''''
~~
en"""."
'" 0 c:
:!; GJ =>
'" ~ a.
~ "
o,,;_~
:;;q- -->.
'"
~"'tI"T1
:E c 5
'" 3 a.
~u '"
0"'...
:;;a..(.r.)
'"
",-c."
" 0 c:
~- en =>
=> <1> a.
o:!; '"
:;;~~
'"
",en."
" 0 c:
~. en :J
"<1>a.
o:!;'"
:;;~~
)>
3
o
c:
3-
Q.
9'
'"
CD'
!1!
-cen
t8~
ce.(')
Om
" '"
=> "
~en
=> ~
en <1>
~ ~
~ g'
IJJ ~.
" =>
~. 0
=> 'ii
0--
~
"'tIa~
~3::'
:!;" ::r
~"C~
.....ao
Ou =>
s:~g:.
'" <1> c:
"a.~
g ro 0'
=>'" =>
g. ~f S-
o<! ~ ~
o-~
.....25
m=>"
" " '"
5!1.enco
~~~
~ ~ ...,
:!; ::r
'" 9'
~'"
o -c
-0
7"'"
"''''
0--
"'0
~~
=> 0
"'=>
oen
-<~
-fJ '"
-- ~
0",
"
'"
::r
o
'"
'"
Q
-e-
"'tI-ds-
c: '" =>
3 CD 0
u'" -
co W "T1
a. -c '"
en:r~
~ 0
'" "
~~
gg
:-':IG)
OJ
<
~
en
~
~
o
~
."."
:E Q Q
so89'
S' :J co
s:g:.~
co~"E
"'C Q: :J
c: 0 '"
3 :J o'
U 0"
~ ::::0
" -
g'g2"
:E a: :J
,,"'''
,,'" '"
'" => '"
?' ~ ~
'" ~
~ ~.
"9'
o<! S'
9'
'"
"
"
'"
5-
Q
-
,
C'
'" c:
<1> -
< "
--<
@~
o.g
a.'"
'" "-
~ gf
0-
u
3
'"
3-
'"
8"
u
a
<
c:
'"
'"
<1>
~
en"'tl"'tl----l
Q) 0 c CD
;::::;:cc 3 CD"
(') ceo "C cc
..., (') (I) W
m Q) a..""C
",:Jen:r
en '< CD (')
CD 0 :E Q)
::!: :J CD :J
~g';;C3
OJ:E:;;:J
~~-~
-. OJ "'tI Q)
::J Q) 3 S.
O!!!'-c-<
:;;:J co en
_Oa..CD
en:;;cn::!:
(')-(1)(1)
cn"'tl::!:C;
CD(')~_
~ en o~
...,CO-----I
OJ~..:!!(')
~...,"T1G)
:::;:' IJJ c ...,
.... Q) :J Q)
o en a.. s.
.2j s-~-<t
owen
.,,- <1>
5-2) ::E
a.."T1 ~
'" c: 0
",=>
w~ ~
~ ~
=>
a.
~
~
"T1
-<en
om
~:E
om
"";0
;00
mm
<<
mm
Ze r- en
o
m,,~
en!!:m
>mo
zz~
O~m
m-'"
x!!:
""
m>
zo
O~
=i"T1
em
;om
men
en
)>
~
o
I
s:
m
z
"""
'"
en en ." en en'" en ." ." ." C '" ."
:E:E " :E:E" :E" ;;U -< :> m -i ~ 0 CD -<
:> ",,:> ,,:> 0 '" x OJ 'ii '" 0
"" c. 0 " u CD 5'
,,~ ,,~c. "c. <- Co> C. CD :> (j) ." Co>
'" CD '" "'...'" ...'" m - :> '" :> 2;
'" '" ... C) 0 ~ 00G; it '" CD 5'
-CD ...
... ~ ~ -i oj>. c. 0' m '" '"
. --" :;- ."
en ." -i Q m "':T~ '" C) '" C
:> ."CDCD 3 '"
" 0 CD -a c. ~ '" Q. 1D z
;:; CD .2. ~ .. CD - c
m 5' c.CD :>
0 '" s:1. " m
>< CDU _CD
(j) 0 '" s:1.CD CD )>
-i :E CD -i C"'" -i CD -a '" m:> c. 0 r;:
CD 0 m
0 CD ,.. 0 u "':> 0 CD 1D x'" ""
);! ~CI) );! ~ ::c 0 );! en m Z :> u CD 25 z
en en CD '"
C)'" ~ '" 0 :> '" C) C " ~ 0
r r ~~ en r 0 =i _CD :J 25 m
"'0 ;;u c.
Q :> ,..CD C) , -. Ct) C) ,.. 'U c: 0 e: W z
'< ~ 'U ;;uC):e 'U ~
." 0 :;'m -i -i ;u (j) ."
:> m CD '< CD m 2 0 m W 0
m " " ~ :J ... 0 '"
X -i :> In X X :> en ~ ;:u
." 2 ,.. -. ." :T-im ." ,.. z 3:
m :> en:> m "2" m en )>
z ,.. CD C Z O:::J !!. Z CD -i
0 en:e 'ii 0 '" ,..:> 0 :e c 0
=1 ~ C) =1 g,cnc =1 C) 'ii
"'t]CD=n z "
c 0 c c 0 -<
;;u CD :J ;;u o :e ;;u :J en
~ '" ccCD ~
m C)" m (Q. ..., m 0 m
en 0 " en en 2 Co> :E
-
~g C) s:1. c:>
'< o' oj>. m
-0 :> ;u
:> :J
-i ;0 C
:J m
,.. < m
en m <
~ z m en
c: r
'" '" '" '" '" 0 C)
m m I
X en-i." en "U m
."." s:
m-< CD C) " )> 0
20 :e Q:J m c
'" "'" ~ ~ o~ '" '" CD~c. Z Z r
" "'w W W ~ ~ '" ~ ~ "" " ~ '" C m
0 w"" '" '" '" '" =i~ '" '" "" _'" ... o".~ -t ~
'" - -", CD '" W W W c '" w_ "'''' ~ :;;.:t....... m 3:
W ""'" '" ~ W W W ;;u ... ww CDO ><
" "'"" '" '" CD "" "" m w ""3 .9'" ~ "U "U
-i '" '" m )>
0 z C')
'" ![ C -t
'" en ." ::j
0 )> ~ ." " "
~ -u " :> c: m
" " ~-g CD 3 c. m
0""......1 m--...J -... wo ... ~ w ~u ~ ;0 en
0'" wu> 0 au " ~ 0 OCD m
0'" CD'" 0 c=:!, ... ~ CD w 'iic. w en
00 Cn~ 0 ...!!i CD -CD CD 0
OCD 0'" 0 o' " ~" '"
0'" 00 0 :> "" w'" CD
)> '" '"
U ",."."
U
'" a ." " " '" C) "
-... " CD W ~. (J) ~
u e- ~ ""
'" ~ w w " 0 W :J CD
-'" !!i (j) ... '" _CD CD ~ o:e'"
'" o' CD -CD "'''' '" :;:;~~
0 :J CD '" "'""
...0 00 0 '" w '" w CD 0)
;,'? '" '"
Q
O"~ ",en."
'" C) "
'< ..Q. ~. en 5-
OCD '" :.. :J CD
~ -s:1. ~ ... o:e'"
~ ... 00 '" ."." '" ,,- " " w -CD'"
Co> 0 00 !" " '" 0'" ~ '" '" .,,~w
WN 00 ~ :> '" Col-v ~m w ~
...'" 00 "" c. '" w" "'~ ...
<fl.#. <fl.<fl. ~ CD CD ,,~ .::::!~ ... -i
0 0. )>
en C)
" - I
" ~ " ~ " :T:> s:
0 CD 0 CD 0 CD ;::;: m
0 CD 0 CD 0 a. Dr 2
0 CD ~ CD 0 " =
(D'< -i
0. '"
C
:J
OJ
"
0.
~
0.
m
:J
0.
s-
ee
tD
OJ
or
:J
JiJ
o
0)
-
'"
e
o
.j>.
m:J9
~m"TI
~ CD "TI
o..~m
~~cn
CD ..., ()
cn ffi Q.
oa.~
s: CD
(I) 0.
~
m
x
-0
(I)
:J
"'
(I)
"'
."
~
.......
o
~
~ ~
.j>.~0)
.j>.~",
t...>......o
"'''''''
~'" ....
'"
'"
0)
."
'"
CD
-'"
'"
CD
CD
'"
CD
_':::"_....J.
,"''''
CD 0
.j>.",
tD
(I)
ee
s-
:J
S-
ee
tD
OJ
or
:J
o
-(I)
o
....
-
o
~
25
'"
."
~
'"
....
-'"
'"
0)
'"
."
"
-<
o
'"
25
'"
"
C
Z
o
tD
)>
,...
)>
z
o
m
z
"
o
;u
s:
)>
..,
6
;;;:
o
..,
::("
;UC
)>z
zO
0'"
I~
9
"
o
..,
::("
~~
zO
0'"
::r:~
9
"
-0 -0
(I) (I)
~ ~
3 !!!-
" :J
.,.ee
:r..;m
OJ or
3
,",3
'< =.:
(1)'<
.0(1)
".0
-- "
< --
OJ <
-OJ
(I) -
:J (I)
_:J
0.-
~ 0.
~d
:;" ::;
ee :J
"ee
:J "
;::;.::::1
..
"''''
"'....
'" '"
9~
00
00
"''''
0)",
~'"
~:'I
00
00
0.
(I)
S-
o
::T
~
-cO
(I) ;U
0.<"
CD:.:!::
::!.or:J
0. ee 0.
~CD~
g~--...I
"",
~O
o.;u"
tD<"
..., _. :J
a:=a.
eeOJ
CD~ ~
o~'"
=;;~
)>
3
o
"
:J
-
o
-
9'
(I)
CD'
!t>
o
(I)
"'
o
~
-s:
c;"
:J
000
;::tJ;::tJ::;;
~~(I)
iUiU~
ee ee
(I) (I)
~~
~I/<>
~'"
o.-c
(I) (I)
"' 0.
"(I)
iir ~
:J ~
tD ffi'
~ :J
i5.:1]J
ee ~
me.:
oee
-(I)
:':19
:':I
..,..,
o 0
-""
:,- ffi
OJ :J
:J 0
@ (I)
gS:
(I) (I)
o 0
o 0
:J :J
"' "'
q-=t"
" "
Sl~
-- 0
g :J
Q.Q,
-0-0
(I) (I)
0.0.
(I) (I)
"' "'
q-9:
-- OJ
~ :J
g-g
a:~
cg (I)
-- ~3"
3-0
-0 ~
a 0
< <
(I) (I)
3 3
(I) (I)
:J :J
- -
:;' g
Q~
~ m
;u:J
OJ 0
~ Dr
::T'<
<ii?
=:::J
oro
ee::T
(I) <
~ --
~5f
ee
(I)
"'
~
'"
I/<>
!"
00
Dim
'< '<
;u;u
OJ OJ
:J :J
00
::T ::T
~~
mm
ee ee
(I) (I)
~~
~-
-c'"
(I) I/<>
g-O)
"' -c
"(I)
-- 0.
OJ (I)
:J "'
tD"
::1. iir
.g.:J
(I) tD
9a:
"ee
~(I)
00
;u=;;
<~
'"'0
~;u
:;~
~~
(I) I/<>
!!i",
ffi' ""0
:J (I)
tDo.
=:!. m
0. _
(Q ::!.
(I) ~
9tD
" :::!.
~ 0.
"ee
" (I)
:J 0
o.=;;
"'~
",-
"'"
"
:J
0.
'"
'"
....
o
~
~
Z
"TIO
-(::I:
o"'D
wm
-C
om
""en
;;O-t
m;;o
<-
m)>
ZZ
ClIJcn
m;;oo
en-I
)>Cfg
zG)c
cmF;;
mCO)
xm
"'D<
mm
zr
cO
_"'D
-t:s:
cm
;;oz
m-t
en-
:s:
"'D
)>
o
-t
"TI
m
m
~
I
s:
m
z
..,
tD
z
~
fT1
-
-<
""
,r
-
c
~
"-
5.
o
"
"-
m
~
9'
m
"
3
o
c
;<
~
!l
"
~
is:
m
go
""
m
"
.8
c
".
'"
o.
~
So
""
m
i!:
"
3
o
"
o
"
m
~
3.
."
c
~
"-
'"
'"
:"
c
o
"
c
"
..
~
o
'"
;;;
o
a
~
m
o
~
3.
~
'"
"
..
o
o
.
m
... x ...
ii1 C1 (') 0 (f.I't:I ii1
:::::I =ti~ :T~ ~ ::::J
@-~6f~-g~~
-..9. m ~ 3: !:; !!:
2!l ~ -g "" ~ 5"
....~~;~
~ ~ 3: S.
o c 0
g; ~ m
c
<i
.
..
o
o
'"
-."
...
'"
-:::J_
'" -
"'0
at-J
"'0
=~
N
'"
o
o
2!
..
o
:..
~
'"
'"
...
:i3
..t>.CD_ "i\3
0<>>.:0,. I.D
NC>>C>> ..JIo.
(000 .....
W.!:::!S ~
..
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
<0
~~ N
"'''' '"
.Q) 0, -.JIo.
"'''' '"
<D& .9
I
-
..t>..... 01_
......001\)
a.f:>..J:o.(..o,I
".;.. u, -..... j...}
....(.,),J:Io.(O
U1~ES
~
o
'"
'"
'"
-."
o
'"
-::;: N
'" ...
::.. CD
'" ...
~ ~
..
<0
o
'"
...
N
...
'"
-:;;:
Co __
W_J\J())
CXlO'I (1) 00
CD~W'"-...JO
....N CXlU1 co
ID..:::!-98.9
..
~
'"
~
'"
..
~
o
o
<0
'"
N ~
'" <0
'" .!!!
..
~
.'"
...
0>
0;
;.
...
.!!!
..
'"
'"
.",
<0
'"
OJ
'"
'"
'"
~
I
-:::J
'" OJ
'" '"
Co 0,
... 0
~ .::::!
..
~
.-
'"
'"
-."
'"
o
J"!D___
WOU'l())....
........,......0).....
mco cn-l co
mg-~~-~
......::::..=:!:!!!:!!
N
<0
.::!
-:::;:
'"
~
N
'"
~
;09
. ""
3' !!1
~'"
'i .
~ <
m .
3 0
. c
".
'"
3'O~
~ :;; ~
. '" c
3" ~ ~
. .
~ ~
m.
" .
3
5.
~
.
o
5'
;g
.
o
o
..
.
-...
"''''
...'"
:""'".....1
<00
~'"
'"
_N
"'...
"'-
C,oN
a'"
N -
'"
.",
'" '"
...'"
WA.
"'N
"'N
'"
.",
"''''
<ON
N:'"
<0 '"
...'"
N
-;.
t!::J
.NO
...-
...'"
N""....I
"'N
'" <0
(DNa
"'''''''
(J'I.!:!!CD
-'"
"'-
-NW
'" -
~o
_N
"'-
:""'(0
N'"
~<O
'"
NN
w~
"''''
"''''
_N
"'<0
00,
"'-
.!!!...
N
-i>>
...'"
"'0
-01"(0
0-
- <0
'"
",-."
...0
"''''
oo"-J'"m
"'<0'"
"'<0'"
'"
.
~
3.
o
5.
~
'"
"
".
o
o
..
o
~
~
a
w
..
0;
'"
o
i>>
'"
~
..
-
o
o
...
'"
u.
'"
...
'"
.
~ 0
::11::
3
;5'
"
..
".
~ "
" .
~ 0
~ ~
~
..
N
o
'"
<0
'"
N
.!!!
~ ."
y,1P 9.
~ Q, o'
~ (\I
I
" "
. 0
~ ~ ~
ci" IP
o 0.
..
.'"
<0
...
.",
'"
N
r
~ ~
~ ~
~
..
u;
u.
'"
'"
i>>
'"
~
"
~ .
~ '! VJ
". c
3 ~
..
N
:":
-."
...
.!!!
3" '"
0" 2:
~ ~ ~
-.,j <i-g.
3 "
..
" "
o .
3 :i"
~ ~
~ c .
c; ~ ;
"'
'"
'"
~
..
N
~
-."
...
...
-<
"' .
01'< C5"
-..j!!!. "C
~. 0
3 g
.
~
'"
'"
o
...
~
"
0\ s:: ~
~ CS 0
~
I
~
~ g, if
N;:;: fI
~.
..
.'"
'"
'"
~
'"
d
~
,..
."
c:
ID
....
o
."."
-<>
00
W-
-....
0-
...:::!
CIIm
-iCII
~C
m men
;;: ;;i ()
m....'"
zoeJ
-i ." C
o;;:hi
."m",
."z
c:-i
z-
c~
ID>
>0
\:-i
z'"
01H
mCII
"ti
."
C
jj
~
'"
s:
'"
z
-<
:>>
.
r r GJGJGJ n "" " GJGJGJ n GJ CO) " "
~ jjj GJGJGJ 0 en en 0 GJGJGJ <: GJ m .Q. -<
~~
'" $! ~~~ ;0 ....~ r ~ ~~ 0 ~ z CD Q
.... (,)(,.." "'C 0 ..."'''' ... m ~
~"'''' "'''' ......"' "' '"
;0 0 m n $! ..
in $! j!;! m
en z r ...
m "'"'a -< z"' n ""'a -< a )> "
II> "''''0 0 CD ... en CD <" m ~ C
-< ~ " -< as',," -< :e" ;= -< tIJ 00' ;0 -< iI: "
0 c 0 Z 0 "c =< 0 0 GJ 2
en " Q -. Qo ;;0 S.(') ~ Z
j;! c: a. j;! ""3;0 ~ j;! o g in -< CD 0 CD j;! CD "
fro )> :OJ 1ii
CD en -<~m en 3 a:OJ ~ CD
r r ;0 r r r -< 0
r .... ~ cn~ CD en ;0 o (t) CD !il
m C' en ~ C ~ ,,11> !;!;! "-:OJ' Z m $! 'ii
x c..::T _. ;0 II> CD' m !!.mm en x
OJ CD ' iI: "
" " ~[jf:2: m " g-<!" " , x 0 " or -< m
m -< m 5 m 0 m ;0"" m 0 ><
z z "' , 0 z ~a C z CD II> Z Z :OJ
C <:> ~~x- n <:> 0 m <:> :OJ~ <:> c z "
=< =< =< 3 r =< o -. " =< "" m
,,"" s: )> 3 Z < 0 c a. " Z
c C -II>cc -< C C II> :OJ " C II> C
;0 ;0 II>:OJ _ 0 ;0 c CO) ;0 !:!':"'U ::u (jj 0
::J !:!!.C/) :OJ a. "
m m m [ m o , m a. :::j
0,< Z ::::J .Q. en
en en :OJ "' en " en CD G> en en <:> e
h (jj ." c h ~ :::! 6 .... CD
" c;- - "' ;a
r 0 3 c 0 :OJ " <: en m g. m
ijj ::u " r a. .... z
::u " a. 0 en 0 N m ,. en
)> .... $! c;-
0 en m '" a
::u ~ ~ m :OJ
"
m )> Z r
en a -< )>
5 ;= m <:> "
z =< ::u ~ -<
~ m !;!;! z Q
~ '"
en ~ -
::u Q
<:> z ~ ...
en en"
5 -<
5 oe
z z :I:m
m,....
0-
CO
,...."
m"'en
00 a
"j=::C
'" '" '" '" '" _m
m O-iC
X" m-c
.'" '" ""-< -imr
~ - ~ 0 !go ",enm
~ - 'K "'''' "' '" '" .... '" '" '" a.'" -0'"
'" '" '" "'... '" .'" ... '" '" ~~
.. .. u, 0'" .", ~~ Co CO,J:!.o, 0 0 r-_~
'" '" '" m;..,,""....,J '" "'''' J8 ~"'''' ~ ~ iiJ m"
'" '" "' ~o'" '" "'''' ...."'''' o~
"'~'" m"
-< ><"
0 ,,2
II> i[
"' m"
s.~ z-
~~ .'" .... !/!-g 0
... me ~ '" u, ~ "'0 :::j
~ "''''''' ...~ ~",g .~ a"" e
~~'" ~o ~f!
" ~-.....~ ~-..j Co Coenm ~ ;a
0 t~ "'...~ '" o. m
0 "'~ 0"'''' '" :OJ en
)>
~ ""
0 -g"
to Os.
'" -g"
... ![CD
0 o.
0
0 "
"'
....
Q,
"""
"'tJ.Q.
"CD
~ ~ <:>~
-"
8 "'0 ~ 8J~Qj ~ " "
...."'0 ~o "' :OJ
0 "'~o ~~ N8J'" '" a.
0 '" 0 .... '" ... CD
"'- ?ft.*'*- ?fl.*' tf!.'#.?f!. "'- "- ~
0 0
en
0-
'" ~~'" ~- '" "'~ '" :::r:OJ a
0 ~~8 "'"' ~ 0"' 0 (1);::::;': ::c
0 "' "' 0", ~ g~ s:
0 "'"'''' "' ~ ~.... (j)'< m
"- z
-<
'"
-c-c-c ;tJ GJGJ;tJ GJ .... "'tJ"'1J"'tJ""C""C"'U"'tI ." -c 'T1
;tJ;tJ;tJ m GJGJm GJ m (/Jcnoooow(J'Jcn ;; .2, -<
""" 0 ~~o ~ r ->.......->...................->.
"",,,.., """0 " m U'1O'H.TlO'1U'1/'VN m CD 0
~o", ." "'CO;tJ '" -C <Dco.......mO(()(]) en Q. w
)> ::t C -
0 a 0 -C 0
en;;::<E en ....
??~5: .... Z "TI""[]IXl1lCDCD -C
D:lOCD-t CD m :;'C =1.1)::;;" W CD ;tJ "
;::;:::Imn; (>;tJ)> ro ~ .... Cl)O"'::JCDcn"TI m 'T1
Q~;cn CCDZ -0 0 O=rOOcnc::;:;:;- en C
38)> or j;! _.Q)"'C=r_:::ICD en 'Ti
CD" ::J 0 :::j (f,Icn"T10Wcr 0
CD - '" ." ~ ~ G) ::J ~CD:;'O~Og?
;:o::-cn\J c: _c.m CD 0 r - 0 (t) CD g =: In Z 0
-'" ;;: ::t
-_D> ::::I 3 " ~ g.:;j~;;~:!,!g en 'ii
fTI::u""a, ;;::m ::J m -<
rQ."cn " c. () ::::;. !! CD -....,j ..., ::J
<CI::JZ >< -c en m
-I S' '" 3' 3 -t a: -c m CDCD6''<()CD~ .... X
'" <CI-en )> Z ~m::J"TIogJ m
iiJ<CI -< @ Z 0 ~-gN~'~~ ;;: "
~~ n en en :::j -c' :.n C/'J 2 g m
n.!!!. 1 .... -c 0 c ." Z
m a 3-iitQ. C
0 ;;: Z ::u CD Q d': o' c:
n (> m ::J ::::j
3 -c c. CD en ;3.~ g ::J Do 0
CD '" ." c:
-c ." '" c: -'n CD '" CD
"'" c: :;" ... '" ;;c
::J ;; Q
::J <CI Do en m
Do en '" m -g: !J.I
'" '< ... en 0"
'" ~ CD C ::J
~
CD -c
3 -c
c ::u 'T1
-0 m -<
<CI en
iiJ en 0
c. 0 W
CD Z -
'" 0
~ ....
In
en 0 "
.... c:
m :I: [IJ
;;:: m r
C (')
c:
r 'T1
m >en
0 On
'T1 -:I:
'" '" Cm
'" m C -10
"" '" >< " m -c
"" w ... W -0 -< ~ mr
0, U'1.t>.~--'-~ CD Inm
" ~"'" '" ... ::J 0
~ wow io ,,~ w co Q,~ C""
~ (J"" ",_w '" '" ~J\J ~o NU'1N-....JU'1 ;=
(,n'O-1\) "" t "" <.nCO:"'WIDNN 2"~ 'Ti"
'" " - ... m
'" "'~'" '" &;S?; " O>O.l:loCDN-....J...... (j)
"'''~ co "" O1WcnCD.......O-...J c-
o 0 '" m"
'" '" .... X'T1
0 "S:!
" !i1:
'" m'T1
Q,~ z-
""~,, "'-0 C
-00 ~ " ~ 01 CO-.l<D'"....lwCn wa ::::j
00 '" " ~ C:O......OW.t>.NW 0-0
00'" co... -" 010.......C:OW.......W ~a c:
00-...... ~j ~ OA -,,\,)0, w:...r Co ;;C
00" '" g~t:;ffim~m 0" m
00'" 0'" 0 ::J In
)>
-0
-0
a"
-os.
~ c
" Dj"""
'--J _CD
0 0"
0 ::J
'"
"g
0
Q,
O"-c
'<~
"'U.Q.
"CD
~~ oQ.
-"
"'''''' ~~ " NN,f:!.01CD 00 "c
"'~o 0 U'1C:O......COCD 00 ::J
C:n~N ow '" CoCD~Ni:D 00 c.
CO ""0 w", " N-J-..JU'1......00 CD
,*#.?fi. ?f.?f. <f. ?f.?f.'#.cft'#.?f!.?f. c. ~
en ~
(>-
""" ,,~ ~ NNNNN......'" or::J
000 oco co ooooocoo (1);:;: :I:
000 oco co oaoooCDO g-~ ;;::
ww~ 0"" 0 .l:It.NWW......O>N
ro'< m
c. Z
....
(JJ
r-
0
:I>
Z
~
." ." :1>'" ." ~"'C)
~ ." ",,, ." '<0
0 CD" 0 -" C)-a
;g " ~ 300
'ii Q 51 'ii e!.r:::....
ii: CD' CD CD' (J)~~
CD iiI c. CD ::T=o
3 c. '" "'c. ~;:;o:J
0
CD ~ ~ '< CD roro-<
3- C)CD' ~ '" '"
o 0 ~ Q.a
i!i :Js91 ~O
- ::tt Q. 0-
0 ~-~ " ."
""~O
3 ",CD 3 "'- 0
o~cn 00
;: 0'" CD
'" o 2" 0 <;.>:: '"
3" ::J =: r::: g"
;:0- 00
." m::Jg' ""GJ -
1D '< ~'< ""CD 0"
N 0''' "
.'" "'0C)
900 ~~ 9.
r ",~3 C)!!!. b
." o~3 'C."
~ 0'i1c: " c: '"
...... ~ :2. a~ "
in" .:<
'" ~ CD'm
'" S4:g
0 1D "0
~ !" GJ<
;: r- GJCD
~ c.
~ ." '"
." '"
.Q,
CD
g
b
~ '"
"
~ '" "0 ~
'" '"
... '" 0
(J) " " 0
0> '" '" c:
0 '" (J) 3-
'"
:;-
'" '" (J) r0-
o 0 ~ iiI
0 0 ~
~ ~ ~ ;:c
. . .
!!!.
CD
.
Daniel Forster
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Daniel Forster
Wednesday, April 20, 20054:27 PM
David Krogh (E-mail)
FW: GMOC Info Request
Subject:
Daniel Forster
Wednesday, April 20, 2005 2:43 PM
David Krogh (E-mail); Arthur Garcia (E-mail); Bill Tripp (E-mail); David Krogh (E-mail); Gary-Gail Nordstrom (E-mail); Kevin O'Neill
(E-mail); Mike Spethman (E-mail); Rafael Munoz (E-mail 2); Richard Arroyo (E-mail)
GMOC Info Request
From:
Sent:
To:
To GMOC:
I forwarded 2 questions as follow-up to Finance, which were:
1. The TDIF had a balance of $9,624,127 with interest earned of $203,680.
The Interim SR-125 fee has a balance of 14,425,539 with interest earned of $20,580.
The question was, why the difference in interest earned?
2. Under expenses for the Interim SR-125 fee, $1,414,500 was listed as "Othe~'. A breakdown of these
expenses was
requested.
The response has been:
1. The TDIF balance of $9,624,127 and SR125 of $14,425,539 represent fund balance equivalent to Retained
Earnings in private sector. We compute interest based on available cash. The average TDIF cash balance is
$3,463,760 and SR125, $538,437. This is the reason why interest earned on TDIF is higher than SR125.
Further, the SR125 fund balance is high...it is the "CASH" that is low. The SR125 fund made a loan to the TDIF
which is with interest. The interest are reported as receivable and not recognized as revenue until paid. As of
6/30/2004, we have interest receivable of $541 ,890.
2. Expenditure of $1,414,500 is a single line entry, no breakdown. The disbursement of $1 ,414,500 was made
under the contribution agreement between the City of Chula Vista and San Diego Expressway, L.P. We received
the disbursement request from the City Attorney's Office accompanied by an invoice/letter from the law offices of
Nossaman,Guthner, Knox, and Elliott, LLP.
Please let me know if you wish further follow-up.
Dan Forster, AICP
Growth Management Coordinator
Department of Planning and Building
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
619-476-5348
1
~(f?
~r-
~
01YOF
CHUIA VISTA
~I ~~0 {lJUI ~f
I ~yV16v1
D5-1S'-o5.........~
v
Growth Management Oversight Commission
Date:
May 3, 2005
To:
~.Attorney
Nordstrom, Chair, Growth Management Oversight Commission
From:
Subject:
Request for Explanation of Interim SR-125 Fund Use
This memo constitutes a request for an explanation of the disposition of the Interim SR 125 fees.
As you know, by city policy one of the GMOC's tasks is to "Monitor the development impact fee
programs, considering the appropriate and timely use of such funds." In addition, by ordinance "the
GMOC shall be provided with an annual 'development impact fee report', which provides an analysis
of development impact fees collected and expended over the previous 12-month period." Pursuing
this direction, during the GMOC's discussion with Finance Director Maria Katchadoorian, a question
was raised regarding the disposition of the Interim SR 125 fees now that those funds will not be
needed for the purpose for which they were collected. It is the understanding of the GMOC that,
according to state law, if no longer needed for the purpose they were collected, DIP fees are to be
refunded to the current land owners.
Ms. Katchadoorian indicated that she had been advised by your office that the use of the Interim SR
125 fund for other activities and not refunded to the current land owners had been done in
accordance with all applicable laws. The GMOC has no reason to question the validity of that
statement but does wish a written explanation from your office as to how this was accomplished.
Our review ofthe finance threshold remains unfinished without this information. Your cooperation
is appreciated.
The GMOC will be finalizing our recommendations on May 16 and then scheduling the joint
workshop with City Council. A response prior to May 16 will be appreciated. Please send your
response to me, in care of Dan Forster, the GMOC staff liaison with the city.
cc: Dave Rowlands, City Manager
Jim Sandoval, Director of Planning and Building
Dan Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
GMOC Members
Memorandum
To: Gary Nordstrom, Chair, Growth Management Oversight Commission
From: John P. Mullen, Deputy City Attorney
Date: OS/27/2005
Re: Interim SR-125 Funds
By memorandum dated May 3,2005, you asked for an explanation why the
balance of the Interim SR -125 funds are not required to be refunded to the
property owners who paid the fees. This memo provides a brief analysis of state
law on this issue.
I
BACKGROUND
On January 4,1994, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista ("City Council")
adopted Ordinance 2579 establishing the Interim Pre-SR-125 Development
Impact Fee ("Interim DIF" or "fee"). According to Section lea) of Ordinance
2579, the fee was imposed "to pay for transportation improvements and facilities
within the Eastern Territories of the City." A list of five improvements to be
financed by the fee is provided in Section 5(a) of Ordinance 2579. In addition,
Section 5(b) authorized the City Council to modify the list of facilities to
maintain compliance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
On October 17,2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2826 which, among
other things, authorized the City to use the Interim SR-125 DIP funds to advance
the construction of the SR-125, including, but not limited to, studying the
feasibility of purchasing the franchise, acquiring right of way, and constructing
the SR-125 either as a toll facility or a rreeway.
The City Council adopted Ordinance 2959 on April 20, 2004, tolling the
collection of the Interim SR-125 DIP. Furthermore, the City Council
specifically authorized the use the remaining Interim SR-125 funds "[t]o
advance the construction or financing of transportation enhancing projects or
transportation programs related to SR-125."
Recently, the City has completed a comprehensive review of the Transportation
Development Impact Fee ("TDIF"). The analysis concludes that the TDIF
.
should be increased fi"OIn the current fee of $8,825 to $10,050 per equivalent
dwelling unit. On May 10, 2005, the City Council approved the first reading of
an ordinance increasing the TDIF. In addition, the City Council adopted a
resolution transferring the balance of the Interim SR-125 DIF fund to the TDIF
fund.
II
THE REFUND PROVISIONS OF THE
MITIGATION FEE ACT NOT APPLICABLE
The Mitigation Fee Act, California Government Code section 66000 et seq.,
imposes numerous statutory requirements on local agencies when establishing,
increasing or imposing a fee as a condition of the approval of a development
project. For instance, the City must identify the purpose of the fee and the use to
which the fee will be put. Gov't Code 9966001(a)(I)-(2). Moreover, the City
must determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee
and the type of project on which it is imposed. Also, the City must determine
how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility
and the type of project subject to the fee. Gov't Code 99 66001(a)(3)-(4).
These requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act implement applicable case law
involving fees imposed by the government as a condition of development. Such
exactions must have a nexus to a legitimate state interest, and must be "roughly
proportional" to the impact of the development. See Nollan v. California Coastal
Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987); Dolan v. City ofTigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994),
and Ehr/ich v City of Culver City ,12 Cal.4th 854 (1996).
The subject of impact fee refunds is addressed in Government Code section
66001 (e). The statute provides in relevant part:
Except as provided in subdivision (f), when sufficient fUnds
have been collected. . . to complete financing of incomplete
improvements identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a),
and the public improvements remain incomplete, the local
agency shall identify, within 180 days ofthe determination
that sufficient funds have been collected, an approximate
date by which construction of the public improvement will
be commenced, or shall refund to the then current record
owner or owners ofthe lots or units, as identified in the last
equalized assessment roll . . . the unexpended portion of the
fee and any interest accrued thereon.
Gov't Code 966001(e) (emphasis added)
If the City has collected sufficient funds to complete the improvement and
chooses not to set a date to commence construction, it "may refund the
unexpended revenues by direct payment, by providing a temporary suspension of
fees, or by any other reasonable means." Gov't Code ~6600l(e) (emphasis
added)
The conditions triggering a refund of the Interim SR-125 funds have not
occurred. The City never made a determination that sufficient funds were
collected to complete financing of all of the identified facilities. Absent such a
determination, no refund is required under the plain language of Government
Code section 66001(e). According to the City Engineer, the cost to complete of
the Interim SR-125 facilities far exceeds the available balance of the Interim SR-
125 fund.' As a result, there is no statutory obligation to refund the available
balance ofthe Interim SR-125 Fund2 Consequently, this fee revenue may
continue to expended on traffic enhancing projects in eastern Chula Vista and
programs related to SR-125, as explicitly provided in Ordinance 2959, adopted
by the City Council on April 20, 2004.
If you have any additional questions, please contact me directly at (619) 585-
5656.
1 For further details, please contact Alex Al-Agha.
2 It should be noted that one of the available methods of "refunding" the excess
fee revenue is to temporarily suspend the fee, which the City did when it adopted
Ordinance 2959 on April 20, 2004
THRESHOLD
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed. to foster air quality improvement
pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable Federal,
State and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development specific activities being undertaken by the City
toward compliance with relevant Federal, State and local regulations
regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) for
review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall report on overall regional and local air
quality conditions, the status of regional air quality improvement implementation efforts
under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related Federal and State programs, and the
affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and local planning and
development activities.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table, and update any prior years' figures if they have
been revised.
SMOG TRENDS - Number of days over standards
STATE STANDARDS 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
San Diego Region 27 24 29 15 23 12
Chula Vista 4 0 2 1 0 1
FEDERAL
STANDARDS
San Dieqo Region 0 0 2 0 1 1
Chuia Vista 0 0 0 0 0 0
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Retumed ques~GMOC APCD 04.completed.doc
Page 1
1a. Please note any additional information relevant to regional and local air quality
conditions during the reporting period.
Please provide brief responses to the following:
2. Were there any changes in Federal or State programs during the reporting period?
Yes X
No
Explain
The United States Environmental Protection Agency designated San Diego County as a
nonattainment area for the new federal8-hour ozone and annual average PM2.5 standards, and the
California Air Resources Board designated San Diego County as a state nonattainment area for the
state annual average PM2.5 standard.
Note: 2004 PM2.5 data that are currently being reviewed may allow San Diego County to be
designated attainment for the federal PM2.5 standard.
3. Has the Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) been updated or revised during the
reporting period?
Yes
X
No
Explain:
a. What changes were made/adopted?
Eight stationary source control measures were scheduled for development and consideration for
adoption through 2007.
4. Will the above-noted changes (under questions 2 &3), if any, affect Chula Vista's local
planning and development activities and regulations?
Yes
No X
Explain:
The changes affect individual commercial sources (primarily industrial operations) only.
MISCELLANEOUS
5. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
If yes, explain:
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Retumed ques~GMOC APCD 04.completed.doc
Page 2
6. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No X
Explain:
7. Do you have any other relevant information that the APCD desires to communicate to
the City and GMOC?
Yes
No
X
Explain:
Prepared by: Andy Hamilton and Carl Selnick
Title: Air Quality Specialist (both have this title)
Date: January 5, 2005
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC D4=D5\Retumed quest\GMOC APCO D4.completed.doc
Page 3
THRESHOLD
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement
pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable Federal,
State and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development related activities being undertaken by the City
toward compliance with relevant Federal, State and local regulations
regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution Control District
(APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall report on overall regional
and local air quality conditions, the status of regional air quality improvement
implementation efforts under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related Federal and
State programs, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and
local planning and development activities.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Has the City submitted an annual report to the GMOC and the Air Quality Pollution
Control District that covers points 1, 2, and 3 above?
Yes
x
No
2. Have any major developments or Master Planned Communities been approved during
the reporting period?
Yes X
No
a. List any approved projects and indicate to what extent these projects implement
measures designed to foster air quality improvement pursuant to relevant federal,
state, regional and/or local policies and regulations?
Since the last reporting period there have been several major development projects required
to prepare an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) that have been approved or are in the
entitlement process.
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed quesM4 GMOC Planning AQ3.doc
Page 1
The 31 acre Auto Park East Specific Plan was approved June 1,2004. Located on the south
side of Main Street approximately one-half mile east of Interstate 805, the project is an
expansion of the existing Chula Vista Auto Park creating a regional automobile sales and
service destination. Prior to the issuance of building permits an Air Quality Improvement Plan
will be prepared for each parcel in the Auto Park East.
Approved August 24, 2004, Chula Vista Crossings is a retail shopping center anchored by
Kohl's Department Store. The project consists of 17 acres located at the southeast corner
of Main Street and Interstate 805. An Air Quality Improvement Plan will be prepared for
each parcel prior to the issuance of building permits.
The Otay Ranch Village 7 SPA Plan was approved October 12, 2004. Five separate
landowners, two of whom are the sponsors of the SPA Plan, control the property. This
project is a transit oriented 424 acre development contqining 1 ,204 dwelling units, schools, a
park and open space areas. Approximately 121 acres of the site is identified as
undesignated uses to be determined in the future. The project sponsors have chosen to
participate in the Chula Vista GreenStar Building Efficiency Program (GreenStar) to meet the
AQIP requirement. A total of 602 dwelling units will be built using construction methods that
exceed Title 24 Energy Code requirements by 15%. The owners of the remaining
undesignated properties will be required to prepare supplemental AQIP's for their future
projects.
A proposal to amend the EastLake III SPA Plan is currently in the preliminary stages of the
entitlement process. The developer is requesting an 18.4 acre Commercial- Tourist site be
designated high density residential for use as senior housing. This project proposes 494
dwelling units contained in a series of clustered courtyards with four floors of housing and
subterranean parking. An amendment to the existing AQIP for EastLake III must be
prepared to include the senior housing project.
The Espanada Specific Plan is a 4.2 acre mixed use project consisting of two residential
high rise condominium structures containing 200 units with two levels of subterranean
parking, 16 town-homes, 13,000 sq. ft. of retail space and a restaurant pad. In order to meet
the AQIP requirement the developer has agreed to participate in the GreenStar Program.
This would result in 108 residential units constructed 15% beyond Title 24 Energy Standards
and the majority of all retail and restaurant structures exceeding Title 24 Energy Standards
by 10%. It is anticipated that the Espanada project will proceed to public hearing after
completion of the City's General Plan Update.
The Otay Ranch Village 2, 3,4 (portion) and Planning Area 18b SPA Plan proposal consists
of 1,195 acres. The project is estimated to provide 2,786 residential dwelling units, a school,
park facilities, commercial and industrial uses. As a part of the Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) Plan, an AQIP must be prepared consistent with the adopted Guidelines.
Other major developments currently in early planning stages include the Eastern Urban
Center, and Otay Ranch Village 8 and Village 9 (University Village). These proposals
represent a large portion of the remaining undeveloped land in Otay Ranch. Following
completion of the General Plan Update, submittal of SPA Plans for these proposals is likely
to occur.
3. Are Chula Vista's development regulations, policies and procedures consistent with
current applicable federal, state and regional air quality regulations and programs?
Yes X
No
a. With respect to any inconsistencies, please indicate actions needed to bring
C:ldffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Retumed ques~04 GMOC Planning AQ3.doc
Page 2
development regulations, policies and/or procedures into compliance.
4. Are there any non-development related air quality programs that the City is currently
implementing or participating in?
Yes X
No
Explain:
a. Identify and provide a brief explanation of each.
The City continues to implement the 20 Action Measures contained in the Carbon Dioxide
(C02) Reduction Plan adopted by the City Council on November 14, 2000. Following is an
explanation of the non-development related air quality programs identified as Action
Measures in the CO2 Reduction Plan that have been active or updated during the reporting
period:
Measure 1 - Purchase of Altemative Fuel Vehicles
The City's alternative fuel assets include the operation and maintenance of the following
existing alternative fueled vehicles and fueling stations:
Alternative Fuel Vehicles
o Chula Vista Transit has 25 CNG Busses (a total 6 additional CNG busses will be
delivered in June 2005).
o The Nature Center will receive a dedicated CNG bus in June 2005.
o Six CNG Passenger Vehicles: 4 Vans and 2 Cars.
o Five Neighborhood Electric Cars.
o Honda FCX Fuel Cell Car.
Alternative Fueling Station
o Hydrogen Fueling Facility installed at the John Lippitt Public Works Center in
April 2003.
o CNG Fueling Station at the John Lippitt Public Works Center.
o Public access to CNG Fueling Facility at the John Lippitt Public Works Center.
Measure 2 - Green Power
Renewable Energy efforts include:
o 4 kw Photovoltaic (PV) system at the John Lippitt Public Works Center.
o 7 kw PV system for Nature Center.
o 30 kw PV system for new Police HQ.
o Additional 4 kw PV system planned at the John Lippitt Public Works Center in
2005.
o Staff to evaluate installation of 1 MW PV for the John Lippitt Public Works Center.
Measure 3 - Municipal Clean Fuel Demonstration Project
o The City is continuing to work with SunLine to demonstrate hydrogen Electrolyzer
and hydrogen fuel cell bus by 2006. Funding of $3.4 million from the Department
Of Energy (DOE) and the CEC is pending organization of a regional project. The
regional project scope will procure up to four fuel cell busses for a two-year
demonstration for the San Diego region with Chula Vista as the anchor.
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05\Retumed quesM4 GMOC Planning AQ3.doc
Page 3
Measure 5 - Municipal Building Upgrades and Trip Reduction
. Facility and infrastructure retrofits are generating savings of 4.7+ MW-hrs/yr.
. The City has replaced 30 refrigerators with EnergyStar rated units since June
2003.
. Past retrofits include upgrading lights, many HVAC systems and other
appliances with energy-saving devices. Additional improvements will be made
as major capital items will be replaced or refurbished.
. The City has expanded it's website opportunities for the public to access
information and communicate with staff without traveling to the Civic Center and
other City facilities. Planning and Land Use applications as well as Building
permit forms and specifications are available via the Internet resulting in trip
reduction by City employees and the public.
In addition to the CO2 Reduction Plan measures, the City has initiated the following programs:
Transportation Demand Management
. In March 2003, the City was awarded a $414,325 grant by the San Diego Air
Pollution Control District to develop and implement a transportation demand
management program. The program includes an express bus from ea!!tern
Chula Vista to downtown San Diego and an express shuttle from eastern Chula
Vista to a trolley stop. Council accepted the grants in April 2004 and the
program may begin implementation in March 2005.
Light Bulb Exchange Program
. The City partnered with SDG&E to facilitate a light bulb exchange program
targeting western Chula Vista. Replacement compact fluorescent lights were
provided to 600 households in October 2004.
5. Are there additional non-development related program efforts that the City needs to
undertake pursuant to federal, state or regional air quality regulations?
Yes No ...lL.-
Explain:
Chula Vista Transit is required to follow the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
regulations to reduce diesel Particulate Matter (PM) levels. Chula Vista Transit (CVT) has
met all of the deadlines to transition the fleet to alternative fuel and retrofit diesel engines as
mandated. CARB now requires that CVT maintain a diesel PM baseline below the January
2002 baseline of 6.64 PM. A noticeably lower baseline of 1.94 PM was recorded for 2004. It
is anticipated that the same level will be maintained with a possible reduction realized later in
2005 due the elimination of more diesel engines and the addition of 6 new CNG buses.
a. If so, please identify.
6. Are any new air quality programs scheduled for implementation during the next year?
Yes X
No
Explain:
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05\Retumed questl04 GMOC Planning AQ3.doc
Page 4
In partnership with the San Diego Regional Energy Office (SDREO) and People for Trees,
the City coordinated participation in the SDREO Cool Communities Shade Tree Program in
Chula Vista. This is a community program that provides trees to homeowners at no cost.
Approximately 1,000 new trees were planted in Chula Vista during the reporting period.
In the summer of 2004, the California Forestry and Fire Protection Department received a
$50,000 grant award to plant 460 trees on City public right of way in 2005/2006. The trees
will be planted in City parks; street medians and side walk strips.
PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS
7. In last year's report, a recommendation that was accepted by Council asked that a
City policy position regarding the acquisition and use of alternative fueled vehicles by
the City be developed. Please describe efforts toward developing this policy.
Explain:
Staff is in the process of researching and reviewing alternative fueled vehicle purchase and
use policies from other municipalities and agencies. Staff anticipates that a draft policy will
be ready for presentation to the GMOC by the end of the first quarter of 2005. In the mean
time, interim steps continue to be taken to promote use of alternative fuel vehicles in the
City. In November 2004, the City leased a Honda FCX hydrogen fuel cell car. The Cities of
Chula Vista, San Francisco, Los Angeles, South Coast Air Quality Management District and
the State of New York are a few of the agencies in the US that are currently testing this
technology.
MISCELLANEOUS
8. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
Explain:
9. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No X
Explain:
10. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes X
No
Explain:
The national clean air standards for ozone have not been exceeded in San Diego County for
six consecutive years. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has phased out
and replaced the one-hour ozone standard with a more restrictive 8-hour standard. San
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned quesM4 GMOC Planning AQ3.doc
Page 5
Diego County is considered a non-attainment area for ozone based on this new 8-hour
standard. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District has three years to develop a plan for
reaching attainment of the new standard by 2009.
In July 2004, the City of Chula Vista staff - Willie Gaters, Environmental Resource Manager-
was invited to participate in the state's Climate Change Committee by the Califomia Energy
Commission. The goal of the Committee is to "make recommendations to the commission
on the most equitable and efficient ways to implement international and national climate
change requirements based on cost, technical feasibility, and relevant information on current
energy and air quality policies and activities and on greenhouse gas emissions reductions
and trends since 1990."
Members of the Committee include representatives from business, major industrial and
energy sectors, utilities, forestry, agriculture, local government, and environmental groups.
Chula Vista is the only municipality invited to provide input.
Prepared by: Mary Venables, Associate Planner/GreenStar Program Coordinator
Willie Gaters, Environmental Resource Manager
Date: January 26, 2005
C:ldffilesIGMOC\GMOC 04=05\Retumed quesfi04 GMOC Planning AQ3.doc
Page 6
THRESHOLD:
1. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards (75% of
design capacity).
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan Sewer Authority with a 12
to 18 month development forecast and request confirmation that the projection is
within the cityDs purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecast and continuing growth, or the City Public Works
Department staff shall gather the necessary data. The information provided to the
GMOC shall include the following:
a. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
b. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth.
c. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
d. Other relevant information.
The growth forecast and Authority response letters shall be provided to the GMOC for
inclusion in its review.
1. Please provide a copy of the standards that the City utilizes in order to evaluate
whether the quality of life threshold has been met.
2. Please fill in the blanks and provide relevant updates on this table.
Average 14.756
Flow (MGD)
Capacity 19.843
15.316 15.951 16.6 17.88 20.34 26.2*
19.843 20.875** 20.875** 20.875** 20.875** 20.875**
. Buildout Projection based on the General Plan Update (Steering Alternative). (Adopted General Plan "Buildout" = 23.0 MGD)
. ** Increase in capacity is based on the allocation of additional capacity rights resulting from the construction of the new
South bay Treatment Plant (allocation process still underway)
Page 1
2b Is buildout sewage flow estimates higher than treatment capacity? Yes_X_ No_
If Yes, please explain how the projected flow will be accommodated and financed.
Explanation
The City is currently in the process of completing the update to the Wastewater Master Plan,
which was being done concurrently with the General Plan Update. One of the major goals
of this study was to evaluate the City's buildout capacity needs under the preferred GPU
Land Use alternative. It also included the re-evaluation of the Sewer Capacity Fee to ensure
that the Capacity Fee is set at the level necessary to generate the revenue that would be
needed to fund the acquisition of additional capacity rights. Through this effort we have
determined the City's buildout need (approx. 5MGD) and begun the process of laying out a
strategy for the acquisition of additional capacity rights.
The primary comerstone of this strategy is to enter into negotiations with the City of San
Diego (who currently has reserves of about 49 MGD) for the purchase of additional capacity
rights. The other option is to enter into a lease agreement with San Diego. for temporary
capacity rights until such time when planned upgrades to the regional treatment system,
which includes the construction of another Treatment plant in the Southbay area becomes
imminent. These South bay facilities are currently planned for 2018 and are shown in the City
of San Diego Metro's Master Plan. Staff has already initiated discussions with City of San
Diego staff to explore these options, it is anticipated that the viability of these options will be
determined in the first quarter of 2005.
Additional capacity righfs will be financed utilizing funds from the Trunk Sewer Capacity
Reserve Fund, which is derived from capacity fees charged to new connections. A Financial
Plan was prepared as part of the Wastewater Master Plan Update, which re-evaluated the
capacity fee and the City's ability to finance the purchase of the required capacity. The
plan determined that there would be sufficient revenues to fund the acquisition, so far as the
plan recommendations are implemented. The recommendations include annual increase of
the capacity fee based on the construction cost index (ENR).
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
3. Have sewage flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at any time
during this reporting period?
Yes
No ..lL
If yes:
a. Where did this occur?
b. Why did it occur?
c, What has been, or will be done to correct the situation?
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Page 2
Yes
No .lL
Explain: Service levels were maintained during the reporting period despite the pace
of development in the eastern portion of the City.
5. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 18-month and 5
year time frame?
Yes
No ~
Explain: Current sewerage facilities should be able to handle anticipated growth
during the 12 to 18 month period. However, due to the pace of development in the City,
especially in the eastern portion, existing sewerage facilities within thaf part of the City may
not be adequate to handle forecasted growth during the next 5-years. However, the
completion of several planned facilities within this same period should adequately mitigate
this condition.
6. What new facilities have been constructed to accommodate the forecasted growth?
Explain:
(a)
The Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor - from west Frontage Road
easterly along Main street past Interstate-805 through Salt Creek to
Olympic Parkway.
a. How have these facilities been funded?
(i) The Salt Creek Gravitv Sewer Interceptorwas funded utilizing a combination of funds
from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund and the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Basin
DIF.
7. Has the City finalized an agreement with the City of San Diego regarding the provision
of adequate treatment capacity to meet the buildout needs ofthe City's General Plan?
Yes
No -1L
Explain: As earlier stated in response to Question No. 2b, staff is already engaged in
discussions with the City of San Diego to find a way of addressing the City's long-term
capacity needs.
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes
No
x.
Explain: Historically, the City has usually allocated approximately $300,000 each year
for the repair and/or replacement of sewer mains at various locations in the City as part of
the Sewer Rehabilitation Program. This program is funded through a charge of $0.70 per
month per single family and $0.06/HCF for Multi-Family and Commercial properties. The fee is
billed as part of the monthly sewer service charge. The remainder of operation and
maintenance costs, including salaries and equipment costs, are paid from the sewer service
charges assessed to residents or property owners connected to the sewer system.
Page 3
However, one of the components of the Wastewater Master Plan update was to analyze the
system and determine if the current rehabilitation and maintenance program was
adequate. This type of study usually involves evaluation of video records from a Video
Monitoring Program. Although the City had a periodic video monitoring program, there was
insufficient dafa from that effort that could be utilized in fhe analysis, so an "Age of Pipe
Analysis" was performed. That analysis made fhe following recommendations:
1. That the City needs to implement a more comprehensive Video Monitoring Program -
Based on that recommendation Council recently approved the allocation of funds to
fund the purchase of a new vehicle and cameras, to implemenf the program. In
addition, Council also authorized the hiring of additional staff to run the program.
2. Based on fhe above finding, the sfudy concluded that the City needed to pursue a
more aggressive sewer relining and replacement program.
3. The financial component of that analysis also determined that the current Sewer
Facilities Replacement Fee charged to users of the system was inadequate to support
the needed level of improvements. Therefore, it was recommended that the fee be
increased immediately within the next fiscal year. This recommendation is being
incorporated into the Sewer Rate Update that is planned for next fiscal year.
9. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the
current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes
x
No_
Explain:
a. "G" Street Pump Station Improvement- This involves the construction of a new pump
station at the BF Goodrich site to replace the existing pump station, which is now old and
poses a significant risk of failure. This project is currently under design.
MISCELLANEOUS
10. Are there areas of western Chula Vista that have inadequate sewer collection
capacity?
Yes
x
No_
Explain: Through the Wastewater Master Plan Update, there were certain areas of the
collection system where the analysis showed that portions of the collection system needed
to be upgraded to address near-term peak flow events. To mitigate these conditions,
Council approved four CIP projects listed below to deal with these issues. The improvement
plans for these projects are currently being designed by City's Engineering Design Group
and should be completed by the end of this fiscal year.
The projects are as follows:
a. Moss Street Sewer Improvement between Broadway and Woodlawn
b. Colorado Avenue Sewer Improvement between "J" Street and "K" Street
c. Center Street Sewer Improvement between Garrett and Fourth Avenue
d. Main Street Sewer Improvement between Hilltop and Fresno
Page 4
11. Does the current Sewer Threshold Standard need any modification?
Yes
No
x .
Explain:
12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the GMOC to recommend to the City
Council?
Yes
x
No_
Explain: The GMOC should support the recommendation from the Wastewater
Master Plan Update regarding the adjustment of the Sewer Facilities Replacement Fee.
13. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes
No
x.
Explain:
Prepared by:
Title:
Date:
Anthony Chukwudolue
Civil Engineer
12/15/2004
Page 5
THRESHOLD
1. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the Otay
Water District or Sweetwater Authority for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the Sweetwater
Authority, and the Otay Water District with a 12 to 18 month development forecast and
requests an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing
growth. The replies should address the following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering both short and
long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or
committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
e. Other relevant information the agencies desire to communicate to the City and
GMOC.
1. Please fill in or update the tables below.
SDCWA
Helix WD
RWCWRF
12,677
565
425
93%
4%
3%
13,500
600
450
97%
0%
3%
97%
0%
3%
92%
5%
3%
otal (MG)
13,667
100%
14,550
100%
100%
100%
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Retumed ques~GMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc
Page 1
otal Flow Supply 125.9 125.9 130.6 130.6 144.6
Capacity
Potable Stora e Capacity 189.7 190.7 190.7 197.0 234.6
Non-Potable Storage 28.3 28.3 31.7 31.7 43.7
Capacity
Potable Supply Flow 124.9 124.9 129.5 129.5 137.5
Capacity
Non-Potable Supply Flow 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 7.1
Capacity
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the current ability to
maintain service levels?
Yes No X
Explain:
The Otay Water District (Otay WD) has anticipated growth, effectively managed the
addition of new facilities, and does not foresee any negative impacts to current or future
service levels. In fact service levels have been enhanced with the addition of new major
facilities that provide access to existing storage reservoirs and increase supply capacity
from the Helix WD Levy Water Treatment Plant, which came on line during FY 2003-
2004. This is due to the extensive and excellent planning Otay WD has done over the
years including the development of a Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) dated
August 2002 and the annual process to have the capital improvement program (CIP)
projects funded and constructed in a timely manner corresponding with development
construction activities and water demand growth that require new or upgraded facilities.
The process of planning followed by the Otay WD is to use WRMP as a guide and to
reevaluate each year the best alternatives for providing a reliable water supply and
system facilities.
Growth projection data provided from SANDAG, the City of Chula Vista, and the
development community was used to develop the WRMP. The WRMP incorporates the
concepts of water storage and supply from neighboring water agencies to meet
emergency water supply needs. The Otay WD works closely with City of Chula Vista
staff to insure the WRMP remains current and incorporates changes in development
activities within all areas of Chula Vista such as the Otay Ranch.
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05\Retumed ques~GMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc
Page 2
3. Do current facilities have the ability to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18
month and 5 year time frames?
Yes X No
Explain:
The Otay WD plans, designs, and constructs water system facilities to meet projected
ultimate demands to be placed upon the potable and recycled water systems. Also, the
Otay WD forecasts needs and plans for water supply requirements to meet projected
demands at ultimate build out. The water facilities are constructed when development
activities require them for adequate cost effective water service. Potable water supply
within San Diego County is typically planned for and acquired through the regional
approach process. The San Diego County Water Authority (SDCW A) and Metropolitan
Water District of Southem Califomia (MWDSC) take the leadership role in these efforts.
An excellent example of this is, on April 29, 1998, the SDCWA signed a historic agreement
with Imperial Irrigation District (liD) for the long-term transfer of conserved Colorado River
water to San Diego County. Under the Water Authority-liD Agreement, Colorado River
water will be conserved by Imperial Valley farmers, who voluntarily participate in the
program, and then transferred to the SDCW A for use in San Diego County. The water to
be conserved is part of liD's Colorado River rights, which are among the most senior in the
Lower Colorado River Basin. Imperial Valley farmers will conserve the water by employing
extra-ordinary conservation measures.
The Otay WD assures that facilities are in place to receive and deliver the water supply
for all existing and future customers. Also, the Otay WD successfully reached a final
agreement with the City of Diego for recycled water supplies from their South Bay Water
Reclamation Plant (SBWRP). The City of San Diego formally approved the agreement
on October 20,2003. The agreement provides for 6 MGD of supply from the SBWRP.
The Otay WD is actively pursuing development local water supply through the sharing of
treatment plant capacity with agencies such as Helix Water District and the City of San
Diego. An agreement with the City of San Diego for 10 MGD from their Otay Water
Treatment Plant (WTP) has been achieved. In addition 8 MGD from the Helix Water
District's Levy Water Treatment Plant is currently available to Otay WD. The completion
of construction of a new connection with Helix WD known as Flow Control Facility No. 14
was placed into operation during FY 2003 - 2004. This connection made the increased
capacity a reality.
The MWD, SDCW A, and Otay WD have addressed the availability of water supply in
emergency conditions. The Otay WD need for a ten-day water supply during a SDCW A
shutdown has been fully addressed in the WRMP. The Otay WD has the ability to meet
and exceed this requirement through its own storage and existing interconnections with
other agencies. MWD, SDCWA, and Otay WD all have programs to continue to meet or
exceed the emergency water supply needs of the region into the foreseeable future. As
mentioned above the Otay WD executed a 50-year renewable agreement with the City of
San Diego to provide 10 MGD of immediate capacity and an additional required capacity
in the future from the Otay WTP.
The Otay WD, in concert with the City of Chula Vista, continues to expand the use of
recycled water. The City of San Diego has completed the construction of their SBWRP
capable of producing approximately 15 MGD. Recycled water from this facility is
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed ques~GMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc
Page 3
available for distribution by the Otay WD per terms of the agreement with the City of San
Diego. This supply source it Otay WD will occur once construction of a transmission
main, storage facility, and a pump station are complete. The estimated schedule is fall of
2006.
The Otay WD continues to encourage water conservation through a school education
program, penalties on excessive use of water for irrigation, and water conservation
incentive programs.
4. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth for the 12-18
month time frame? Yes X No_;
For the 5 year time frame?
Yes X
No_
Explain:
a. Type of facility.
b. Location of facility.
c. Projected production, in gallons.
d. Projected operational date.
e. Are sites available for these facilities?
f. How will these facilities be funded?
g. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
The Otay WD WRMP defines and describes the new water facilities that are required to
accommodate the forecasted growth within the entire Otay WD. These facilities are
incorporated into the annual Otay WD CIP for implementation when required to support
development activities. As major development plans are formulated and proceed
through the City of Chula Vista approval process, Otay WD requires the developer to
prepare a Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP) for the specific development project consistent
with the WRMP. This SAMP document defines and describes all the water and recycled
water system facilities to be constructed to provide an acceptable and adequate level of
service to the proposed land uses. The SAMP also defines the financial responsibility of
the facilities required for service. The Otay WD through collection of water meter capacity
fees funds those facilities identified as CIP projects. These fees were established to
fund the CIP project facilities. The developer funds all other required water system
facilities to provide water service to their project. Examples of this process are the Otay
Ranch SPA One, EastLake Trials, Salt Creek Ranch, Village One West, San Miguel
Ranch, Village 6, Sun bow II, EastLake Woods, EastLake Vistas, and etc. development
projects. The SAMP identifies the major water transmission main and distribution
pipeline facilities typically located within the roadway alignments.
A few examples of significant new CIP project facilities include the following listed
projects. Funding for these projects are provided from water meter capacity fees.
. The Lower Otay Pump Station project is located adjacent to the City of San Diego
Otay WTP. This significant capital investment will pump the treated water
produced at the Otay WTP into the Central Area-Otay Mesa Interconnection
Pipeline system connected to the Central Area and Otay Mesa Systems.
. The 680-1 Reservoir and 944-1 Pump Station projects are located underground
in the planned Sunset Park as a joint use project concept coordinated with the
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05\Retumed questlGMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 5-2004.doc
Page 4
City of Chula. These major recycled water storage and pumping facilities are now
in operation. These facilities serve recycled water to the communities of Rancho
Del Rey, Sunbow II, Otay Ranch, etc.
. The Patzig Reservoir inlet and outlet pipeline capacity enhancements and a new
disinfection facility are located south of Otay Lakes Road on Otay WD property.
These improvements have increased water flow rate capacity and insure
continued high water quality for existing and future customers.
. The 980-2 Pump Station project will be located adjacent to the existing 30 MG
EastLake Greens Reservoir on existing Otay WD property. This significant
capital investment will increase the pumping capacity within the 980 and 711
Pressure Zones to meet anticipated demand requirements. Construction of this
project has begun.
. The 3D-inch transmission main to transport recycled water from the SBWRP to
the Otay WD will be constructed from the plant to a location upon the existing
Otay landfill property site.
. A 12 MG recycled water 450-1 Reservoir project will be constructed at the
terminus of the 3D-inch transmission main. This reservoir is required to balance
relatively constant flow from the SBWRP with the widely variable recycled water
demand conditions.
. A 16.5 MGD recycled water 680-1 Pump Station project will be constructed
adjacent to the proposed 450-1 Reservoir. The pump station will provide the
pressure and flow capacity necessary to meet demand requirements, met by
supply from the SBWRP, of the existing and future recycled water markets within
the City of Chula Vista.
5. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current level
of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes No_X_
Explain:
An historic and very positive water supply event was recently transacted, which is the
final approval of the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) and other related
agreements between all interested parties and agencies. With execution of the QSA and
related agreements, delivery of 10,000 acre-feet into San Diego County from the transfer
will be made in 2003. The quantities will increase annually to 200,000 acre-feet by the year
2021 and remain fixed for the duration of the transfer agreement. The initial term of the
agreementis for 45 years, with a provision to extend the agreement for an additional 30-
year term under certain circumstances. This agreement assures the San Diego County
region a reliable water supply. Also, the SDCWA has completed their Regional Water
Facilities Master Plan that addresses water supply needs through 2030 and the required
systems for its delivery to Otay WD and their other member agencies.
On September 25, 2003, the SDCWA Board voted to accept assignment of the MWD's
water rights to 77,700 ac-ftIyr from projects that will line the All American Canal (ACC)
and Coachella Canal (CC). The projects will stop the loss of water that currently occurs
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed ques~GMOC 2004 Questionalre 7-2003111ru 6-2004.doc Page 5
through seepage, and that conserved water will go to the SDCWA. This will provide the
San Diego region with an additional 8.5 million acre-feet of water over the 11 O-year life of
the agreement.
The SDCWA has a proposed and continues to move forward with the Seawater
Desalination Project at Encina (Desai Project) consists of a 50 MGD reverse osmosis
desalination plant sited adjacent to the Encina Power Station in the City of Carls bad and
the pipelines and ancillary facilities necessary to convey product water from the plant to
local and regional water distribution systems. The Desai Project is anticipated to
produce 56,000 acre-feet annually of new water supply generated from seawater drawn
in by the Encina Power Station cooling water circulation system from the Pacific Ocean
via the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The Desai Project would provide a new source of high
quality water that would meet or exceed state and federal standards.
MAINTENANCE
6. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes _X_ No
Explain:
The Otay WD has an established renewal and replacement fund within the Operating
Budget for all facilities. There is adequate funding secured and identified for
maintenance and replacement of existing facilities, as they are required to be maintained
and/or replaced.
7. Are there any new major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuantto
the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes _X_ No
Explain:
The following is a list of the maintenance, replacement, and upgrade CIP projects within
the current FY 2005 Otay WD Five-Year CIP project plan. The Otay WD produces each
year a Otay WD Five Year CIP project list, which contains information on all of the
proposed CIP projects.
CIP Project CIP Proiect Title
No.
043 Cathodic Protection Stems Installation and Maintenance Pro
077 Reservoir Maintenance Interior/Exterior Coatin IPaintin IRe ram
101 Water Service Lateral Re lacement Pro ram
102 Water S stem Valve Re lacement Pro ram
205 Disinfection Stems Minor Installation and Maintenance Pro ram
250 Telemet S stem Installation and Maintenance
295 624-1 Reservoir Disinfection, InletlOutletlB ass & 613 Reservoir Demolition
S009 Sewer Stem Manhole Rehabilitation Pro ram
S013 RWCWRF 1m rovements
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05IReturned ques~GMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc Page 6
5014
W259
W267
W270
W306
W307
W308
W316
W349
W358
W366
W382
W384
W419
ram
ram
RECYCLED WATER
8. Please update/fill in the table below.
RECYCLED WATER DEMAND PER YEAR (Million Gallons (MG))
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
TOTAL 299 415 894 720 769 1,207
USES
Irriaation 299 415 894 720 769 1,207
Industry
Recharae
8a. How many gallons of recycled water can OWD currently deliver?
The Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF) can now produce about
1.1 MGD or 1,232 acre-feet per year of recycled water. When the recycled water
demand exceed supply capabilities of the RWCWRF typically limited to about 365 MG
per year the supply shortfall will be met by supplementing the recycled water system with
potable water. The recycled water system will continue to be supplemented with potable
water until the additional source of recycled water supply from the City of San Diego's
SBWRP is available. The supply of recycled water from the SBWRP is expected to
begin in the fall of 2006 with construction completion and operation of the transmission,
storage, and pump station systems necessary to receive the SBWRP recycled water.
8b. Is OWD meeting demands per the table above?
Yes.
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Returned ques~GMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc
Page 7
9. Please give a brief description of the impact the below items have on the District's
current efforts to market recycled water.
a Water quality
b. Price of water
c. Willing customers
d. Distribution lines
e. Other
Explain:
The total dissolved salt content of the recycled water supply, typically ranging between
900 and 1,000 TDS, is the primary factor potentially impacting the cost of recycled water
production to meet regulatory requirements on limitations of salt loading within market
areas. Currently, TDS levels are well below regulatory levels and do not impact water
quality requirements, nor increase the cost for the production. The landscape planting
materials need to be selected such that those that are highly sensitivity to salt levels are
not integrated into the landscape-planting scheme.
The Otay WD currently markets recycled water at 85% of the potable water rate and
does not charge for electrical energy pumping requirements within the recycled water
rate structure which when combined represents about a 75% cost relative to potable
water. This pricing level has increased user willingness and acceptance of the Otay WD
mandatory recycled water use ordinance. Customer acceptance of recycled water
overall has been positive. When resistance is encountered it is typically due to concerns
of increased capital cost to install the necessary distribution pipelines to the irrigation
areas. The Otay WD through collection of water meter capacity fees funds the recycled
water transmission main, storage reservoir, and pump station capital facilities.
MISCELLANEOUS
10. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No _X_
Explain:
The current threshold standard addresses all the significant aspects of water service and
the capability to accommodate the continuing growth within the City of Chula Vista.
11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes _X_ No
Explain:
That the Otay WD and the Growth Management Oversight Commission recommend that the
City of Chula Vista fully support and continue to require and encourage the use of recycled
water. The City of Chula Vista should continue to encourage joint use land use projects for
mutual benefit such as the successful Sunset View Park example.
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed questlGMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc Page 8
12. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and the
GMOC?
Yes_X_
No
-
Explain:
Recvcled Water
On the recycled waterfront, the Otay WD continues to actively require the development of
recycled water facilities and related demand generation within new development projects
within the City of Chula Vista, and support of the City of San Diego's South Bay Water
Reclamation Plant. The City of San Diego has identified Otay WD as their major market
for recycled water produced at the SBWRP. The agreement between the City of San
Diego and Otay WD is approved. The Otay WD plans to receive recycled water from the
SBWRP, which is currently scheduled to occur in the fall of 2006.
Water Conservation
The Otay WD continues to have a Water Conservation Program Ordinance to reduce the
quantity of water used by customers for the purpose of conserving water supplies. The
program actually provides a water "budget," thereby requiring irrigation efficiency by
water accounts dedicated solely to the irrigation of landscaping. A study suggested that
if users could be encouraged to manage their landscape with a maximum annual amount
of 48-inches of water, approximately 1,000 acre-feet of water would be saved annually.
Conservation is also promoted by the education of the public. The SDCW A, in
conjunction with the Otay WD, Helix WD, and Cuyamaca College operate the
educational Water Conservation Garden.
Hiqhliqhts of Otav Water District's Operation
The following are a few highlights of the FY 2003-2004 accomplishments by Otay WD.
1. No water rate increases associated with Otay WD operations.
2. No water meter capacity fee 'increases.
3. $31 million capital improvement program budget.
4. The Otay WD is in the 90% design phase of the Lower Otay Pump Station to supply
the currently available 10 MGD from the City of San Diego's Otay WTP.
5. The City of San Diego and Otay WD recently approved and signed the final
agreement for 6 MGD of recycled water supply from their SBWRP.
6. The Otay WD is nearing the completion of the environmental documentation and is
well underway in the design phases of the 30-inch transmission main from the
SBWRP and the related 12 MG 450-1 Reservoir and 680-1 Pump Station projects.
In summary, the water supply outlook is excellent and the City of Chula Vista's long-term
growth should be assured of a reliable water supply. The historic and very positive event
being the final approval of the Quantification Settlement Agreement and other related
agreements between all interested parties and agencies assures a long term water
supply future. An additional assured water supply occurred with the SDCW A Board
acceptance of the assignment of the MWD's water rights from projects that will line the
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRebJrned ques~GMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc
Page 9
All American Canal and Coachella Canal. Also, the SDCWA has a proposed Seawater
Desalination Project at Encina, which consists of a reverse osmosis desalination plant
sited adjacent to the Encina Power Station in the City of Carlsbad and the pipelines and
ancillary facilities necessary to convey product water from the plant to local and regional
water distribution systems.
The potential for interruptions to the water supply have been addressed by Otay WD,
SDCWA, and MWD through the development of long-term emergency water supply such
as the SDCWA Emergency Storage Project (90 days), the MWD Diamond Valley
Reservoir (six months) and Otay WD ten-day storage and supply strategy.
The continued close coordination efforts with the City of Chula Vista and other agencies
have brought forth significant enhancements for the effective utilization of the region's
water supply to the benefit of all citizens.
Prepared by: James F. Peasley
Title: Engineering Planning Manager
Date: 12/10/2004
C:\dffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned ques~GMOC 2004 Questionaire 7-2003 thru 6-2004.doc
Page 10
THRESHOLD
1. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the
Water District for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the Sweetwater
Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water District with a 12 to 18 month development
forecast and request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and
continuing growth. The District's replies should address the following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering both short and
long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or
committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
e. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and
GMOC.
1. Please fill in the tables below.
Local
1m orted
1423
6658
18
82
2430
5670
2
58
22
78
18
82
otal
8081
100
8100
100
100
100
Notes: 1)
Use of local vs. Imported water sources is highly dependent on weather conditions and
therefore unpredictable.
Page 1
2) Table values are for portion of Chula Vista served by Sweetwater Authority only.
FY
2001
FY
2002
FY
2003
FY
2004
12-18 Mo
Projection
5 Year
Projection
Yearly Demand - (Purchased by
consumers, MG) 8.048 7.618 8063 8081
8100
8350
Yearly Supply Capacity, MG (1) 26,740 26,740 26,740 27,740 27,740 27,740
Storage Capacity. MG - Treated 42 42 42 45
Water 42 42
Storage Capacity, MG - Raw
Water 17,421 17,421 17,421 17,421 17,421 17,421
Notes: (1) Maximum supply capacity includes 62 cfs treated water connection, Robert Perdue Treatment Plant (30
mgd), Reynolds DesaI. plant (4mgd) and National City Wells (2 mgd).
(2) Normal maximum supply capacity is from Robert Perdue Treatment Plant (30 mgd), Reynolds DesaI. plant
(4mgd) and National City Wells (2 mgd).
Please provide brief responses to the following questions.
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes No_X_
Explain:
Growth observed within the Sweetwater Authority service area during the review
period was approximately 0.5% which is not significant.
3. Do current facilities have the ability to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18
month time frame?
Yes_X
No
Explain:
Based on current adopted planning by the City of Chula Vista, no significant growth
is expected within the Sweetwater service area during the next 12 to 18 month period.
4. Will any new facilities will be required to accommodate the forecast growth for the
12-18 month time frame? Yes No_X
Page 2
for the 5-7 year time frame? Yes
No_X
Explain: Infrastructure improvements are proposed in conjuction with our 2002 Water
distribution System Master Plan
a. Type of facility.
b. Location offacility.
c. Projected production, in gallons.
d. Projected operational date.
e. Are sites available for these facilities?
f. How will these facilities be funded?
g. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
5. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current level
of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes_X_ No
Explain: The ability of the SD County water Authority to continue delivering water for
current and projected demands, as we rely on this agency to supplement water supply.
MAINTENANCE
6. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes_X
No
Explain: Maintenance is directly funded by our rate payers and we are not dependent
on state or federal funding.
7. Are there any new major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to
the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes
X_
No
Explain: The Perdue Treatment plant $40 million upgrade to meet future water
treatment standards. Master Plan improvements within the City of Chula Vista are
approximately $20 million.
8. Does the District have any plans to produce or distribute reclaimed water?
Yes
X_
No
Page 3
Explain: The Authority hired a consultant to prepare a Recycled Water Feasibility
Study and Master Plan. The driving force behind this effort is Duke's proposed power plant
design alternative which requires a 5 MGD recycled water supply to cool power generating
units. The SDCWA is providing a $75,000 grant to study the use of recycled in the entire
Sweetwater Authority service area. If the Duke Power plant construction moves forward
Sweetwater Authority plans to supply their recycled water demand.
MISCELLANEOUS
9. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No
x_
Explain: The threshold for water service appears to be working fine.
10. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes _X_ No
Explain: Ensure that water supply is available atthe state level to support local growth
11. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and the
GMOC?
Yes
No
X_
Explain: None at this time.
Prepared by:
Title:
Date:
Hector Martinez
Deputy Chief Engineer
1/12/05
Page 4
THRESHOLD STANDARD
In the area east of 1-805, the City shall construct, by buildout (approximately year 2030) 60,000
GSF of library space beyond the city-wide June 30, 2000 GSF total. The construction of said
facilities shall be phased such that the City will not fall below the city-wide ratio of 500 GSF
per 1,000 population. Library facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
Please fill in the blanks or uodate the information on this table.
FY 1996-97 156,041 102,000 654
FY 1997-98 163,417 102,000 624
FY 1998-99 169,265 102,000 603
FY 1999-00 178,645 102,000 571
FY 2000-01 187,444 102;000 544
FY 2001-02' 195,000 102,000 523
FY 2002-03' 203,000 102,000 502
FY 2003-04' 211,800 102,000 482
225,900 102,000 451
255,000 132,000'" 517
'Planning Division Estimate
"S-year projections are based on GMOC Forecast.
"'Previously assumed that EastLake Branch would close with the opening of Rancho del Rey Branch but because of the
high circulation at this location it has been decided to keep it open until the Eastern Urban Center Branch opens late in
the decade.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
2. The ratio of library square feet to the population has dropped below the 500 square
foot threshold minimum. Please comment on this situation and what actions can be
taken to mitigate the shortfall.
Comment:
The ratio of library square feet to the population will only increase when the new Rancho del Rey
Branch Library opens. The new branch should open late Fall 2006, since Public Facilities
Development Impact Fees have been collected for this project.
3. Are libraries "adequately equipped"?
Yes X
No_
Explain:
a. Have resources been provided to improve the library technology infrastructure
for the Civic Center, South Chula Vista, and EastLake Libraries?
The resources provided are sufficient to maintain the level of technology presently being utilized.
The library's network servers have been replaced to keep pace with demands for enhanced network
security and to enable the library to be in compliance with mandated legislation. The library also
implemented various systems to enhance or improve functionality. These included:
~ Upgrade Integrated Library Online System (IOlS) in July 04 to the most recent version
~ Self-check registration via the Internet on-sire and/or external
~ Wireless access at Civic Center Branch (will be implemented at South Chula Vista Branch in
2005
~ Courtesy notices by email of upcoming due items
b. What is the current materials collection ratio per person and, if not already at
this point, what is necessary to bring this to 3.0 items per person?
Currently the Library has 474,393 total items in the collection at all three facilities, averaging 2.2
items per capita, based on population of 211,800 (FY 03-04). In November 2004, City Council
approved a one-time book augmentation in the amount of $250,000, which will add an additional
8,000 items to the collection and with the construction of the Rancho del Rey branch the
collection will increase by an additional 170,000 bringing the total to 652,393. Therefore, by
2009, with the population projected to be 255,000, the items per capita ratio would be 3.03
4. Are libraries "adequately staffed"?
Yes X
No_
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed questlGMOC Library 04.doc
Page 2
Explain:
a. Have staffing levels been increased for the South Chula Vista Library?
Staffing level are sufficient. In August 2002 public service hours increased from 48 hours per week
to 56 hours per week. As a result, staffing was increased to cover these additional hours. On an
hourly basis, staffing levels at South Chula Vista Branch Library are comparable to those at Civic
Center Branch Library.
5. Please provide a staffing plan which illustrates how the existing and planned library
facilities for Chula Vista will be staffed and operated in light of measured community
needs related to hours of operation and staffing.
Describe or Attach:
The Chula Vista Public Library staff has developed a staffing plan for library branches that allocate s
a core number of staff at each facility, consisting of 5 permanent librarians, 5-7 permanent
paraprofessionals, and a large contingency of hourly support staff to maintain the high level of
service.
The plan, which does not include the current staffing levels at the shared-facility at EastLake High
School, is designed to provide the community with the maximum number of hours open in the most
efficient and cost effective manner. This plan allows for branches to be open to the community
between 56-64 hours a week.
Of course, it is not just the number of staff members that is important. The Chula Vista Public
Library understands that in order to be able to attract and recruit qualified staff, there must be a
commitment to a high quality of work life for both staff and volunteers and excellent intemal training
programs must be in place. Recent training opportunities have included:
. Reference 101- available to all public services staff covering basic reference techniques,
customer services issues, and current library resources available.
. Bi-Annual All-Staff meetings provide time for staff to learn and reflect on current issues, past
progress, and future goals.
. Computer Software Classes- held monthly to provide library staff an opportunity to keep up
with technology
The library system also has a vibrant volunteer program. During the past year approximately 589
individuals have registered as volunteers working in literacy, technical service, circulation and other
customer service areas. The Library's Volunteer Coordinator works closely with the City's Volunteer
Coordinator on the establishment of job descriptions and job performance standards, as well as on
recruitment and retention issues.
GROWTH IMPACTS
6. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes
No X.
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned questlGMOC Library 04.doc
Page 3
Explain:
7. Are current facilities able to serve forecasted growth for both the 18-month and 5 year
time frame?
Yes
No X .
Explain:
Until the opening of Rancho del Rey Branch projected for late Fall 2006, the three existing library
branches will not be able to serve the forecasted growth within the 18-month time frame.
8. Will new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth?
Yes X
No
Explain:
a. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
In order to accommodate forecasted growth, the 1998 Library Master Plan calls for the construction
of a full service regional library of approximately 30,000 square feet in the Rancho del Rey area at
the corner of Paseo Ranchero and East H Street by late Fall 2006, and the construction of a second
full service regional library of equal same size in the Eastem Urban Center in Otay Ranch. Public
Facilities Development Impact Fees have been and are being collected to pay 100% of the costs of
these facilities.
9. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting the provision of library services?
Yes
No X
Explain:
MAINTENANCE/UPGRADE OF EQUIPMENT & COLLECTIONS
10. Has adequate funding been identified and/or secured for necessary maintenance
and/or upgrade of equipment and collections?
Yes
X
No
Explain:
The Civic Center branch library will be undergoing a major renovation over the next 1-2 years.
Funding is being secured for the needed building upgrades, including upgrading of the electrical
system to handle the increased number of computers, self checkout machines and printers.
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned questlGMOC Library 04.doc
Page 4
Funding will also provide for replacement of carpeting, banners, refinishing and/or replacement of
furniture and furnishings, improvement of the energy efficiency of the lighting system, and redesign
of underutilized non-public areas of the library and overcrowded staff cubicles in the Circulation and
Information and Reader Services sections. The Civic Center Branch library's HVAC system and
roof have been replaced over the past five years.
Funds have also been secured to repair floors, fountains and other building issues at South Chula
Vista Branch Library in 2005.
a. Are there any major maintenance/upgrades to be undertaken over the 1-year
and 5-year time frames?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
The Library has secured funding through the Capital Improvement Project budget to fund the
implementation of Radio Frequency Identification technology (RFID), which will allow the Library to
move circulation functions to a new level of self-service.
The Library has a goal to use technology to improve service and reduce costs. Radio Frequency
Identification [RFID] is the technology that promises to fulfill those desires. RFID uses tags placed
in library materials to transmit an identification number to the existing Integrated Library Online
System [I LOS] linking a description of the item with the borrower. It is ideally suited to a self-service
model. To checkout materials the borrower is only required to place the items in a certain place to
be 'read' and deactivate the theft strip, eliminating the need for staff to handle each item. Similarly,
when the borrower returns the item, they place it in a return slot that reads the RFID tag, credits the
borrower's account for the returned item and prints a receipt. Mechanized sorting equipment with
conveyer belts reads the RFID tag and sorts the materials, further reducing handling by staff.
Implementation of RFID begins with purchasing tags and coding equipment and inserting the RFID
tags in the materials. While the conversion takes place, the ILOS continues to use the present
barcodes scanned by staff to checkout materials. Once a significant percentage of the collection
has been tagged at all branches, RFID equipment can be installed. If additional funding exists, the
conversion to complete reliance on RFID, as described, can be phased in over a period of about 2
years. There will be additional costs associated with physical modifications to fumiture, electrical
wiring, communications wiring and work areas to accommodate the new equipment in existing
buildings. Supplies (RFID tags) and service maintenance contracts will be an on-going cost of
operating an RFID system.
11. Please provide an update on the funding and building program for the Rancho Del
Rey Library.
Describe:
On Tuesday, November 30, the California Public Library Construction and Renovation Bond Board
met to consider 72 applications totaling $586 million. At that meeting they funded 12 projects
totaling $77 million. This was the third and final grant cycle.
Once again, Chula Vista's application to construct the Rancho del Rey Branch Library was not one
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Retumed quest\GMOC Library 04.doc
Page 5
of those funded. As in the first two rounds, the City received a "very good" overall rating.
Although this is the end of the grant process, the Rancho del Rey Branch library will be constructed
at the corner of East Hand Paseo Ranchero using Development Impact Fees that have been
collected for this purpose. The building program will be revised and General Services intends to
retain a "design- build" team for the project during the first quarter of 2005.
MISCELLANEOUS
12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No -2L..:
Explain:
13. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate to
the GMOC?
Yes X
No_
Explain:
In August 2004, the Chula Vista Public Library embarked on a new model of library service, called
"Marketplace." This exciting model, which was rolled-out first at Civic Center Branch, includes:
~ Prominent displays of the Library's newest materials
~ Additional book displays on seasonal topics like travel, holidays and gardening
~ Belter marketing of the most popular children's resources
~ A small cafe area
~ Additional self-checkout and new self-registration
~ Staff relocated from behind desks onto the public floor
~ Wireless Internet connection
All of these changes were made to provide betler customer service, increase circulation and
encourage more use of the library. They are consistent with changes that have been successfully
implemented by a growing number of libraries across the nation using elements of a model that's
used in bookstores, coffee shops and other retail establishments.
Since the Marketplace was unveiled monthly circulation has steadily grown. For example,
circulation in November increased by 18% over the same month in 2003.
The Marketplace model will be implemented at South Chula Vista Branch Library in 2005.
Prepared by:
Title:
Date:
Mariya G. Anton
Administrative Analyst II
December 3, 2004
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed questlGMOC Library 04.doc
Page 6
THRESHOLD STANDARD:
1. Storm water flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
2. The GMOC shall annually review the performance ofthe City's storm drain system to
determine its ability to meet the goals and objectives above.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Please submit to GMOC the current standards that are used to evaluate drainage
system performance in regards to meeting the threshold standard.
The City's standards with respect to drainage system design and performance are
addressed in Section 3-200 of the City's Subdivision Manual (attached). In general, all storm
drainage systems shall be designed so that the underground storm drain capacity and street
flow shall convey the 1 OO-year storm event without property damage.
2. Have storm water flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at anytime
during this reporting period?
Yes X
No
If yes:
a.
b.
Where did this occur? Although no property damage occurred, to our
knowledge, there was flooding at Third Avenue and L Street in February
2004.
Why did it occur? A large tree branch was wedged into one side of the box
culvert under L Street. The branch collected debris from the upstream
unlined portions of the channel as well as from construction site storm water
devices (BMPs) during the rain event, subsequently blocking approximately
50 percent of the box culvert's capacity at that location.
What has been, or is being done to correct the situation? City
maintenance crews removed the branch and other debris.
c.
GROWTH IMPACTS
3. Has the addition of over 2,600 new homes during the reporting period negatively
affected the ability to maintain service levels?
Page 1
Yes
No X
Explain: As a condition of development, the additional new homes (development) have
not negatively affected the ability to maintain service levels since the drainage facilities that
require maintenance, such as detention basins, have been incorporated into maintenance
districts that are funded by the area of benefit.
4. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 24 -month and 5-
year time frame, constituting over 5,000 and 12,000 new homes respectively?
Yes
X
No
Explain: Developers are required per Section 3-200 of the Subdivision Manual to provide
on-site detention facilities such that the post-development flow rate does not exceed the pre-
development flow rate at the outlet of the subdivision.
5. Western Chula Vista may experience the addition of 2,300 or possibly additional
housing units over the next 5 years, what are the issues, if any, that need to be
monitored in regards to this level of growth and drainage?
Describe:
1. Storm water quality runoff requirements may inhibit the ability to be able to improve
existing natural drainage channels.
2. More intense development will be placing additional needs to have covered drainage
facilities instead of open channels so that parking or other passive uses can be provided
on the surface.
3. All development/redevelopment projects are required to comply with the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.
4. Development along existing unimproved drainage facilities will be considerably more
expensive to develop than for property not along natural drainage channels.
5. City requirements regarding development within the floodplain (included in Chapter
18.54 of the City's Municipal Code) are sufficient and should not be relaxed. The lowest
floor elevation of residential structures shall be elevated to a minimum of one foot above
the regulatory flood elevation.
6. Historically, property damage has been confined to areas developed within or adjacent
to flood plains.
6. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate this forecasted growth
(differentiate between east and west)?
Yes X
No
1. East: New facilities will be required in some of the natural drainage channels. Land
development projects will be required to provide all necessary facilities and their
respective share of maintenance costs to accommodate their impacts.
2. West: It is anticipated that some facilities will be required as parcels encroach onto
natural drainage areas due to redevelopment at a higher density. Redevelopment may
Page 2
also require that some existing facilities be modified or reconstructed so that more of the
parcel can be redeveloped.
a. Are there sites available for the needed facilities?
Yes, pending environmental resource agency approval, there are some limited areas
in each of the drainage basins where additional drainage facilities could be added.
However, most of these areas are on private property.
b. How will these facilities be funded?
It is expected that since the areas for these facilities are generally privately owned,
that the property owner will be funding these improvements as a condition of
development. In some cases, depending on the type and magnitude of
development, consideration of City funding participation could be approved by the
City Council.
c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
The City collects storm drain fees both from sewer/ storm drain users. During Fiscal
Year 2003-04, $684,858 was collected in user fees. This fee was established per
Municipal Code Section14.16.010 to finance storm drain maintenance and the City's
NPDES Program. This fee has also been used in the past to finance certain storm
drain construction and rehabilitation CIP projects. However, due to inflation and
additional NPDES requirements, it is anticipated that funds from this source may not
be available for such CIP projects in the future. Staff is currently evaluating methods
as to how this fee can be increased.
The NPDES Program is also financed by a storm water permit fee which is collected
with building permit issuance. These funds pay for the inspection of storm water
devices (BMPs) installed with new construction. $432,960 was collected on building
permits during Fiscal Year 2003-04.
7. Are there, or do you foresee any growth related issues affecting the maintenance of
the current level of service as Chula Vista's population increases? The population is
growing at about 7,800 persons per year.
Yes
x
No
Explain: The City's growth in the eastern areas will increase the flow into downstream
storm drains and may eventually result in storm drain capacity problems in westem Chula
Vista. One of the functions of the Drainage Master Plan is to identify the location of storm
drains which will be undersized to handle a 1 OO-year storm event at buildout.
PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATION
8. Please provide an update on the status of the Drainage Master Facilities Plan, that
will identify high priority drainage projects and applicable federal funding.
Description: The consultant PBS&J has submitted to the City a draft report with backup
data which covers both the eastern and western areas of the City. The work is estimated to
be about 90 percent complete. PBS&J has received the City's comments, and it is
Page 3
anticipated that the report will be finalized within the next month.
The City is also waiting on the resolution of an issue regarding the use of new hydrology
standards recently adopted by the County. This issue will affect the flows calculated for the
storm drain basins and thus recommendations for facilities which need to be upgraded.
After this issue is resolved, staff will be able to revise the report and use it to determine
drainage priorities.
The City has recently added the position of Grants Manager to the Administrative staff. This
person is in charge of seeking State and Federal funding sources for City projects and will
be working closely with the Engineering Division.
MAINTENANCE
9. Please provide an update on the adequacy of secured funding identified for
maintenance of existing facilities.
Explain: Maintenance of drainage facilities is generally supported from the General Fund
and to a lesser extent by Gas Tax and Storm Drain Fee funds. As a result of the EI Nino
storms of 1998, we became aware of a pressing need to rehabilitate the old metal drainage
pipes. Rehabilitation and/or replacement of some of the City's drainage infrastructure
facilities are a priority. Specifically, corrugated metal pipe (CMP) facilities are in need of
rehabilitation and/or replacement due to corrosion.
Council adopted the Westem Chula Vista Infrastructure Financing Program for Fiscal Year
2003-04 in order to improve the condition of City infrastructure in this area. The first portion
of this program involved a loan from the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Section 108 Loan Program, which would be repaid through the City's
annual Community Development Block Grant entitlement. The City has applied for and
received $11.9 million from this program. The second portion of this program involves
borrowing $9.0 million from the City's recent bond issue for Civic Center renovations and
repaying this money through funds generated by the Residential Construction Tax (RCT).
Drainage projects that will be funded from these sources include $3.0 million for CMP
replacement! rehabilitation, $0.74 million for drainage improvements on Emerson Street, and
$0.62 million for other drainage improvements. Sufficient funds are currently available from
the above sources to construct these projects.
On February 21, 2001, the San Diego County's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) municipal permit was adopted which requires implementation of Best
Management Practices so that pollutant levels at the storm water outfalls are minimized to
the maximum extent practicable. This requirement will create additional work on the City's
behalf to modify or construct the drainage infrastructure so that "first flush" pollutants are
captured and treated during significant rainfall events. This is an unfunded statewide
requirement that the majority of private development and City projects must incorporate in all
new projects and/or retrofit to the extent practicable.
10. Are there any major maintenance projects to be undertaken pursuant to the current 1-
year and 5-year CIP? If yes, Please provide a list of projects in order of importance.
Yes X
No
Page 4
The major project will be the televising of existing CMP to determine a priority list for the
replacement and repair of CMP. A related project in the Capital Improvement Program for
Fiscal Years 2003-04 and 2004-05 is DR 161: FY03/04 CDBG CMP Rehabilitation/
Replacement Program. This was a $325,000 CIP project which included the replacement of
784 linear feet of the CMP that most urgently needed replacement.
11. Describe the key drainage maintenance issues facing western Chula Vista now, and
what corrective work need to be undertaken, the cost of this work, and what is
currently not funded. Provide a list of unfunded drainage projects.
Description: The primary area of concern in western Chula Vista is the Montgomery Area,
located within the southwestern area of Chula Vista, generally bound by L Street to the north
and Hilltop Drive to the east. Scattered throughout the Montgomery area are incornpleted
street and drainage improvements, such as curb-and-gutter and sidewalks. As a result of
the incomplete improvements, both drainage and pavement-related problems occur. The
drainage and street improvements need to be constructed prior to any pavement
rehabilitation in order to preserve pavement life. In addition, due to inadequate drainage
facilities and in some cases, drainage between/within residential properties, problems occur
in these areas during the rainy season. Some of these areas can be improved through the
Western Chula Vista Infrastructure Financing Program, but there are insufficient funds to
construct all missing street and drainage improvements.
An additional concem is the maintenance of natural drainage courses. The accumulation of
silt and debris in these channels impedes their ability to carry the required stonm water flow,
but the City has frequently been required to obtain environmental permits from the State
and/ or Federal government before perfonming the maintenance, which is very time
consuming. We will be involved in upcoming discussions with the State Regional Water
Quality Control Board regarding the permitting process and maintenance needs.
12. During the recent heavy rains, particularly in October 2004, were there any drainage
failures or localized flooding? Indicate which instances may be attributable to
growth and comment on other issues of which the GMOC should be aware.
Yes
x
No
Two areas of local flooding during recent rains have been the around the intersection of
Third Avenue and L Street and the drainage channel east of Emerson Street and Third
Avenue. Both of these problems were largely due to debris blockages, and the problems
were eliminated after the debris was cleared away.
13. Please provide a map of those areas of Chula Vista that are either flood prone or have
flooded in recent years.
We have prepared a map showing areas which are known to be subject to flooding. This
does not indicate that there has been property damage in these areas. This map may not
be complete, as there may be other areas in the City which are subject to flooding of which
we are not aware. Narrative on each of these areas is included in the Drainage Master Plan.
14. Please verify that it is the intention of the City to replace all of the CMP used for
Page 5
drainage, and when you anticipate this will be accomplished.
Not all CMP needs to be replaced. The portions of CMP that are in relatively good condition
may be proposed for rehabilitation (such as lining) instead of replacement, a less expensive
and less disruptive option. The Drainage Master Plan has identified 94,158 linear feet of
CMP, which would cost an estimated $20.24 million to replace. Since the City does not
have sufficient funds to replace or rehabilitate all these pipes at the same time, we will
propose a CIP project to first televise the CMP. After this has been done, staff will establish
priorities and take care of the immediate needs first.
We will propose to begin this process during Fiscal Year 2005-06.
MISCELLANEOUS
15. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
Explain:
16. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No X
Explain:
17. Do you have any other relevant information the Department desires to communicate
to the GMOC?
Yes X
No
Explain: The Drainage Master Plan has enabled us to identify the locations of the CMP
within the City and has assisted us in setting priorities for televising all the CMP within the
City's storm drain system. Once it is complete, we also anticipate that the drainage Master
Plan will enable us to identify potential drainage deficiencies and correct them.
Prepared by (NamefTitle): Frank Rivera, Deputy City Engineer - General Services
Date: January 11, 2005
J:\EngineerlADVPLAN\GMOC\DRAINAGE 04 GMOC.emc.doc
Page 6
___..-1
--- ....1.
'1
~
" Q
,..-'s'" ~
.1;.. >
'4 '(!
1.0 t!, 0
..,...
'rr\
< "-..,
" '\ . ...--\
on') 1.--' \
......:-" , i
........,.;1 \
"'. i
\, \
. \
~)
\ -.
'1/\
If d-
~7 ~T1-..'-.J--~ '"
#) t..s....~'/.\..,.c'
"",'/ ' ,\;'
J". ,
./' ....
( f~"" N,
I li\
\. ~ ~"cd,.
;>.. J , ;::" _~....ro,.\J, "'"
i ;' &EV"" I" ~_.
~ . .on '
.... I ...' ,;,. ';j, ~ fI,',!.. ~ '. r.i..-~, '
,'/t,) "It.."" . "N.,. ""'. ,
!"'.~ .....-:. .;:...,~~,,\J
\"'- -- 'd>
>1\ \ 0
" \-->,C\ .
. \"~~ " ,~.
'\.~~/-\
I r~
.
,
.
C
WUH
C ct ~
OWe
oCl::i;-
...I cc G
II.
'\ i Q
"",'Wi\UI
A'
,
I;',
, . ' I '1 ~ ·
Hi! !! ili .Hd II hi I
i Jlli! J.1i HI !fin h! liilll I
! .!!!I!I~i 'i H! !~Hll!t"H .) t
i ~ I:J!f!!flfiiffli!f!f1!!f!!ili!!!fll I
! I ... ... ...:: ::11 '" r.lIU 'HI I;; 'UIJI.
.
.
.
\
:1 t,
I~ :~
,."
/-
~o~ , .,,'.
..,
i! ". '"
f' ~'::$''\'t-
\ I.
I
.
II'
\
~
~
'" i!
~7034-"" ~
I
.
i!
i!
o
\
.
o
...
.
.
.
~""
'\..
t,
~
>
...., ~
p~ '''"
",,,, III
-I',Q't\. V.
+: ... "do,
'\ 11'
c#"" ~ \
.",.' .
.':'"
~q~ :
'>0
'\,
\
....,
.J
.
;:.
\;
J
.
'. '~
~'1~\
~t
N 'M
, #
,
.
.. '"
., "
~~iv.O""
'!,
~..." ~
I \'
flf"~"~" . \ '" \
. 1,' \....
"~::.\,~;
-,.~',,~
~\,T'
,~.,
,\~
r-O
\,~
.~
\
~', ~,,'
..0
]
. ~
,...."
'<f"i
I
11"li 1111
.!' .11
h Ii U'i
1,1'1 "'.
'!ill Un
It"'I""1
. i. I
-Ii!;; 1'/1.
!in!'I'! ,III!
.ilut h'!
~h
*~m,~ "I
~IJ~I
.----.\
\ \
", \ .)
\ ,
~ '-I I
I .
I I
I !
L-.__I
I',"
,I"" ! i;-'
~
,..
r
I
I
I
I
I
:,0 I
"I.
.,.
-', ,.
'<~::".11'
",v..",V
,O\....~
...
'0110 I',','.
.c \
o
- .
.A"'M:I~\I:O;Or-l
";.'",,~l!:}J:t)~,
r
I" ".-
,I-,j "': ,:_'~.n
':.:iF':'\!;~:~;;i:::::/
o
,
[
"'.
'"
"'-'
:"'1"
r."
" - :/ '.1: ~I'i,<, r- I
ii. ,,:li'i,:,'.:.ri:J
<['il:.I!:','''' I'
~ :::;'IA~~~ I
~ ,',1'<1",' I
Ii 1';,;'::"1/ . I'
g,-, I ',II;':",!:,: i
. "1"1 '." I
.. . ,/" i'I" '
'ij,,1
...",,'
-il I,
~
s'f'\~~ I i:" J, C'J-
~.,:,.., I' !
l-irFR~EW"Y :, ' ", c' ~___J
ll1A\I'iI .~.:r~_ ',!'
I '
,
I
.~-
0'
,~
, --
~
-- '
"\
t
. .
\
.
\
'1O
\
~
'"
.
THRESHOLD STANDARD
1. Population Ratio: three (3) acres of neighborhood and community parkland
with appropriate facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east of 1-805.
The foJ/owing table compares City of Chula Vista population estimates from previous years with
current and forecasted population estimates. Park acreage provided or anticipated to be provided is
also identified. AdditionaJ/y, the table identifies the threshold standard, (acres of parkland provided
per 1,000 persons), for the respective reporting periods.
3 Acres per East 1-805 3.72
1,000 AC/1 ,000 persons 3.01 2.99 ** 3.45 3.14
Population
East West 1-805
of 1-805 AC/1,000 persons 1.03 1.07*** 1.03 1.03 1.03
Citywide 1.89 1.97 2.02 1.98 1.91
AC/1 ,000 persons
Acres of East 1-805 278.85 318.15 255.28 265.06 266.35
Parkland
West 1-805 122.33 127.54 122.43 122.33 122.33
Citywide 401.18 445.69 377. 71 387.39 388.68
Population' East 1-805 92,500 106,500 68,644 76,845 84,755
West 1-805 119,300 119,400 118,800 118,845 119,089
Citywide 211,800 225,900 187,444 195,689 203,844
Acre Shortfall East 1-805 1.35 -1.35 49.35 34.52 12.08
or Excess
West 1-805 -235.57 -230.66 -233.97 -234.21 -234.94
Citywide -234.22 232.01 -184.62 -199.69 -222.85
, Population forecasts are for preliminary planning purposes.
"Although 12 acres of parkland will be under construction by 12131/05, the park are not anticipated to be open to
the public until the following quarter, and have therefore not been included in the park acreage count. Inclusion of
the 12 acres translates to a ratio of 3.1 acres per 1 ,000 persons, which more than meets the threshold standard.
"'Harborside Park Construction to start construction later part of 2005 results in an increase in western park
inventory.
Page 1
General Planning Estimates Chula Vista East versus West Population
.
ArealYear* 2000 2004** 2009***
East of 1-805 64,827 97,575 128,675
West of 1-805 118,473 119,325 126,225
Total 183,300 216,900 254,800
'Vear end population unless otherwise indicated.
.. Assumes that 97% of growth takes place in eastern Chula Vista, with no major residential
projects in the west.
... Assumes that there is a 2,300 unit increase in western Chula Vista between 2005 and 2009.
Please provide a brief narrative response to the fol/owing:
2. Pursuant to the Parks Development Ordinance (PDO), has the eastern Chula
Vista parks system had the required parkland acreage (3 acres/1 ,000 persons)
during the reporting period?
Yes X
No
Explain:
As identified in the preceding table, the Eastern Chula Vista park system met
the parkland requirements for the reporting period with a ratio of 3. 01 acres
per one thousand persons.
a. What actions are being taken, or need to be taken, to correct any
parkland shortages?
No action is necessary since no shortages to Eastern Chula Vista parkland
have been experienced.
3. Pursuant to the Parks Development Ordinance (PDO), has the City's park
system provided the required facilities during the reporting period?
Yes No--1L-
Explain:
The following table identifies facilities required under the POD, and shows the
shortfall or overage based only on the City's park system. Please note, however,
that, per the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the provision of needed recreation
facilities on non-public park sites, such as schools, is necessary to help meet this
demand.
Page 2
Eastern Chula Vista Recreational Facility Needs 2004
Softball
Organized Adult 1/7,900 8
Organized Youth 1/12,700 -5
Practice/Informal 1/2,850 17
Baseball
Organized Adult 1/12,200 4
Organized Youth 1/4,400 9
Practice/Informal 1/3,300 13
Football 1/21,400 -13
Soccer
Organized Games 1/5,400 4
Practice/Informal 1/2,450 21
Picnic Tables 1/600 -147
Tot Lots/Playgrounds 1/2,650 7
Swimming Pool 1/45,800 2
Tennis 1/3,200 16
Basketball 1/2,150 26
Skateboarding 1/56,950
Roller Blading 1/59,100
Interior Assembly Space 1/3,900 22>
Per the attachment to question 15, many softball, baseball,
and soccer facilities are provided at school sites.
Per the attachment to question 15, many softball, baseball,
and soccer facilities are provided at school sites.
Football facility means any flat turf area suitable for informal
play, not an official football field.
Per the attachment to question 15, many softball, baseball,
and soccer facilities are provided at school sites.
This number is so high because it includes the 117 picnic
tables found in Rohr Park, which is east of 1-805, but is really
more of a regional serving park.
Nearly all of the parks east of 1-805 contain tot lots and
playgrounds.
The City's two public pools are west of 1-805 and are
therefore not counted, The quasi-public pools of the YMCA
and Southwestern College are also not counted.
Not induded in the count are the 14 Southwestern College, 6
Bonita Vista High, 10 Eastlake High, and 4 Rancho del Rey
Middle School courts, which are all listed in the Recreation
Department's quarterly Recreation Brochure listing classes,
programs, and events.
No outdoor school basketball courts are counted.
Indudes the recently opened Len Moore Skate Park,
operated by the Chula Vista Boys and Girls Club, but built
and owned by the City.
Includes the recently opened Len Moore Skate Park,
operated by the Chula Vista Boys and Girls Club, but built
and owned by the City.
Does not indude the quasi-public South Bay YMCA facility
nor the Chula Vista Boys and Girls Club facility.
Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan based needs ratio November 12, 2002.
Negative Value indicates overage.
* Represents approximately 85,800 square feet.
a. What actions are being taken, or need to be taken, to correct any
shortages of facilities?
The Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan (approved in November
2002) identifies future park sites and identifies future facility locations. In
response to identified shortages, the Master Plan includes a park
programming matrix which clearly defines where needed facilities will be
located in conjunction with the development of new park sites as well as
upgrades to existing park sites. This plan of action will selVe to remedy
facility shortages. The Master Plan contains an action plan that identifies
timing of planned facilities, and funding sources. The plan also recognizes
that the acreage required to accommodate desired recreation facilities
Page 3
exceeds the total amount of parkland obligation associated with future
development. The assignment of needed recreation facilities to non-public
park sites, such as future school sites, is necessary to accommodate future
demand since the total developer obligated future park acreage is less than
total acres required by demanded facilities.
Facilities being targeted for future parks include swim complexes with 50-
meter swimming pools and multi-purpose community centers with
gymnasiums.
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to
maintain the threshold standard?
Yes
No X
Explain:
While growth during the reporting period has not affected the ability to provide
required parkland acreaae, growth during the reporting period has further
exacerbated the shortage of certain recreation facilities, such as a community
center, a swimming pool, sports courts (basketball and tennis), and sport fields
(soccer, baseball/softball) for adult and youth leagues.
5. Are any additional parklands necessary to accommodate forecasted growth
by December 2005 and 2009?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. What is the amount of needed parkland?
Current eastern Chula Vista parkland inventory will provide adequate
acreage to accommodate up to 92,520 persons.
The 18-month forecast calls for an eastem Chula Vista population of 106,500
(anincrease of 14,000), therefore current inventory will need to be increased
by 42.00 acres however, with the current excess of 1.35 acres (as depicted
in the table on page 1) the net need is 40.65 acres (42.00-1.35 = 40.65) to
meet the 18-month forecast. With 18.77 acres (Sunsetview Park and Santa
Venetia Park) of parkland being available for use by March 2005, Veterans
Park (10.5 acres) available for use by December 2005 and construction of
12.3 acres (Horizon Park and Windingwalk Park) developed and potentially
available for use by December 2005, a total of 41.57 acres will be available.
It should also be noted that there would be three other parks under
construction by the City during 2005. These parks are Montevalle
Page 4
Community Park (Rolling Hills Ranch) and Saltcreek Community Park and
Mountain Hawk Neighborhood Park (EastLake). All of these parks should be
completed in 2006. Upon their completion, the amount of park acreage to
persons should comfortably exceed the threshold standard.
Approximately 133.57 park acres (parks listed in table on page 8 plus Village
7 neighborhood park) are forecasted to be constructed between June 2004
and December 2009 time frame. This translates to an eastern Chula Vista
parkland inventory of 395.05 acres, which is capable of accommodating a
total of 131,700 persons.
By the end of 2009, the eastern Chula Vista population would be 128,675.
This would necessitate 386.03 acres of parkland in eastern Chula Vista to
meet the threshold standard. Since a total of 412.42 acres of parkland is
forecasted, (existing inventory plus acreage forecasted to come online), this
amount is more than adequate to meet the threshold standard.
b. Are there sites available for the needed parklands?
Park sites are available and have been identified on SPA plans and
Tentative Maps for major projects within the eastern territory such as Otay
Ranch, San Miguel Ranch, Rolling Hills Ranch, and EastLake. The table
contained in item 12 below identifies available park sites currently being
designed or developed. Once the General Plan Update is approved
additional park sites will be identified.
c. Is funding available for needed parklands?
Funding for needed parklands in eastern Chula Vista is available through the
development of turnkey park facilities and/or payment of Parkland Dedication
Ordinance Fees (PAD Fees).
6. Are any additional facilities necessary to accommodate forecasted growth by
December 2005 and 2009?
Yes X
No
Explain:
a. What facilities are needed?
The following facilities will be needed in eastern Chula Vista to accommodate a
population increase of 31, 100 (Year 2009) and taking into consideration existing
(2004) inventory,
Page 5
Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan-Based
Needs Ratio - 2004 and 2009
Organized Adult 1 17 ,900 8 5
Organized Youth 1/12,700 -4 -10
Practice/Informal 1/2,850 18 22
Baseball
Organized Adult 1/12,200 4 4
Organized Youth 1/4,400 10 9
Practice/Informal 1/3,300 15 11
Football 1/21,400 -12 -12
Soccer
Organized Games 1/5,400 5 1
Practice/Informal 1/2,450 23 27
Picnic Tables 1/600 -138 -199
Tot Lots/Playgrounds 1/2,650 9 13
Swimming Pool 1 / 45,800 2 3
Tennis 1/3,200 17 21
Basketball 1/2,150 28 27
Skateboarding 1/56,950 1 -3
Roller Blading 1/59,100 1 -2
Interior Assembly Space 1/3,900 23 11
Notes:
1. Negative Value indicates overage.
2. Number of facilities needed has been round up when one-half or greater.
3. "Interior Assembly Spacen refers to an increment of building facility utilized for recreation purposes. Each
increment represents approximately 3.140 square feet. Community Centers and Gymnasiums count toward this
requirement.
b. Are there sites available for the needed facilities?
Yes, sites become available and are reserved as part of the land
development process (Tentative Map, SPA Plan, and Final Map).
c. Is funding available for needed parklands?
Yes, funding of needed parklands will be available at Final Map recordation
or at building permit for those projects not requiring Final Maps.
7. Are there any other growth related issues you see affecting the ability to
maintain the threshold standard as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes X
No
Explain:
If not properly phased, growth has the potential to affect the ability to provide
necessary parkland and facilities in a timely fashion. Future park sites need to be
Page 6
developed early in the development phasing sequence. Furthermore, depending on
facility type needed, it may be necessary to develop community park sites prior to
neighborhood park sites in a given development. The Chula Vista Parks and
Recreation Master Plan includes goals, policies, and action items that address
sequencing of park development in conjunction with population increases.
PARKLAND AND FACILITIES MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured andlor identified for maintenance of existing
parklands and facilities?
Yes X
No
Explain: The maintenance of all parklands and facilities is a budget issue. As new
parks come online, additional maintenance staff and equipment wi/l be needed to
maintain parks that are added to the park system.
8A. Is there adequate staff for park maintenance?
Yes -1L
No
Explain: The City Council has approved a staffing ratio of .087 per acre to ensure
that staffing levels are commensurate with parkland maintenance standards.
9. Were any major parkland or facilities maintenancelupgrade projects
completed during the reporting period? If yes, please list.
Yes X
No
Explain:
Otay Park: New Comfort Station
Rohr Park: New Play Equipment
SDGE Easement West: New Play Equipment
PARK PLANNING
10. Please provide a staffing plan for planned recreational facilities, or indicate
when such a plan will be prepared. (Response prepared by Recreation
Department).
Comment:
The Recreation Department has implemented a staffing strategy to insure that both
full-time and part-time staffing levels are commensurate with community demand
and Department needs overall. The Department has adopted a staffing plan of a
minimum of two full time staff per facility with sufficient part time staff to provide
Page 7
adequate coverage for programs and facility operating hours. A standard based on
facility size and program elements is being developed to provide staffing that is
adequate to meet both current and forecasted demand. The provision of staff for
planned facilities, pursuant to this proposed plan, is contingent upon City
management and budget approval by Council, FY2005-06.
11. Please indicate specific opportunities for acquiring parkland for western
Chula Vista and the means for financing these acquisitions.
Describe:
The City is currently proceeding with the preparation of construction documents for
the development of the Harborside Park site in western Chula Vista. Construction of
the park is anticipated to commence the latter part of 2005. The project is part of a
$ 9 million effort by the City to improve parks on the west side. The money would
come from a federal loan through the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Additionally, once the General Plan Update and Urban Core Specific
Plan are adopted, additional park sites and funding sources will be identified.
12 Please update the parkland-phasing program for eastern Chula Vista as
presented in last year's response to the GMOC.
Park Phasing
Construction First Quarter Third Quarter Fourth Quarter
Horizon 5.30 Documents of 2005 of 2005 of 2005
Mountain Hawk 12.00 Construction Second Quarter Fourth Quarter First Quarter
Documents of 2005 of 2005 of 2006
Construction Under First Quarter Second
Santa Venetia 7.00 Document Construction of 2005 Quarter
Preparation of 2005
Under Under Last Quarter First Quarter
Sunset View 11.77 Construction Construction of 2004 of 2005
Windingwalk 7.00 onstruction First Quarter Third Quarter Fourth Quarter
Documents of 2005 of 2005 of 2005
Communi Parks
Under Third uarter Second Quarter Fourth Quarter
Veterans 10.50 Construction of 2004 of 2005 of 2005
Montevalle Construction Third Quarter First Quarter Second
Community 29.00 Document of 2005 of 2006 Quarter
Park Preparation of 2006
Saltcreek Construction Third Quarter econd
Community 19.80 Document of 2005 Quarter
Park Preparation of 2006
San Miguel Construction Second Quarter Fourth Quarter First Quarter
Ranch 16.10 Document of 2006 of 2006 of 2007
Community Preparation
Park
Page 8
13 Please provide a progress report on implementing the Parks Master Plan in
terms of facility development and staffing.
Describe: In terms of Facility Development staff is currently moving forward on the
design and/or construction coordination often parks. Similar to last reporting cycle,
this represents one of the most active park development periods in the City's entire
history. The Council adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan identifies facilities
desired for each park site. As site-specific park designs are developed identified
facilities are sited. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan identified facilities are
included for consideration.
With regard to facility staffing, a staffing strategy for new facilities has been
implemented by the Recreation Department, per the response to question 10.
14. Please update list of joint use park and recreational resources with the
school districts.
Describe:
1) Joint use of Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vista Elementary
School District field facilities is available for use by Youth Sports Council members.
2) In addition, the Recreation Department provides middle school after school
programming at Rancho Del Rey Middle School, Castle Park Middle School, Chula
Vista Middle School and Hilltop Middle School.
3) Additionally, the Library Department has after school programs at 31 elementary
school sites.
4) Chula Vista Community Youth Center, which is located in western Chula Vista,
is a model of successful joint use that offers a mix of school, recreation and
community uses in class offerings that sometimes blur between the Chula Vista
High School and the Recreation Department.
5) The City and High School District have a joint use agreement for Rancho del Rey
Middle School and Voyager Park, whereby the middle school and the City have
access to each other's facilities, including soccer fields, softball fields, basketball
and tennis courts, and parking.
6) The City and High School District have a joint use agreement for Eastlake High
School and Chula Vista Community Park, whereby the high school and the City
have access to each other's facilities, including softball fields, basketball,
volleyball,. and tennis courts, a track complex, and parking.
7) At the two City pools, various high school swim and water polo teams pay fees
for pool time and City lifeguard service for their practices. The Recreation
Department offers elementary schoollearn-to-swim programs to elementary
schools for a fee. Aquatics staff also goes to first grade classes at various
elementary schools to teach an Aquatic Safety Awareness Program.
8) The Recreation Department has been in contact with the principal and ASB
Director at Otay Ranch High School regarding collaborations and use of school
facilities.
Page g
THRESHOLDS AND COMMUNICATIONS
15. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes X
No
Explain:
Staff will continue to evaluate the concept of a revised threshold recommendation.
The current standard should continue to be applied as a citywide goal with the
understanding that there were preexisting park development standards that differ
from current City standards.
16. Are there any suggestions you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No X
Explain:
17. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC.
Yes X
No
Explain:
At its July 13, 2004 meeting, the City Council adopted a resolution and placed a
measure to adopt an ordinance that would implement the automatic adjustment to
the park development fee annually, using the Engineering News Record (ENR)'s
Construction Cost Index. The automatic annual update of the fee is identical to the
methodology applied to other development related fees within the City. The
mechanism will ensure the collection of sufficient funds to maintain current services
levels, while minimizing the expense to the City associated with the preparation of a
Master Fee Schedule update. The ordinance update continues to provide for
periodic comprehensive updates, as required to, among other things, reflect land
acquisition cost.
Recommendations from last year's GMOC report
18. Please advise of the status of the Western Chula Vista Parks Master Plan and
what may be reasonably accomplished by the end of 2005.
Three major programs relating to the future development of parks in western Chula
Vista are currently underway. Once the three programs are completed, work on
updating the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the development of the
Western Chula Vista Parks Implementation Plan can occur. The General Plan
Page 10
Update (the first program) will establish a new framework for future parks in westem
Chula Vista (adoption anticipated for the second quarter of 2005). The second
program is the Western Chula Vista Urban Core Specific Plan, which will address
the integrating of parks in the context of the expanded vision for residential,
commercial and office development in the urban core area of western Chula Vista
(anticipated adoption third quarter of 2005). The third program is the update of the
Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment. The City is in the processes of retaining
a consultant to conduct a survey and prepare an update to the Parks and
Recreation Needs Assessment. The Assessment is the first step in developing a
Western Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Implementation Plan. The Assessment
will be utilized to update the Parks and Recreation Master Plan to be consistent with
the anticipated General Plan Update and Urban Core Specific Plan. The Needs
Assessment task is anticipated to be completed mid 2005. The selection of
preparers of the Western Chula Vista Parks Implementation Plan program is
anticipated to commence in the second quarter of 2005.
The General Plan Update, The Urban Core Specific Plan, and the updated Parks
and Recreation Needs Assessment Report will be completed By the end of 2005.
19. Please indicate recent efforts and issues toward achieving joint use for parks
with the school districts.
No new efforts other than existing agreements.
Prepared by: Joe Gamble
Title: Landscape Planner II
Last Update: December 9, 2004
Contributing Editors: Shauna Stokes, Larry Eliason, Ed Hail
Page 11
~!ft...
~
cnv OF
CHULA VISTA
MEMO'RANDUM
'REC'REA nON VEPA'R71vfENT
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
March 15, 2005
Dan Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
Joe Gamble, Landscape Planner II
Response to GMOC Comments
The following information has been prepared to serve as a response to questions and
comments pertaining to park and recreation facilities generated during the GMOC January
13, 2005 meeting.
Question: How have recreation facilitv needs been determined?
Response:
Recreational facility needs represented in the annual GMOC Parks and Recreation
questionnaire are based on the conclusions and findings contained in the Chula Vista Parks
and Recreation Master Plan (adopted by City Council in November 2002).
One of the first steps in developing the Parks and Recreation Master Plan was the
development of a parks and recreation needs assessment. In the late 90's the City hired a
consultant to prepare a parks and recreation needs assessment. The consultant (Research
Network, Ltd.) conducted a random sample telephone survey of residents to assess their
recreation needs and preferences and the current patterns of recreation activity. The survey
was done in two phases. Phase one covered west Chula Vista and phase two covered east
Chula Vista. Both surveys contained similar lines of questioning regarding specific
participation rates for a variety of recreational facilities. Please note that the results of the
survey represent a need based on actual participation by residents in various recreational
activities. This is in contrast to the sometimes characterization that the recreational activities
are mere "wants" (a characterization that implies less importance).
The telephone survey results have been used to develop "Facility Demand Ratios" for each
recreation facility. Facility Demand Ratios were developed in accordance with assessment
methods recognized and supported by the National Parks And Recreation Association
(NPRA). The ratio represents the number of persons served by each facility. For example,
the demand ratio for tennis is one tennis court for every 3,200 persons. The total number of
recreation facilities required can be determined by applying the current and forecasted
population estimates to the ratios.
The City Council adopted Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan (November 2002)
contains a description of how needed recreation facilities are to be distributed to future park
sites. Utilizing the number and type of recreation facilities identified in the Parks and
Recreation Master Plan, Chapter 2 (Demand and Opinion of Needs Analysis), as a total
distribution goal, facilities needed to meet future (2020) demand have been distributed to
future park sites (refer to the attached tables). Factors influencing facility distribution include
park type (community or neighborhood), park size (total acreage available), park site
configuration, and park location (proximity to neighborhood served and adjacency to other
parks). As previously stated, the tables represent a goal, and as such actual facility
assignment may vary. Park sites currently being developed are identified in the last table in
this memorandum. Recreation components for each park are also identified.
Question: Please provide a table that shows the schedule for city parks and the facilties that
are to be contained at those parks.
Response:
The recreation facility assignment tables contained in the City Council approve Parks and
Recreation Master Plan and the back of this memorandum (Table 4-3 Community Park
Recreation Facility Assignment 2000-2020 and Table 4-4 Neighborhood Park Recreation
Facility Assignment 2000-2020) are intended to expedite the planning of future park sites by
establishing the palette of facilities to be located in each future development obligated park
(refer to attached tables). The comprehensive nature of the tables insures that the accounting
of each needed recreation facility can occur. The tables identify future park sites and the
most desired recreation facilities scheme to be placed in a given park site. The tables
represent a goal. As specific park design occurs minor rearranging of facilities may occur.
Recreation accommodating land, other than developer obligated public parks, includes land
acquired by the City for public park purposes, future school sites (see Figure 3), community
purpose facility sites, and potentially, utility and water agency owned lands.
Recreation facilities anticipated to be located at non-public park sites are identified in Table 4-
5 - Recreation Facilities Non-Public Parkland - Recommended Facility Assignment. Since
the City has limited control of recreation facilities located on non-public parkland sites, the
table only represents a recommended palette of facilities.
The assignment of needed recreation facilities to non-public park sites is necessary to
accommodate future demand since the total developer obligated future park acreage is less
than total acres required by demanded facilities. All demands can't be met based on the total
legal limit of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons required of new development. With the
inclusion of additional non-park land acreage as part of the solution to meet a portion of the
recreation facility needs, nearly all of demand (except baseball fields) can be met. This is
demonstrated in Table 4-6 (Recreation Facility Assignment Summary 2000 - 2020), in the
row titled "Residual Needs Anticipated". Table cells in the "Residual Needs Anticipated" row
containing no numbers represent no residual needs remaining. Assignment of facilities to
non-public park sites includes consideration of the existing practice of quasi-public sites
meeting demand.
To maintain a balance an equitable approach has been taken in the assigning of facilities, in
terms of the numeric goal for each type of recreation facility. For instance, 100 percent of the
defined "organized youth league" demand has been met within public park sites for softball
and soccer. One hundred percent of practice ball field demand has been met within public
park sites for softball and soccer. Future demand for baseball will have to be met on non-
.
public park sites. Tot lots/playgrounds are another example of existing pattems of use
influencing future facility assignment. Currently and in the future, public park sites and quasi-
public sites equally meet the demand for tot lots/playgrounds.
Future demand for interior assembly space is proposed to be met in future public community
park sites. Nearly 100 percent of future demand will be met on public park sites. This is a
higher percentage as compared to what is currently being met in public park sites (30
percent).
Question: How are priorities set for deliverv of future parks and recreation facilities? How
much fIexibilitv exists for the park deliverv schedule?
Response:
To a great degree the sequence of new park development in eastem Chula Vista is
dependent on the pace and location of new residential development. As eastern territory
residential development entitlements occur, park sites are dedicated to the City. As
residential tract maps are finaled and park development fees are paid, funds become
available to the city for the design and development of public park sites. Without the
dedication of park sites and collection of park development fees, park design and
development cannot proceed. The anticipated sequence of future park development is
identified in the City Council approved Parks and Recreation Master Plan document. For
instance the future community park in Otay Ranch (Village 2 and Village 4) cannot proceed
until the developer dedicates land to the City. When the developer of Otay Ranch proceeds
through the development approval process and final tract maps then the City can proceed
with the design and construction of the community park. As soon as park sites are dedicated
park design and development proceed. Sites that have not been dedicated cannot proceed
before dedicated sites. Sequence of dedication of new parkland in eastern Chula Vista is not
that flexible since the pace of developer driven residential development is a major influencing
factor. The general rule is to proceed with park design and development as soon as possible
when the park site has been graded and necessary infrastructure (sewer, water, power,
roadways) is available and funds are available. Larger park sites especially those with
community recreation center buildings require additional time for design and construction due
to the complex nature of those types of projects.
() () ()
m m m
.,;: to to E
0 "
,.... <0 <0 " '"
~
0.
~
'"
"C
OJ
~ '" '"
"
0
13
~
0.
~
.E x
~ ~ '" c W
;;: Z
0 Z
.<: <(
'"
a'J z
W
:J W
0 ~ ~
" " " ... ~ 0 Q
"ijS
E z
W
:J CIJ
C
~ "
0 CD ()
'" " " ... ~ " .E
" ~
:;;
.<: :::J
f- CiS
" " -ci <(
OJ z
'" ::;:
0 "iij >-
N ... E <.?
0 '" " " '" " ~ "
N .E
c <I)
0 ~ Ci
0
0 0 t5 W
0 '" " " to to ~ f-
N ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~ Z
- 0. W
C co ()
CD . "C ~
. . . ~
E '" " co ~ c
co
C "C Z
OJ :::J
CI '" '" ::;:
'iij '" " CD ~ " ::;:
.::! E 0
co ()
C>
>- co "
:!:: '" <(
co >.
'u 2J "
I'll . . c ~
U. . 0 . CD :J "
" '" ~ ,.... " 0
C 0 0.
"C ~
0 OJ
:;:; ... '" C>
I'll " to '" ~ " .E
"C
e E .=
co" :J
U " e>:2icc
CD '" to ... ~ co
"C- a;
Q: " '"
N'- 0
..\I: .- .<: CO
C- o.
.. ~.~ en
I'll
c.. ~C>;.,
OC::C
~ .c.:;::; E
o c "
co:J '"
C W 0",
:::J 0<(
E " ~
0
:c ."
E :J "
0 ]:
0 . "C
(.)
to 0 in
M to 0 0 0 0 <0 "
, ...: M a; 0 .,.; '" 15
"'" " " ~ ,.... '" ~ Z
CD
:is OJ
I'll " :J CIJ
I- -'" C> ...J
rncn~t5 ..c~ ;::
;.,O"C
1i,i=CC: ca c: c: Q)
ctI ~ ctI ctI o~~ij5 0
Wf-ClJa: f-
o
N
o
N
I'-
~ ~ N N ~ N N N N N N N N '<t N
a::>
N N N N N N N N N ~
to
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I 0>
0
'<t I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- ~
. . '"
C N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
G)
E
c N N ~ ~ to
In
In
~ ~
- . . . . . . N
(j ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
III
C ~ ~ ~ '"
52
III ~ ~ ~ '"
G)
...
U
G)
...
III
0
0
...
0 ~
.
. ~
.
0 0 C! c:i
Qj ~ c:i ~ ": c:i '" C! C! to C! C! C! 0 0 0 N
~ ~ ~ to '" ~ '" I'- I'- ,,; I'- I'- a::> 0; 0; ~ ~
. "0 ;: in
0 Q) '" Q) '" .c
0 5 <:; ~ '" .c ~ '" '"
;: Q) (.) ;: N N '<t to a::> ~ ~ ~ en
G) Q) ;,; 0< in ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....J
N '" '" Q) '" 0 <(
Q) '" ., '" ~"E .c (.) f-
III Q) e: "'- e: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ :J co .~ '" '" :J :J 0
cc en ill> I en en > > > > > > > > > ill f-
o
o
o
N
-
<(
:--
u.
...
a:
.>0::
c..
'C
..c
..c
..c
z
..,.
"'"
:is
I-
'"
"0
a;
'"
Q)
u
:u
(II
~
c.
~
.E
e:
;:
o
.r::;
'"
'"
Q)
:J
10
>
u
.~
E
:J
e:
Q)
~
.E
Q)
~
Q)
.r::;
f-
"0
a;
'"
10
E
~
.E
e: ><
~ c: ~
u Q) e:
t5 .2: ro
'" O>.r::;
C. ~j
'" .9 E
"0 ",:J
ffi ._";::
::: 0
"0 "O-
m Q) ctI
ti= o~
Q) 0< 0>
E m~
'" a. Q)
C) ~c:
'" '" Q)
(/) -7 (,)
co c~
en 0'-
c: ~S
:J e: E
8 0 E
"'C ~8
"'ffi .~....
;,;:: OOQ5
Q) . Q)"'C
E~.t; :J
co.QClJU
c>jg~.5
"C.~ Co ~
CD J:: a. 0
N--..o
'c c ctJ c
(0--.3 :J
~~~U)
0:.;::::;_
..c:so
t)o~
ctI u ro...
UJ Q) I:
:3
:J
o
"0
~
'2
:J
Q)
u
'"
a.
'"
>-
:3
E
Q)
'"
'"
<(
~
o
'C
Q)
E
Q)
>
'"
'"
10
:J
CT
2.
-'
. e:'
Q)
en en
Q) i'!
oa.
zi'!
... N ~ '"
'" <0
... ... ~
0
N
0
~ '"
0 ... '" '" ~
0
0
N
0
-
c::
~
c:: '"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~
"'C
Q)
-
ns
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
'U
..
c::
< '"
~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~
"'C
c::
ns N N N <0
~
...
ns
a..
.!:! ~ - ~ '"
:c
:;, '" N
a.. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N '"
,
c::
0
Z
UI N N N <0
Q)
E
'u '" '" '" '"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ~
ns
II. ~ '"
- ~
c::
0
.. N N N <0
ns
~
CJ i':' N
Q) i':' i':' i':' i':' i':' i':'
0:: i':' 19 i':' i':'
rn rn 19 19 19 19 19 ~ i':' 19
.. C i':' C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v rn 19
.s 19 v v v v v v E C ~ ~
.n " E E E E E E " " i':' "6
(jj E ~ .c v v E
, " " '" " " " " " U;; E E 19 0
.... 0 " E ill :;: ill ill ill ill ill " " ~ .c
U;; " U;; "
" N N ... .0 .;, ..:. ..:.8 "' ill ill " '"
Q) 0 ~ E
:c .c 'a; ill " " " " " " ".c " " , !i1 a; " ."
U ~
'" '" '" 0> 0> 0> 0> '" 0>" 0> 0> U :;: ~ ill
ns J!1 3: J!1 J!1 J!1 J!1 J!1 J!1 rn'" J!1 J!1 :::J 0> .;,
f :=Q) 0> :!E .. ;,;
I- :> 0 :> :> :> :> :> :> :> :> w & "8 "8
~ .c >'5 rn
"S n: ~ n: n: n: n: n: n: a::::2 n: n: n: "6 ~ 0
~ rn
"- 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0::;: 0 0 0 n: '" ;;: ;;: >-
"
15
~
0
."
C
"
..
"
Ci
f
..
."
a;
""
8
~
"
!!
c.
~
~
.c
..
..
"
~
rn
>
u
.~
E
~
~
"
:;
'0
"
8
..
I!!
~ ~
I!!
"
.c :is
>- .!1J
." -~
a; >
"
"" '0
rn
E "
"
~ c
~ !!
'" "
8 ~
ij 0>
"
!! C
c. "
" ..
." I!!
~ c.
" I!!
."
a; 0
"" ~
" 0
E ."
" ."
0> ~
" "
.. ,.,
" "E
.!!J 0
."
~ "
~ 1;;
8 c.
." :Q
a; c
"" "
" f
E
" "
(!) ."
"
." ""
Ii:! ~
~
"2 "
" :E
~ ..
0 "
.c ~
" "1;
" "
W ,;"-
15
19
..
:;:
-.
.S ...
0>
.. ~
(II;
" ~
-~
~8
c:
0 '" N Q)
<I)
N It) ex> '" N ~
C.
Q)
~
<I)
"
a;
'" '" N '"
Q)
"
:e
'"
~
c.
'" '" N .E
c:
;=
0
.r:
0 I'- '" '" '" <I)
N ~ It) " <I)
Q)
:J
ro
>
"
'" ex> '" I'- '" "'"
N It) N Q)
E
:J
c:
Q)
~
.E
N N N ~
Q)
.r:
" '" '" '" It) f-
~ ~ " '"
"
a;
'"
ro
0 '" '" " E
~ 0 It) ~
~ ~ N ~ .E
c:
""
Q)
. . "
~ '" '" '" ex> is
~ ~ ~ " '" '"
~
c.
'" It) I'- '"
~ '" '" N ~ "
c:
'"
"
a;
~ '" It) " '"
Q)
. . E
'" N N 0 N '"
N ~ '" I'- '" '"
'"
<I)
" I'- N '"
'" <I)
c:
:J
N ~ 0
~ '" '" N I'- "
"
. a;
'" '" ex> '"
N '" Q)
E
'"
'" '" ex> N eJ.!!1
.. ,,-"
~ Q) '"
:J N-
- ~ "- <I)
:J", c:"-
'" N '" ",.r:
LL ",-
~ c:
UI 0"-
" .. '"
0 - .r: c:
~ 0 in U:;:;:
.r: '" c:
"" ~ "'" UI W :J
:J 0 ~ <I) UI UI " . 0
E -" "'- "
.r: 11.8 .. .. ..
E '" :E :;::; .." "" Q)
".r: ::"C <1)-
0 "0; .- " "u"CJ Z .. Q)-"
() Z :;;cn (,) .. -- - :J
.. .. .." .. .. 00
:J LL c: LL c: :J Z"
<I) <I) 11. Q) ca "C.-
ca'- ii E -- (,)
"'" "'" c: U):;::;
~ ~ _UI -
'" '" 0 ~~ o Q>> CD c:
11. I1.Z f-CII:<e
C1
C
.-
III
lIS
~
c..
~
...
lIS
c..
~
'"
"
0",
-"0
to
"N
0_
"-0
~
'"
"
0'"
o
"EO
._N
""-
1-0
~
'"
"",
00
_0
i!!N
.--
"-0
c:
.Q~
-OC:
""
.:=E
'" "
c:o
00
uo
o
00
'" N
on ~
-"
,.
'"
:r:
c:
c: 2
:;: c:
'C: "
o 0
:r: :;:
~
'"
"eo
00
_0
i!!N
U:o
"C~'"
c:"o
oto
O"'N
""-
Cl)00
~
'"
"
0",
""0
to
"N
0_
"-0
"
t
'"
"'"
00
_0
i!!N
.--
"-0
~
'"
"
o
"C'"
c:o
00
ON
"-
Cl)o
c:
o
13
"
~.:=
" '"
"Cc:
c: 0
::H)
c:
0'"
i3C
" "
.:=E
'" "
c: 0
00
Uo
~
"
t
'"
"'"
00
_0
i!!N
.--
"-0
~
'"
a~
_0
"'N
"'-
-'0
:3 c a
i3cg 13
:J Q) co :J
..... E..... ....j:::;
1i):J co Q) (/)
cuQ.-cc
o 0 ~ c: 0
uoe.. ::>u
o
o
,.:
'"
:g
c:
"
>
'"
"E
'"
CI)
~
"
t
'"
"
0",
""0
to
"N
0_
"-0
~
"
t
'"
"
0'"
o
"Co
.=C'\I
""-
1-0
c:
o
U
"
Q;~
"cc:
58
~
"
t
'"
"'"
00
_0
i!!N
.--
"-0
c:
.2 J9
-OC:
2"
_E
"'''
c:o
00
uo
....
'"
~
~
o
o
,.:
~
:>
a;
'"
c:
"
CI)
-"
Cii
,.
'"
c:
'5
c:
3:
1/1
...
~
..
D..
-
'"
::I
E
E
o
o
~
"
t
'"
"
0",
""0
to
"N
0_
"-0
"C~eo
c:"o
oto
O"'N
""-
Cl)00
"
t
'"
"
o
"C'"
c:o
00
ON
"-
Cl)o
"
t
'"
"eo
00
_0
i!!N
.--
"-0
~
"
t
'"
"
O~
"Eo
._N
""-
1-0
~
"
t
'"
"
0'"
o
"Eo
._N
""-
1-0
c:
o
13
"
Q;~
"Cc:
c: 0
::>u
c:
o c:
t5cg
2"'"
..... E ffi
"'''0.
c: 0"
oo~
uoe..
o
'"
o
'"
c:
~
.sa
"
>
,,~
~'s
in E
cE~
00'"
::;;ue..
"C~eo
c:"o
8to
Q)~N
cnoo
~
'"
"eo
00
_0
i!!N
.--
"-0
~
"
t
'"
"
0'"
o
"Eo
._N
""-
1-0
g c:
13 cg
",,~
.b E ctI
"'''0.
C:O"
8o~
oe..
o
o
m
N
~
-,,'-
" c:
" "
~ E
~E~
'" 0 '"
Cl)Ue..
~
'"
"....
00
_0
i!!N
.--
"-0
"
t
'"
"
Oeo
""0
to
"N
0_
"-0
~
"
t
'"
"
o
"Ceo
c:o
00
ON
"-
Cl)o
c:
.2..... :3
't)C:.;::::;
2 Q) ~
_E",
"''' "-
c: 0 "
o 0 ~
uo e..
o
co
m
~
o
~
<0
~
0; ~
~ "c
._ :J
~-5 E
c:c:E~
mcaOm
Cl)a::ue..
,.
o
c:
>-
'"
E
'"
"
E
ro
J=
Q)
E
,.,
'0
Q)
o
c:
Q)
~
~
Q)
~
Q)
==
-
o
Q)
E
o
'"
Q)
~
.E
l'!
Q)
==
Q)
~
'ffi
c:
c:
o
~
Q)
::J
o
c:
o
~
Q)
~
o
Q)
0:::
'0
c:
ro
'"
-"
~
ro
e..
o
o
:;:
CJ
...
o
o
N
~
Q)
.c
E
Q)
o
Q)
o
Q)
==
E
o
J=
.!!!
Q)
:c
S
Q)
>
o
.c
~~
..c:~
':":~
s:a
o Q)
Z.c
C)U::
::Qci-
"HI)
o
"
o
C: "ii)
;:; 0 I/)
~ 0 B
o
N
a.:_E
o ~ g
00:0:
:2
':; C)
m .5
0>
~ "
~:c
o!!!
0: CD
2"E
m m
"'0
00.0
m
.0
;;
'"
o
m
CD
o
.2
"
{!!.
<5
o
a.
00
f--'
gO)
5J5
._ m
a.f-
"
~'t:
o.~
Of-
~ 8
g1J
o ~
000.
~
u
o
00
0=
o m
u...o
~
0_
mo;
CD.o
II)
o
o
N
..c:
u
~
ca
::E
IJ)
w
i=
::i
(3
<C
u.
z
o
~
w
0::
()
W
0::
C
z
<C ~
::.:: ~
o::Z
<C~
D..~
u
m
d:
"'-
00;
00.0
"'-
~~
o
~ e
m u
0.<
~ ~
m>;
a.f-
o
o
'"
~
00
00
00
_0
NN
-
................................................
~
E
~
u
~ ~
~ ~
c:c:
~ ~
UU
-- -
-
-
---
-
N.......C"':I......C"':IN.......N
-
_NN
-
............N..............................
'"
I"--COOI"--NNI"--N
N ............ ......
-
...............................................
-
........................MMN
-
........................MC"':IN
-
............MC"':IN
............................... C"':I
.............................. C"':I
....... I"--MI.ONO)CON......
I() I()ci"'":Nai......~
......1"-- ....... ......
Z ZZZZUUZ()
0) m c: en.::.:: Q;J'::'::~-:;;
"0 ~2~tij'i5:R;!:5
r::'~ !fi'~.s ~> ~:!2..!2"
"_22r::>:I:<D.5.s-c:::2
u:v,gm >-g~8Js~
.sIg~ ~::2 3en
".en .g
" " ~
o 0
': u
~ ~
." "
" ."
::> :5
" 0
i! '"
m :;
0. 0.
~
W
m
w
-
-
..................................................................N
-
-
-
-
NN......N......
_N",
N_
NN_
_N
......N.....N"t
.............................................................NM
I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--NI.O
-...
.........................................................................
......................................................NCC
......................................................NCC
N...................................................... ~
"'I...................................................... ~
I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--I"--MO
N....
ZZZZZZZZZZUO
.:!:<(m<(<(mo<(lIJo<(lIJZ:-
~~~~~~~~~~~~"~
"ONNI"--COCOCOO)O)O)OUE
S<D<D<DQ;J<D<DQ;JQ;J<D~~8
CIIC)C)C>C)OIC>C)C)OIUJUJ
m m m m m m m m m ~
;g555555555 ~
.:i 0:
e ~
.a 0
~
u..
00
00
00
00
NN
Q:i Q:i
c:c
~ ~
UU
--
--
N
<D
o
o
'"
<D
'"
o
N
....
'"
M
M
~
N
N
...
N
N
N
o
N
'"
N
'"
N
....
-
o
'"
N
'"
N
N
'"
<ri
<D
N
-'
i'"
o
f-
f-
00
i:i
00
00
U.J
0:
"
o
0:
a.
~
o
o
-
o
o
-
-
o
o
-
'"
-
-
-
o
o
o
o
-
on
-'
i'"
o
f-
f-
00
U.J
;::
00
00
U.J
0:
"
o
0:
a.
~
o
o
'"
<D
'"
o
N
N
o
....
o
-
...
M
~
N
N
~
N
o
N
N
N
o
M
o
M
....
-
o
'"
N
'"
N
N
'"
...
....
N
-'
~
o
f-
;:
..
U.J
.,
.,
U.J
0:
"
o
0:
0.
:!;
~.s"2
~ m ~
,,'" 0
0.. 0. c
_=>'"
~ ~ ~
~~~
0.. " m
"u..
- ~ 0
~C)Z
0"-
;e:;
:g~
q;~
~
"
~
1U
."
0.
=>
"
m
a:
~
o
"
::0
"
o
1U
e
u
~
."
"
m
"
~
"
a.
."
c
m
.!!!
m
."
0.
=>
C
m
a:
0;
~
c
~
"
~
~
."
~
"
.~
~
;;
."
~
.0
.9
o
~
~
.u
m
u..
'"
:;
a.
t;~~~t;~~~~co\TJ
W CO ~ 0 < 0 ~ ~ ~ e e
:!:~i5i::Wf-;J!:!Q)c<(<(
:g -e s: -e (tI ~ ~ ~ ~
~coo Q(!)I/)~C1::C1::
,,,:r: Q ><.... 0 Q Q
"J "0 0 ~ If ~:::.;:::.;
~~Q) "b5"bEC1::ct
~EE ~<<i~(tIOO
oco~ o;;:Qo;;:i::<\I"'I"
-J ~ i:: CO 1:] co:5 {"') C"')
-g:5:::> ~ Q:I ~ "0"0
E :5E:5 Q)Q:I
~ ~ ~ ~
~ :5 ~ r::::
-.J :5:5
'"
0:
<
",a.
0:0
<0
0.0
~iE",
ZOO:
=>CD<
::00:0.
::0"-
Ow~
uz::O
uz::o
THRESHOLD STANDARD:
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 81% ofthe
Priority I emergency calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an
average response time to all Priority I calls of five minutes and thirty seconds (5.5 minutes) or
less (measured annually).
Urgent response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 57% of the
Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an
average response time to all Priority II calls of seven minutes and thirty seconds (7.5
minutes) or less (measured annually).
1. Threshold Standard
FY 2003-04 1,322 of71,OOO 82.1% 4:52
FY 2002-03 1,424 of 71,268 80.8% 4:55
FY 2001-02 1,539 of 71,859' 80.0% 5:07
FY 2000-01 1,7340f73,977 79.7% 5:13
FY 1999-00 1,750 of 76,738 75.9% 5:21
CY 1999 1,8900f74,405 70.9% 5:50
FY 1997-98 1,512 of 69,196 74.8% 5:47
FY 1996-97 1,968 of 69,904 83.8% 4:52
FY 1995-96 1,915 of 71,197 83.0% 4:46
FY 1994-95 2,453 of 73,485 84.9% 4:37
1These figures (as well as Priority II figures on the next page) reflect a change in citizen-initiated call reporting criteria. Prior to FY 01-
02, citizen-initiated calls were determined according to call type; they are now determined according to received source. Using the old
method of reporting calls for service to better compare change over time, total citizen.initiated calls actually increased 1.5% from
FYOO-O' to FY01-02.
2The FY98-99 GMOC report used calendar 1999 data due to the implementation of the new CAD system in mid-19gB.
Page 1
FY 2003-04
FY 2002-03
FY 2001-02
FY 2000-01
FY 1999-00
CY 1999
FY 1997-98
FY 1996-97
FY 1995-96
FY 1994-95
16,526 of 71,000
15,024* of71,268
22,199 of 71,859
25,234 of 73,977
23,898 of 76,738
20,405 of 74,405
22,342 of 69,196
22,140 of 69,904
21,743 of 71,197
21,900 of 73,485
48.4%
50.2%
45.6%
47.9%
46.4%
45.8%
52.9%
62.2%
64.5%
63.4%
9:50
9:24
10:04
9:38
9:37
9:35
8:13
6:50
6:38
6:49
. This calculation not to include responses to false alarms beginning in FY 2002-03.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
2. During the current reporting period, please indicate (1) the number and percent of
priority 1 calls that have a 10-minute or greater response time, (2) characterize the
nature of the calls, and (3) characterize the typical reasons for the lengthy response
times.
During FY03-04, 5.7% of priority 1 calis (63 of the 1,106 calis available for analysis) had
response times greater than 10 minutes. The most frequent type of P1 calis with response
times over 10 minutes were robbery alarm calis, which are almost always false3. Other P1
calis with response times over 10 minutes included attempted suicide/overdose calis; and
fraud now calis. The most typical reasons for P1 response times over 10 minutes were (1)
lengthy distances had to be traveled to provide a response; and, (2) a limited number of
units were available to respond.
. 3. Was the Police Department properly eauiDDed to deliver services at the level
necessary to maintain Priority I and II threshold standard compliance during the
reporting period?
Explain:
Yes
x
No
The department was properly equipped with patrol vehicles, motorcycles, officer safety
equipment, and communication equipment to deliver services.
4. Was the Police Department properly staffed to deliver services at the level necessary
to maintain Priority I and II Threshold Standard compliance during the reporting
3 A 2002 study of robbery/duress alarm calls to the Department found that 99.7% were false.
Page 2
period?
Yes
x
No
-
Explain:
The authorized police budget is sufficient to handle calls for service. Staffing levels are
based on the patrol staffing model. The Department is authorized 103 officers in Patrol.
Currently, 91 officers are in Patrol; 4 additional officers are in field training; and 12 additional
officers are in the regional academy. Four of these recruits are scheduled to be in field
training positions this spring, and 8 are scheduled to be in field training positions this
summer.
In order to meet budget constraints, City departments reduced expenditures this past
year. The majority of the Police Department's reductions were achieved through attrition, and
a number of civilian positions were frozen. However, filling vacancies in the Dispatch Center
was a priority during the reporting period. As a result, there are only 3 current vacancies in
Dispatch, which is authorized 30 full-time positions. Backgrounds are in process for 6
applicants, and 1 has a conditional offer of employment.
GROWTH IMPACTS
5. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Department's ability to
maintain service levels consistent with the threshold standard?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
Although traffic volume has increased each year, traffic volume is not correlated with East
side travel times. In other words, increasing traffic does not appear to have increased East
side travel times, which are generally higher than West side travel times. However, the
estimated 10,444 housing units and accompanying street infrastructure that will be built in
Eastern Chula Vista between 2004 and 2009 poses a challenge for patrol officers trying to
quickly respond to calls at addresses on new streets. In-car mapping technology, which has
been operational in all patrol car MDCs for the past two years, allows officers to rapidly
locate addresses on newly built roadways. While the in-car mapping technology has helped
meet response time thresholds, a global positioning system program that will automatically
identify the closest unit to a call address is expected to more favorably impact response
times. We expect to be able to implement the system in 2005.
6. Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth through
December 2003 and 2007?
Yes
No
x
Explain:
We moved into the new police facility in March of 2004. This facility will enable us to meet
Page 3
the physical plant needs associated with forecasted growth for at least the next 25 years.
Staff and associated equipment will be added according to the patrol staffing model to
absorb forecasted growth.
7. Are new facilities, equipment and/or staff needed to accommodate the forecasted
growth?
Yes
x
No
To accommodate forecasted growth while improving public safety, there is a need for a staff
person who can help coordinate efforts among the Police Department, Planning & Building,
and Community Development to incorporate crime prevention through environmental design
(CPTED) into the planning process for new and redeveloped areas.
For example, eight trolley stops have been proposed along an East-West Chula Vista line.
Public transit locations, particularly subwayltrolley stops, are usually crime generators in
public transportation systems throughout the world. (The three existing trolley stops in Chula
Vista were the locations that residents said they most avoided in the city, according to our
2003 Resident Opinion Survey results.) Fortunately, if the proposed trolley stops are
designed and managed using advanced CPTED principles, the amount of crime and fear
generated by the stops can be significantly minimized. An example of a very well designed
subway system is the Washington, DC, Metro, which has relatively little crime compared to
similar systems. Other crime and disorder problems that can be significantly minimized by
design include traffic collisions (roadway design); auto theft (parking lot design); noise
disturbances (residential unit designs that include adequate sound-proofing); residential
burglary (neighborhood layout); and street robbery and graffiti (building in natural
surveillance of high-risk locations), among others. Traffic collisions are currently our fourth
mostfrequent call type; auto theft is our fifth most frequent call type; vandalism/graffiti is our
sixth most frequent call type; and noise disturbances are our eighth most frequent call type.
These four call types alone account for 14% of all citizen-initiated calls for service to the
Police Department.
If yes:
a. Are there sites/resources available for the needed facilities, equipment and/or
staff?
We are in the process of determining whether the necessary resources for the staff position
are available through grants or other means.
b. How will these be funded?
This position may be funded through grants or departmental appropriations.
c. Are there appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
Yes.
8. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the provision of police services?
Yes
x
No
Page 4
Explain:
The estimated 12,744 housing units that will be built in Chula Vista between 2004 and 2009
pose challenges with respect to false alarm calls. Many of the new housing units will be pre-
wired for burglar alarms, facilitating the purchase and use of alarm devices.
9. Please assess the City's advance hire program relative to keeping pace with growth
as presented in the 5 Year forecast.
As of January 2005, we expect to be authorized 231 positions, due to the addition of two
grant-funded officer positions. Also as of January 2005, we anticipate having a swom staff of
226 officers, as well as an academy class that month of between 5 and 10 officers. In
addition, we may hire several lateral officers during this time. As a result, we expect to be in
overhire status this January.
MAINTENANCE
10. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities
and equipment?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
Equipment replacement funded through the General Fund ensures the ongoing upgrades of
equipment such as MDCs.
11. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the
current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
. Police Technology Enhancements
FALSE ALARMS
The GMOC continues to recommend that the Police Department follows a course of action to
reduce the number of false alanms.
Page 5
12. Please fill the blanks on the table below.
13. Please describe the current status of the Department's goal oriented action plan to
reduce the number of false alarms.
Discussion:
The department has continued to focus on the locations with the highest number of false
alarms, both by category and by specific address. In an effort to monitor and reduce false
alarms at Chula Vista Elementary Schools, false alarm data was provided on a monthly
basis to both school principals and administrators during the reporting period. Residential
and business alarmed locations were contacted by phone when the number of false
alarms became excessive. .
14. Please update the information provided last year regarding the effectiveness of the
Alarm Analyst in reducing false alarms (last year's information below).
.
JUL-DEC 2000 3,830
JAN-JUN 2001 3,197 -16.5% second six-month period compared to first
six-month oeriod of the fiscal year
JUL-Dec 2001 4,060
JAN-JUN 2002 3953 -2.7% second six-month period compared to first
six-month period of the fiscal year
JUL-DEC 2002 4190
JAN-JUN 2003 4072 -2.8% second six-month period compared to first
six-month period of the fiscal year
JUL-DEC 2003 4,544
JAN-JUN 2004 3,768 -17% second six-month period compared to first
six-month oeriod of the fiscal year
4 These figures reflect a change in reporting af alarm calls to include those that are dispatched, but canceled en route. Using the old
method of reporting alarm calls to better compare change over time, the total number of false alarms actually responded to
decreased 5% from FYOO-01 to FY01-02.
Page 6
.
Calendar Year Totals for False Alarms Per Svstem Per Year
(available only for calendar year, but fiscal year totals should be similar)
2000 2001 20025 2003 2004
(annualized) (annualized)
Commercial 1.93 1.50 1.58 1.37 1.09
Residential 0.71 0.51 0.57 0.37 0.28
Total (Com & Res) 1.12 0.80 0.84' 0.64 0.49
MISCELLANEOUS
15. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council, including additional threshold
indicators?
Yes
x
Explain:
No
Suggested Recommendations Comments
That the GMOC continue to support the
dispatch staffing model and the Dispatch
Mana er Conce t.
That the GMOC support continued use of the
patrol staffing model and the advance hiring
program.
That the GMOC continue to support planned
upgrades of police technologies, such as
MDCs, wireless data transmission to patrol
vehicles, and lobal osition in s stems.
That the GMOC continue to support research
and evaluation of Internet crime reporting;
alternative deployment tactics; such as revised
beat configurations, bike patrol; and an aerial
latform.
The model assists in meeting response time
thresholds for priority calls for service.
Both will enable the department to respond to
calls for service, and seek a 1:1 ratio of officer
time spent responding to citizen-initiated calls
for service to officer-initiated activities, and a
zero vacanc factor in atrol.
It is imperative that the Department continue to
build a solid technology infrastructure in order
to service a growing community.
Research staff have looked at several of these
ideas over the past year and expect to continue
to research various options over the next 18
months, with the aim of maximizing both the
effectiveness and efficienc of the De artment.
5 These figures reflect a change in reporting of alarm calls to include those that are dispatched, but canceled en route. Using the old
method of reporting alarm calls to better compare change over time, the total false alarm rate actually decreased 1.3% from FYOO~01
to FY01-0Z (0.79 to 0.77).
Page 7
16. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate to
the GMOC?
Yes
No
x
Explain:
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Date:
Chief Rick Emerson
Karin Schmerler
12/3/04
Page 8
CURRENT THRESHOLD STANDARD:
1. Threshold Standard
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond to
calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 80% (current service to be verified) of
the cases (measured annually).
Please fill in the blanks in the following tables using normalized data:
FY 2004 8420 72.9% 7:38 3:32
FY 2002-03 8088 75.5% 7:35 3:43
FY 2001-02 7626 69.7% 7:53 3:39
FY 2000-01 7128 80.8% 7.02 3:18
FY 1999-00 6654 79.7% 3:29
CY 1999 6344 77.2% 3:41
CY 1998 4119 81.9% 3:40
CY 1997 6275 82.4% 3:32
CY 1996 6103 79.4% 3:44
CY 1995 5885 80.0% 3:45
CY 1994 5701 81.7% 3:35
Note: Reporting period for FY 2001-02 and 2002-03 is for October 1, 2002 to September 30,
2003. The difference in 2004 performance when compared to 2003 is within the 2.5% range of
expected yearly variation and not statistically significant.
Please provide brief responses to the following:
2. Did the Fire Department have properly equipped fire and medical units as
necessary to maintain threshold standard service levels during the reporting
period?
Yes X
No
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned questlFIRE GMOC 04.doc
Page 1
Please explain:
Most front line apparatus have recently been purchased or replaced. Additionally, the Fire
Department has increased the reserved fire engines from 3 to 5. Moreover, the Fire
Department now has two frontline aerial ladder trucks and one reserve aerial ladder truck to
be able to better serve the community in the event of a fire. A new Light and Air Rescue
Truck will become operational July 2005.
3. Did the Fire Department have proper staffing for fire and medical units as
necessary to maintain threshold standard service levels during the reporting
period?
Yes X
No
Explain: Yes, Council approved 9 new firefighting positions for Fire Station 8 during
this reporting period. Interim Fire Station 8 opened on January 6, 2005 when new Fire
Station 6 was opened in the Rolling Hills community. This is the second new Fire Station to
open in eastern Chula Vista with in the last two-year reporting period. Additionally the City
Council approved three new Battalion Chief positions to open a second Battalion in eastem
Chula Vista to be located at Fire Station 7 by October 2005 and 3 new Fire Captains to staff
the Light and Air Rescue. Additional6-firefighter positions will be added in FY 07 budget to
staff the Light and Air Rescue.
In September 2004, in response to the Fire Department's Strategic Plan, the Council
approved an additional eight positions to build the internal capacity of the Fire Department
to support service delivery, provide required training and meet changing industry trends.
These positions include:
One Captain, one Engineer and one Secretary to support the training requirements
for existing and new fire personnel; one Office Specialist and Sr. Office Specialist to support
the Administration, Human Resources and Prevention Lines of Business, Programs and
Services; one Facility and Supply Specialist, one public safety data analyst and
reinstatement of one Public Education Specialist for community outreach. All of the
positions will be hired by 3/18/05 with exception of the Community Outreach Position, which
will be hired in by September 1, 2005.
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Department's
ability to meet the response time threshold or to maintain service levels?
Yes
No
X
Explain: An analysis of the various response time components revealed that the average
turnout time declined from 1 minute 50 seconds to 2 minutes and 7 seconds. This
accounted for a 17-second (15%) decline from 2003. The decline in performance that
resulted from the change in the average turnout time was offset by the change in average
travel time that improved from 3 minutes and 43 seconds to 3 minutes 32 seconds. This
marked an 11 second (4.9%) change from 2003. The average dispatch time improved from
36 to 28 seconds accounting for an 8 second (22.2%) performance enhancement. Growth
does not appear to be a factor in the Department's ability to meet the response time
threshold. Furthermore, since we began this reporting data process several technical
issues with regards to the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) have been address, which will
C:\dffiles\GMOCIGMOC 04=05\Returned quest\FIRE GMOC 04.doc
Page 2
help improve the overall response time. For example the purchase of Netscape will allow
the Police Department and Fire Department to access CAD data from remote computer
locations without disruption to "live" dispatch operations. Other CAD enhancements are
being worked on to improve efficiency and reporting capabilities. The Fire Department has
hired a Public Safety Analyst, which will start on March 18, 2005 and help with data quality
assurance and reporting. Additionally, the Fire Department has completed a Strategic
Business Plan, developed performance measures and is in the process of integrating the
Plan and measures into individual performance plans, which will be used to guide
performance in regards to turnout times.
5. Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth for
both the 12 to 18 month and 5-year time frame (to December 2008)?
Yes
No
Unknown
Explain: Current facilities, equipment and staff are able to absorb forecasted growth within
the next 12 to 18 months; however, we will not know about the 5 year time frame until the
Fire Facility, Staffing And Equipment Study has been completed. The Study will address
the Fire Department's needs over the next five years. Formal Requests for proposals were
released in January and have been accepted by the purchasing agent. An evaluation team
will begin evaluating proposals this month to select a consult to perform the Study. We
anticipate the Study will be completed by late September 2005.
6. Are new facilities, equipment and/or staff needed to accommodate the forecasted
growth?
Yes
No
Unknown
If yes: Please see above comments.
a. Are there sites/resources available for the needed facilities? A site has been
selected for new Fire Station 8 in eastern Chula Vista. Fire Station 9 is proposed to be
placed within the EUC. Fire Station 1 will be rebuilt adjacent to the current site and Fire
Station 5 will be addressed in the Fire Facility Master Plan. The location of other facilities
will be addressed in the Fire Facility, Staffing and Equipment Master Plan.
b. How will these be funded? Most Fire Stations are proposed to be funded from
the Public Facilities Development Impact Fund (PFDIF). Construction of existing Fire
Station 5 will require some General Fund assistance and may be eligible for Community
Block Grant Funding (CDBG) or a loan from the HUD.
7. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the provision of fire services?
Yes
No _X_
Explain:
The pace of growth, and the transition of the community to a suburban designation with an
urban core, presents challenges that must be met with a comprehensive management
approach. The Fire Department has taken several steps to proactively meet growth
demands.
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Returned questlFIRE GMOC 04.doc
Page 3
. First, the Fire Department developed a strategic business plan for 2004 - 2010
adopted by the City Council in concept in September 2004. This plan represents
the beginning of a new way of doing business in the Chula Vista Fire Department.
Fire Management and Labor partnered to develop a vision and a plan to achieve
results for our Customers - the City of Chula Vista. One of the most important
components of the Strategic Business Plan is the internal alignment of the Fire
Department's four lines of business, its programs and services. These services
were grouped around a common purpose into 17 different Fire Department
programs and grouped into four Lines of Businesses: Fire Administration, Calls for
Service/Operations, Prevention, and Disaster Preparedness.
· Second, the Fire Department has hired one of the best consultant's to conduct an
Emergency Medical Study, which will be completed by the end of June 2005.
· Third, The Fire Department is in the process of evaluating formal bids to select a
consultant to conduct a Fire Facility, Staffing and Equipment Master Plan.
. Lastly, last year the Fire Department opened the City's Fire Communications Center
returning control of local operations to the City of Chula Vista.
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing
facilities and equipment?
Yes
x
No
Explain: Facility and equipment maintenance and replacement schedules are in existence.
9. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects are to be undertaken pursuant
to the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes
x
No
Explain: Additional interface and enhancements will be made to the Computer Aided
Dispatch (CAD) system.
MISCELLANEOUS
10. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No _X_
Explain: The City Council has been very supportive of the Fire Department.
11. Do you have any other relevant information the Department desires to
communicate to the GMOC?
Yes No _X_
Explain: N/A
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed quest\FIRE GMOC 04.doc Page 4
12. Please provide the status of GMOC recommendations made last year.
a. Please describe the status of the update of the Fire Department Facility Master
Plan. In conjunction with this, the GMOC would appreciate a comparison of
response time standards/goals that may be established by national organizations
and an assessment of how Chula Vista compares with these.
Fire Facilitv Master Plan
The Fire Facility, Staffing and Equipment Master Plan will be completed by late
September 2005. Consultant proposals are currently under review.
Fire Department Goals
Strategic Goals are a description in measurable terms of the significant, must-do results
that the Fire Department must accomplish over the next 5 years in order to proactively
respond to the critical trends, issues and challenges on the horizon as articulated in the
Issue Statements.
Goal #1 - Class 1 Fire Department: By FY' 07-08, Chula Vista residents, visitors and
businesses will be served by a Class 1 Fire Department as defined by Insurance
Services Organization (ISO).
The Insurance Services Organization collects information on a communities public fire
protection and analyzes the data using a Fire Suppression Rating Schedule. The ISO
then assigns a Public Protection Classification (PPC) from 1 to 10. Class 1 represents
the best public fire protection. Chula Vista is currently rates as Class 3.
The Insurance Services Office (ISO) Class 1 classification represents exemplary fire
protection and lowers fire insurance premiums for residential and commercial
properties. There are only 9 Fire Departments in California rated Class 1.
Goal #2 - Fire Based Emergency Medical Service: Chula Vista residents and
visitors will have a full level of fire based Emergency Medical Services available. By
FY' 06-07, every person calling 911 with a medical emergency will receive
appropriate Emergency Medical Services (EMS), including Advanced Life Support
(ALS), from the Chula Vista Fire Department.
Goal #3 - Response Times: By FY' 08-09, Customers calling 911 will have:
. A fire engine on scene within 6.5 minutes of the call, 90% of the time, when required
. A first alarm assignment (3 Engines, 1 Truck, 1 Battalion Chief) on scene for a fire
or a major incident within 10.5 minutes, 90% of the time.
. Advanced Life Support (ALS) transport, when needed, within 8.5 minutes, 90% of
the time
. Basic Life Support (BLS) transport, when needed, within 15 minutes, 90% of the
time
Goal #4 - Community Risk Reduction: By FY' 05-06, through community risk
reduction education and engagement with the public the Chula Vista Fire Department
will:
. Reduce property loss
. Increase survivability
C:\dfflles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Relumed quest\FIRE GMOC 04.doc
Page 5
. Reduce accidents
. Reduce injuries
. Reduce false 911 calls
. Increase public awareness of fire department services
Goal #5 - Training: By FY'07-08, the Fire Department will have defined training
priorities and have the facilities, equipment and technology for Fire Department training
that:
. Is delivered with minimal interruption to personnel and resource availability
. Decrease % of time fire resources are out of service
. Meets/exceeds Local, State and Federal established standards
. % of all staff who meet and exceed standards
. Increases safety while decrease injury rate
b. Please provide the GMOC with copies of comments made by the Fire Department
over the reporting period to the current time regarding your concerns or indicating
recommended changes to proposed development that have been made in the
course of the Fire Department's role as one of the City's reviewin9 bodies. Please
indicate if no written comments have been made. No comments have been made
outside of the plan check review process.
c. Please provide the GMOC with a copy of the daily report that is provided by Fire
station and by trip regarding response times. Report not available.
13. In last year's report, the GMOC asked that the impact on turn-out time due to changes in
legislation, procedural requirements, and equipment-uniform changes that have taken
place since 1989 be quantified. What has been the result of this investigation? Turnout
time will be evaluated as the department develops its performance measures. This
evaluation was placed on hold until completion of the Dispatch Center Transition from
Heartland was completed. The Fire Department will resume evaluation in April 2005 along
with the strategic business plan performance targets to be set by the Fire Chief.
14. Please advise the GMOC regarding the costs and benefits of housing para-
medics/ambulance service within the Fire Department and what forward thinking strategies
the Fire Department is considering in this regard, if any. The Consultant hired by the Fire
Department to address Emergency Medical Services in the City of Chula Vista will address
this question in his study. Council approved the Consultant contract on March 8, 2005.
The project will take 16 weeks to complete from the initial kick-off of March 7' 2005. It will
include an EMS system review, development of EMS delivery options, review of legal issues
and options and a funding review. Fitch & Associates, LLC and Page, Wolfberg & Wirth
(PWW) will conduct the study. Fitch & Associates will function as the lead consultant fully
responsible for the project and subcontract with PWW to assist with the project, particularly
with regard to a number of legal issues that may arise with the selection of a new EMS
delivery model.
15. Please advise the GMOC on the rationale for rolling out the "big rig" even for non-fire calls.
N/A - there is no impact on threshold compliance.
Prepared by: Doug Perry
Title: Fire Chief
Date: March 4, 2005
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRetumed questlFIRE GMOC 04.doc
Page 6
.
(Please note, in addition to the questionnaire the GMOC will be requesting a briefing by engineering
staff on how the traffic threshold is interpreted and how it is measured.)
THRESHOLD
City-wide: Maintain LOS "C" or better as measured by observed average travel speed
on all signalized arterial segments, except that during peak hours LOS "D" can occur
for no more than two hours of the day. West of 1-805: Those signalized arterial
segments that do not meet the standard above, may continue to operate at their current
1991 LOS, but shall not worsen.
1. Please revise and complete this table according to the newly defined segments and
their respective TMP LOS ratings.
Third Ave. (G St. - Naples St.) NB/SB C/C C/C
Third Ave. (Naples 5t. - South CVCL) NB B ('94) C B (1)
Broadway (C 5t. - H 51.) 5B C C C C C
Broadway (H St. - L St.) NB B ('94) C C C
East H 51. (Hidden Vista Dr. - Paseo Ranchero) WB C A
Otay Lakes Rd. (E. H St. - Tel. Canyon Rd) NB/SB CIA C/C C/C DC/C(2) C/C
Palomar 5t. (Broadway - Hilltop Dr.) WB B ('94) C C B
Broadway (C St. - H St.) SB B('94) C C C C
East H 51. (Hidden Vista Dr. - Paseo Ranchero) WB C B
Hilltop Dr. (F 5t. - L St.) NB/SB B/B('92) C/B C/B B/C C/C
L St. (Industrial- Third Ave.) EB B ('97) C C C
Otay Lakes Rd. (E. H St. - Tel. Canyon Rd.) NB/SB C/B B/C C/C D/BC(2) C/C
. Single letters indicate 2-hour average LOS (example: C). Double letters (example: DC/ED) indicate hourly (first hour
and second hour) LOS. Study directions are separated by a backslash (example: EBIWB).
. Segments no longer studied have been removed. Removed segments will be shown in the table under question 2
(with revised begin and end points and with the notation (2) added to the 2003 data) if the 2004 LOS is C or less.
(1) Not studied because previous LOS was B or better.
Page 1
E St. (Bay - Woodlawn) WB Not D D C Not Studied
Studied
H St. (Bay -Woodlawn) EBIWB DC/C D/C C/D Rd Const. C/CD
East Orange Ave. (Melrose - Oleander) EBIWB DID DC lED
Palomar St. (Bay -Industrial) EB D C D CD D
Telegraph Cyn Rd. (Naclon - Canyon Plaza dIw) WB D D/C
E St. (Bay - Woodlawn) WB Not CD D C Not Studied
Studied
H St. (Bay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave) WB D D DC Rd Canst. D
Palomar St. (Bay - Industrial) EB D D D D D
Rd.
E St. (Bay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave.) WB Canst. D D D D
H St. (Bay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave.) EBIWB DIED DC/D CD/D Rd Const. DIED
East H St. (Hilltop Dr. - Hidden Vista) EB D CD D Rd Canst. C
East Orange Ave. (Melrose - Oleander) EBIWB DID DIED
Palomar St. (Bay Blvd. -Industrial Blvd.) EB D D/C D DE/CD D
2. Should any street segment be added to the above list as a result of the current TMP?
Yes X No
a. Please list those segments in the following table:
Third Ave. (G St. - Naples St.) NB/SB (PM) B/B('98) C/C
Broadway (H St. - L St.) NB (PM) B('01) C
Broadway (L St. - s. CVCL) NB (PM) B('99) C
E St. (Woodlawn Ave. - Third Ave.) EBIWB (Mid-day) C/B(2) C/C
PM C/C 2 C/C
H St. (Woodlawn Ave. - Third Ave.) EBIWB (Mid-day) C I C ('02)(2) C/C
PM C/CD '02 2 C/C
H St. (Third Ave. - Hilltop Dr.) EB (PM) B(2) C
Heritage Rd. (Telegraph Cyn Rd. - Olympic Pkwy) NB/SB (AM) D/D(2) ED(3)/C
(Mld-day) D/D(2) D(3)/C
PM C/D 2 ED 3/C
J St. (Oak lawn Ave. Third Ave.) EBIWB (Mid-day) BI B ('02) (2) C/C
PM C/C 2 C/B
Page 2
L St. (Industrial Blvd. - Third Ave.) EB (Mid-day) B ('97) C
La Media Rd. (Telegraph Cyn Rd. - Olympic Pkwy) NB/SB (AM) DC/C (2) B/AC
(Mid-day) DC/C(2) BC/C
(PM) D/BC(2) C/C
Palomar St. (Industrial Blvd. - Broadway) EBIWB (AM) C/B(2) C/C
(Mid-day) C/C(2) C/C
(PM) D/D(2) D/C
Palomar SI. (Broadway - Hilltop Dr.) WB (PM) B('01) C
Paseo Ranchero (E. H SI. - Telegraph Cyn Rd.) NB/SB (AM) DID (2) CB/C
(Mid-day) D/D(2) BIB
PM C/D 2 CB/C
E SI. (Bay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave.) (a) EB (PM) C C/D
J SI. (Bay Blvd. - Oaklawn Ave.) (a) EBIWB (PM) D/D(2) DID
Main St. (Melrose Ave. - Oleander Ave.) (a) EB (AM) C('96) D
WB PM C '96 D
Palomar SI. (Bay Blvd. -Industrial Blvd.) (a) WB (PM) C/D C/D
(a) These segments are at Freeway Interchanges and are not subject to threshold standards. For information only.
(2) Street was studied with different begin and/or end points or classification.
(3) The Free Flow Speed (FFS) on this segment reflects LOS A. The illustrated LOS reflects long delays at the intersection
with Telegraph Canyon Road. The Engineering Division will correct this deficiency by amending the traffic signal
timing plan for the intersection of Telegraph Canyon Road and Heritage Road.
Note: When traffic volumes on major roadways in eastern Chula Vista exceed 10,000 A.D.T., those roadways will be added to the
TMP segment runs in order to monitor the LOS and ensure that threshold standards are not exceeded.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
3. Please list any major streets, or other traffic improvements constructed during the
reporting period (03/04) fiscal year?
Yes X No
Explain:
. Olympic Parkway street improvements from Heritage Road to Hunte Parkway
. Hunte Parkway street improvements from South Greensview to Olympic Parkway
. East Palomar street improvements from Vista Sonrisa to Olympic Parkway
. Traffic signal improvements at East Palomar Street and Paseo Ladera
. Traffic signal improvements at Olympic Parkway and Hunte Parkway
. Westbound East "H" Street widening at the 1-805 Northbound on-ramp
. Eastbound East "H" Street widening east of 1-805 Northbound off-ramp
. Mount Miguel Road north of Proctor Valley Road
. Otay Lakes Road street Improvements east of Hunte Parkway
. "H" Street improvements between 1-5 and Broadway
. Palomar Street widening and improvements between 1-5 and Industrial
4. Please list any major streets, or other traffic improvements that have been completed
or planned for construction during the 04/05 fiscal year?
Yes x No
Explain:
. Paseo Ranchero from E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway
Page 3
. Olympic Parkway from Paseo Ranchero to La Media Road
. Olympic Parkway from E. Palomar Street to West of Village 5 Boundary
. Otay Lakes Road from Hunte Parkway to Lake Crest Drive
FREEWAY ENTRANCES / EXITS
5. Use the following two tables to report the status of freeway entrance/exit studies
andlor improvement projects.
Information received Last ear- Please U date Tables
E Street
H Street
J Street
L Stllndustrial Blvd.
Palomar Street
Main Street
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Northbound ramp meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Bonita Road
East H Street
Telegraph Canyon
Road
Olympic Parkway
Main Street
GROWTH IMPACTS
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Construction has begun in January 2004 on the widening of Telegraph
Canyon Road to provide three to four-lanes westbound to the
northbound 1-805 on-ramp. The project is scheduled for completion in
April 2005.
Northbound ram meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
Construction has begun in May 2004 on the interchange improvements.
The project is scheduled for completion in November 2005.
Northbound and Southbound ramp meters are scheduled for
activation 2009
Northbound ramp meter is scheduled for activation in 2009
6. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain LOS
levels?
Yes
No X
(See Explanation below)
Explain:
As a result of the various construction activities on major roads throughout
the City, coupled with the fact that SR-125 has not been built yet, traffic
delays have been observed during the peak hours. However, we are
maintaining threshold levels currently. Furthermore, due to the rapid rate of
Page 4
growth the City has been experiencing, construction of the following three
projects is imperative and will be completed in 2005:
1. 1-805 and Olympic Parkway Interchange
2. Telegraph Canyon Road widening east of 1-805
3. East H Street northbound on-ramp widening
Therefore, It is anticipated that additional traffic delays on Olympic Parkway,
Telegraph Canyon Road and East H Street for calendar year 2005 may
occur due to the construction activities for those roadways. We estimate that
motorists may start utilizing alternate routes when construction activities
necessitate a lane closure on these roadways. This will lead to a reduction
of traffic volumes on the roads under construction and a traffic volume
increase on alternate routes. Separately, in the next two years, we also
anticipate delays stemming from construction activities associated with the
construction of SR-125 as the work zone of the roadway crosses local
east/west arterials. The same trip diversions may occur as motorists devise
alternate routes during the day, which may lead to temporary congestion on
other street systems.
7. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth (without exceeding the LOS
threshold) for both the 18-month and 5 year time frame?
Yes X No
Over the next year, there will be delays as noted above on a few select
roadways in the City. The Traffic Section staff feels that with the planned
completion of SR-125 in the Fall of 2006, coupled with the completion of a
variety of local arterials that were exacted from recent subdivision entitlement
processes, the City will continue maintaining an acceptable Level of Service
on local arterials and the roadway's isolated intersections.
a. Please indicate those new roadways and/or improvements necessary to
accommodate forecasted growth consistent with maintaining the Threshold
Standards.
18-month timeframe:
1) Eastlake Parkway from SDG&E easement to Birch Road. (Completion Date by
mid 2005)
2) Birch Road from SR-125 R-O-W to Eastlake Parkway. (Completion Date by mid
2005)
3) Olympic Parkway Interchange at 1-805. (Completion Date is tentatively
scheduled for November 2005)
5-vear timeframe:
1) Birch Road from Eastlake Parkway to La Media Road.
2) Rock Mountain Road.
3) La Media Road from Olympic Parkway to Birch Road.
3) Eastlake Parkway from Birch Road to Hunte Parkway.
Page 5
4) Hunte Parkway from Village 11 entrance to Eastlake Parkway.
b. How will these facilities be funded?
TDIF, Transnet, and Developer funds.
c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this
funding?
Yes.
8. What is the Status of SR-125?
The new State Route 125 South highway is a two-stage project that consists of
constructing about 12.5 miles of new highway from SR 54 near the Sweetwater Reservoir
to State Route 905 in Otay Mesa near the International Border.
The first phase of the Project known as the Gap & Connector. The Gap (a freeway-to-
freeway interchange involving the reconstruction and expansion of an existing section of
SR 54 where it intersects with the new route of State Route 125 South) and the Connector
(a 3.2-mile publicly funded section from SR 54 to San Miguel Road in Bonita)
The second phase of the Project is the remaining 9.3 miles of the project running to SR
905 near the Otay Mesa border will be a state-of-the-art toll road developed by California
Transportation Ventures, Incorporated. The toll system will be designed to maximize the
use of Electronic Toll Collection (ETC), allowing customers equipped with electronic
transponders to drive through toll plazas at normal highway speeds.
State Route 125 will open initially as a four-lane highway with interchanges at SR 54,
Mount Miguel Road, East H Street, Otay Lakes Road, Olympic Parkway, Birch Road and
Otay Mesa Road/SR 905. The project is designed so that it may be expanded with
additional interchanges, carpool lanes and/or transit facilities constructed as future regional
growth and transportation needs dictate.
Construction for the Gap & Connector began in Summer 2002 and is estimated for
completion by Summer 2005 & the groundbreaking for the Toll Road occurred in
September 2003 with an estimated completion in Fall 2006.
9. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current
level of service as Chula Vista's transportation demand increases?
Yes X
No
Explain:
Completion of the SR-125 project will be the key in maintaining the current
level of service as transportation demands increase.
MAINTENANCE
Page 6
10. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes _X_ No
Exp/ain:
Funding for basic maintenance activities is adequate at present and the City
does not anticipate any shortfalls or difficulties in its effort to maintain its
street and traffic infrastructure in a safe and efficient manner. It should be
noted that the City does recognize the possibility that local funding of all City
operations could be affected by the State's on-going budget difficulties and
that once any specific impacts are identified, adjustments to maintenance
and operational activities may be necessary.
11. Has the Engineering Division developed an annual list of priority streets with
deteriorated pavement?
Yes X No
Explain, if yes please attach list:
City staff established an annual priority list for all deteriorating streets after
pavement analysis was performed.
12. Are any major roadway construction/upgrade or maintenance projects to be
undertaken pursuant to the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes X No
Explain:
1) Olympic Parkway 11-805 Interchange (2003 - 2005).
2) East H Street: additional lane on the westbound to northbound 1-805 ramp.
(2005)
3) Telegraph Canyon Road east of 1-805 westbound roadway widening. (2005)
FOLLOW-UP ON PREVIOUS YEAR'S RECOMMENDATIONS
13. Please provide a status report on efforts to investigate the practicality, and to
implement as appropriate, transit design requirements for new planned communities,
redevelopment and intensification areas.
The City of Chula Vista continues in its commitment to long-range planning,
which involves public input during all stages of proposed developments. In
addition, the City is continuing the General Plan update process, which is
scheduled for completion in early 2005. During this process, extensive public
involvement is essential at all stages, including the "visioneers" public
meetings and the various planning committees and public forums. The
public's input and participation in this General Plan update insures a shared
vision and strategy for the City's future and quality of life.
14. Please advise the GMOC on the results of the traffic control plans developed to
Page 7
reduce traffic congestion during construction activities for the 1-805 interchange
related construction.
Construction on the 1-805/0Iympic parkway interchange has started toward
the end of this reporting period. Staff has installed informational signs at the
key locations leading to the project regarding construction dates and
alternate routes.
15. Please describe how the community has been advised regarding construction work at
the 1-805 interchanges.
Same answer as above.
MANAGEMENT
16. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
Explain:
No
x
17. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes X No_
Staff would like to take this opportunity to share with the GMOC some
information presented in Chapter 10 of the Growth Management Element of
the General Plan Update. The Element calls for the development of
appropriate and applicable threshold standards that reflect changing
development patterns, location of development and methods of providing
services. The implementation of the General Plan vision and objectives will
be achieved later through revised policies and programs to be developed
with input from residents and business owners.
18. Are there any other suggestions that you would like the Growth Management
Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
Explain:
Continue the support for the timely construction of SR-125 and for monitoring
the Level Of Service (LOS) on our major streets.
Prepared By:
Date prepared:
Engineering Traffic Section
February 14, 2005
J:IEngineerlTRAFFICIGMOCI05 GMOC Traffic Questionaire.doc
Page 8
THRESHOLD
The City shall annually provide the two local school districts with a 12 to 18 month forecast and
request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The
Districts' replies should address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities
4. Other relevant infonnation the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC.
1. Please fill in or "Update" the information in the table below to indicate the existing enrollment conditions and
for current conditions. The most recent information available is ra uested, lease indicate reference date.
Chula Vista Middle 1,391 1,140 270 1,410 220 X
Hilltop Middle 1,258 1,200 210 1,320 220 X
Chula Vista High 2,640 1,290 990 2,280 220 X
Hiiltop High 2,140 1,500 510 2,010 220 X
Castle Park Middle 1,419 1,380 150 1,590 220 X
Castle Park High 2,139 1,350 570 1,920 220 X
Palomar High 483 360 240 600 100 X
Chula Vista Adult 3,947 N/A N/A N/A N/A X
(Note 2)
Bonita Vista High 2,411 1,770 780 2,550 220 X
Bonita Vista Middle 1,115 1,110 420 1,530 220 X
Eastlake High 2,369 2,460 480 2,940 220 X
Rancho Dei Rey Middle 1,319 1,380 60 1,440 220 X
EastLake Middle 1,104 1,665 0 1,665 220 X
Otay Ranch High 2,025 2,600 0 2,600 220 X
Note I: Capacity is the adjusted building capacity plus physical education capacity. It excludes students and capacity assigned to special
education and learning centers. Capacity figures are taken from Long Range Facility Master Plan (loaded at 30 students per classroom) - 9/03.
Note 2: Please note that past enrollment figures for Chula Vista Adult included the entire district's adult student population not just Chula Vista.
2 . Please fill in the tables below (insert new schools into the table as appropriate) to indicate the projected
conditions for December 2005 (a) and 2009 (b) based on the City's forecast.
2.a
x
X
X Note 2
Castle Park Middle 1,357 1,380 150 1,59 220 X
0
Castle Park High' 1,350 570 1,920 X
Palomar High 360 240 660 X
Chula Vista Adult N/A N/A N/A X
Bonita Vista High 2,248 1,770 780 2,550 220 X
Bonita Vista Middle 1,120 1,110 420 1,530 220 X
Eastlake High 2,195 2,460 480 2,940 220 X
Rancho del Rey 1,221 1,380 60 1,440 220 X
Middle
Otay Ranch High 2,643 2,600 0 2,600 220 X
Eastlake Middle 1,225 1,665 0 1,665 220 X
Notes:
1. Projection is from 1-18-05 CBEDs projection developed by SUHSD Planning Department.
2. A two-story structure with 19 ciassrooms will be under construction in 2005 to provide needed capacity.
Page 2
Chula Vista Middle
Hilltop Middle
Chula Vista High Note 4
Hillto
Castle Park Middle 1,882 1,380 150 1,530 220 X
Castle Park High 2,606 1,350 570 1,920 220 X
Palomar High 483 360 240 660 100 X
Chula Vista Adult N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A X Note 5
Bonita Vista High 2,208 1,770 780 2,550 220 X
Bonita Vista Middle 1,001 1,110 420 1,530 220 X
Eastlake High 3,743 2,460 480 2,940 220 X Note 2
Rancho del Rey 2,146 1,380 60 1,440 220 X Note 3
Middle
Otay Ranch High 4,492 2,600 300 2,900 220 X Note 2
Eastlake Middle 2,094 1,665 0 1,665 220 X Note 3
HS#13 0 2,600 0 2,600 220 X Note 2
MS#11 Note 3
Notes:
1. These projections were prepared by Davis Demographics and Planning (DDP) on January 28,2005 on behalf of the
Sweetwater Union High School District. The projections are based upon the students dwelling within the actual
attendance boundarv of the respective school. It should be further noted that the school district supports specialized
programs at various schools, which allow students throughout the district to choose to attend a school other then the
school assigned. This transfer phenomenon is impossible to project beyond a one year timeline. Therefore, the 2009
projections provided herein, are merely a projection by DDP of students residing in the respective school boundary. The
projection excludes students in special education and learning centers.
2. The district will open a portion of high school No. 13 by 2006, which will provide relief to Otay Ranch and Eastiake
High Schools. The boundaries for the school have not been developed, therefore an enrollment projection is not
available and the students are shown in the boundaries of Eastlake HS and Otay Ranch HS.
3. The district staff currently projects this middle school for 2008. Since no boundary exists, no enrollment projections
can be made and the students are shown in the Rancho del Rey and Eastlake MS boundaries.
4. In 2005, construction on a new classroom building will commence and will provide additional capacity for the school.
5. The Adult School will be relocated to the district's L Street property where a new and expanded facility will be
constructed. The Adult School capacity is expected to increase along with parking facilities. Design efforts will
commence in the next several months.
Page 3
3. Please fill in the table below to indicate enrollment history.
Total Enrollment 7,429 7,215 7,157 7,175
% of Change Over the 2.9% .8% -.3% 4.4%
Previous Year
% of Enrollment from 86% 87% 91% 86%
Chula Vista
Total Enrollment 4,041 4,129 4,004 4,124
% of Change Over the -2.1% 3.3% -3% 8.3%
Previous Year
% of Enrollment from 81% 90% 91% 89%
Chula Vista
Total Enrollment 10,343 9,261 8,441 7,994
% of Change Over the 11.7% 8.9% 5.3% 10.4%
Previous Year
% of Enrollment from 97% 96% 94% 95%
Chula Vista
Total Enrollment
% of Change Over the
Previous Year
40,967
39,290 37,878 37,275
3.6% 1.6% 5.2%
48% 49% 51%
4.2%
% of Enrollment from
Chula Vista
48%
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the District's ability to
accommodate student enrollment?
Yes
No
x
N/A
Explain: We are accommodating growth through new construction programs; high school number
13, new classroom buildings at Hilltop HS and Chula Vista HS. Boundary adjustments implemented
this year also relieved Chula Vista HS and Chula Vista MS.
5. Are existing facilities/schools able to absorb forecasted growth through December 2005?
Yes X
No
N/A
Explain: There has been a slight enrollment decline on the west side and the new facilities east of 1_
805 are able to absorb growth through 2005.
6. Are existing facilities/schools able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5-year (December 2009)
time frame?
Page 4
Yes
No X
Explain:
7. Will new facilities/schools be required to accommodate forecasted growth over the next 5
years?
Yes
X
No
High School No. 13 is currently under construction.
If yes, please indicate when the facility/school is needed and identify the major milestone
points (indicated below) and timing that each facility/school should normally be expected to
meet. Please indicate if the particular milestone is not relevant or if others should be noted:
A. Site Selection - complete
B. Architectural Review - complete
C. Funding identification for land and construction - in process
D. Commencement of site preparation - started
E. Service by utilities and road - started
F. Commencement of construction - April 1, 2005
(Please include a discussion on the status of HS 13 and plans for HS 14):
Architect selection for High School No. 14 will occur in February for board approval in March 2005.
8. Is the school district considering alternative site and facility design and configuration
standards in response to the scarcity and cost of land particularly in western Chula Vista?
Yes
X
No
Explain: The district will look at a multi-story design for HS14 and a campus hosting grades 7
through 12 inclusive.
9. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting the maintenance ofthe level of service as
Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes
No X
10. Please list current joint use activitieslfacilities between the City of Chula Vista and the SUHSD.
JOINT USE WITH CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SCHOOL
ORGANIZATION
AREA OF USE
Bonita Vista High
American Red Cross
Registrar of Voters
New Hope Community Church
AYSO
SOSU
City of Chula Vista
SO Adult Baseball
Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Gym/Cafeteria/Classroom
Athletic Fields
Classrooms
Gym/Classroom
Athletic Fields
Page 5
Bonita Vista Middle American Red Cross Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Registrar of Voters Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
AYSO Athletic Fields
Bonita Valley ASA Athletic Fields
Castle Park High American Red Cross Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Registrar of Voters Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
YMCA Roller Hockey, Gym
CV Youth Football Stadium, Press Box
CV Youth Soccer Athletic Fields
CV Sundevils Softball Athletic Fields
Castle Park Elementary Auditorium
Parkview Elementary Auditorium
UCSO Cafeteria
Starlings Volleyball Gym
Castle Park Middle CV Youth Soccer Athletic Fields
South Bay Little League Athietic Fields
Chula Vista Adult American Red Cross Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Registrar of Voters Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
C.V. Community Church Adult Classes
Norman Park Center AdulUSenior Classes
Fredericka Convalescent
Hospital Classroom
Salvation Army Classroom
Chula Vista High American Red Cross Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Registrar of Voters Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
CV Childrens Choir Classroom
CV Pony North Athletic Fields
CV Youth Football Stadium
SO Sun Harbor Chorus Classroom
Hot Spurs, USA Athletic Fields
AYSO Region 290 Athletic Fields
CV Badgers Wrestling Weight Rooms
SO Flyers Athletic Fields
Huff 'n Puff Soccer Athletic Fields
Starlings Volleyball Gym
YMCA
Chula Vista Middle American Red Cross Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Registrar of Voters Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Page 6
Eastlake High
American Red Cross
Eastlake Youth Football-Cheer
Registrar of Voters
City of Chula Vista
City of Chula Vista
City of Chula Vista
Eastlake Community Church
Minato Gakuen Japanese
School
Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Athletic Fields
Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Library
Chapman Perf. Arts Ctr
Park and Recreation Areas
Gymnasium
Classrooms, Perf. Arts,
Athletic Fields
Hilltop High
American Red Cross
Registrar of Voters
Cornerstone Church
CV Flyers
CV Badgers
AAU Baseball
City of CV Recreation Dept.
City of CV-Police Dept.
SD County Office of Education
Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Gymnasium
Athletic Fieids
Gymnasium
Athietic Fields
Stadium
Stadium
Gym/Classrooms
Hilltop Middle
American Red Cross
Registrar of Voters
Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Rancho Del Rey Middle
American Red Cross
Registrar of Voters
City of Chula Vista
Bonita Valley ASA
Ranger Soccer
Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Park and Recreation Areas
Athietic Fieids
Athletic Fields
Otay Ranch High
American Red Cross
Registrar of Voters
U.S. Olympic Training Center
Rancho Vista Covenant Church
Mater Dei Church
Rebel Soccer
Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Various Athletic Venues:
Track & Field,
Auditorium
Auditorium
Athletic Fields
Palomar High
American Red Cross
Registrar of Voters
Choice Parenting
Gym/Auditoriums for Emg's
Gym/Auditoriums for Voting
Classrooms
11. Please comment on the potential for expanding joint use arrangements, please be specific
where possible.
As new campuses are constructed and brought on line, new opportunities will exist for joint use.
Page 7
12. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes
No X
Explain: The State has not fully funded deferred maintenance accounts and the upcoming
Governor's budget suggests a reduction in funding for education in general.
13. Are there any major upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the School District's
current 1-year and 5-year CIP that will add capacity?
Yes X
No
Explain: An aggressive modernization effort is underway in 2005. What was to have been a 15 year
Proposition BB program will now conclude by 200617. Work at five campuses will commence in
spring 2005, five more summer "sprint" projects will start this summer, and five more projects will start
in the fall 2005. The $187 million of Proposition BB funds have been leveraged to qualify for over
$120 million in State funding and the combined funds will be expended on modernization and new
construction work over the next 1 to 2 years bringing the work in nearly 10 years ahead of schedule.
New classroom buildings at Chula Vista HS, Hilltop HS and Sweetwater HS will be constructed. A
multi-purpose facility at Chula Vista MS will be constructed (starts spring 2005) and at National City
MS. The relocation of the district office to the L Street property will result in the partial vacation of
Chula Vista Adult School, which will create capacity on the west side. Combined, these projects will
add nearly 100 new classrooms on the west side of the district.
Within the next five years the district will construct high school 13, middle school 11 and be in the
planning stages of high school 15. Combined, these projects will add hundreds of new classrooms on
the district's east side.
14. Please indicate what the district considers to be as the major milestones in implementing the
recently completed Facilities Master Plan and the status of those milestones?
Please see #13 above.
MISCELLANEOUS
15. In what ways has the school district benefited from 5850, what have been the shortcomings, if
any?
Describe: The district has benefited from SB 50 and follow-on bonds by being well positioned to
received State funding - actual receipts to date are approaching $100 million and we are in line for an
additional $130 million. The shortcomings of SB 50 are that the district can no longer require a
developer to annex to a Mello Roos district and we are restricted to collecting $1.92 per square foot
on residential developments. Fortunately the large community developers have continued to form
Mello Roos Districts and this has allowed funding of the new schools. On the other hand, developers
of in-fill projects, redevelopment district developers and others on the west side are not forming Mello
districts and the simple payment of fees does not provide the resources needed to fully mitigate for
growth and house students resulting. This is a significant problem.
16. Please identify ways that the GMOC can assist the SUHSD in keeping pace with growth by
making recommendations to City Departments and the City Council.
Describe: The City could greatly assist the district in identifying a means to guide developers into
Page 8
Mello Roos districts on the west side.
The district will need City assistance to quickly site High School No. 14 and obtain the needed
infrastructure to it.
17. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and GMOC?
Yes X
No
Explain: The district has developed a robust web site that shows all construction projects (essentially
the Long Range Facility Master Plan) and their status (new schools and modernization), their
associated budgets, status of planning, emerging business outreach, business opportunities, etc. It
can be viewed at suhsd.k12.ca.us and click on "construction update". It is intended as a helpful
resource to the public and the community in general to keep track of the great progress the district
has made and will make in 2005 and beyond.
With the successful implementation of Proposition BB efforts noted, the district board of trustees may
wish to consider a follow-up measure to continue improvements on older school sites in the district.
The Long Range Facility Master Plan developed in 2004, identified the need for $864 million in
improvements to bring each classroom and associated teaching spaces up to the district standards
and $584 million in new school construction to fully implement the plan. With Mello-Roos bonding
capacity, Proposition BB resources and state funding combined, a shortfall of over $580 million was
identified to complete the implementation of the combined modernization, expansion and new school
construction plan of nearly $1.5 billion. Support of the district's efforts in this arena would be
welcome.
Prepared by: Katy Wright
Title: Director of Planning and Construction
Date: February 1, 2005
Page 9
THRESHOLD
The City shall annually provide the two local school districts with a 12 to 18 month forecast and requestan
evaluation oftheir ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The Districts' replies should
address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities
4. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC.
1. Please fill in or "Update" the information' in the table below to indicate the existing enrollment
conditions and capacity for current conditions. The most recent information available is requested,
please indicate reference date.
Cook
Feaster-Edison Ex!. Trad Charter, TIIG
Hilltop Drive 77 3 Trad 1 NSH class
Mueller 292 Ex!. T rad Charter, TIIG
Rosebank 255 12 Trad
Vista Square 426 YRS 1 Sp. Ed. class, 5 DHH classes,
TIIG & PIS
learning Comm. 557 600 43 Charter, PIS
Castle Park 538 496 133 91 9 Trad 2 NSH classes
Harborside 721 459 383 121 Trad 2 NSH classes, TIIG & PIS
Kellogg 517 377 294 154 1 Trad 2 NSH classes
lauderbach 848 561 403 116 18 YRS 2 NSH classes, TIIG & PIS
loma Verde 590 426 290 112 17 YRS 1 NSH class, NClB
Montgomery 369 432 142 205 Trad 1 NSH class, PIS
Otay 631 568 133 70 36 Trad PIS
Palomar 433 466 0 33 4 Trad 1 NSH class and 1 SH class, PIS
Rice 709 590 257 144 15 Trad 2 SH classes; 3 NSH classes
Rohr 426 466 71 111 YRS 2 NSH class
C:ldffllesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned questlCVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 1
Arrovo Vista 816 792 91 67 17 YRS Charter
Olvmpic View 804 484 368 48 3 YRS
Parkview 464 467 101 104 3 Trad 2 NSH classes, 2 SH classes
Rogers 568 507 127 66 1 YRS
Valle Lindo 572 428 263 119 5 Trad 2 NSH classes
Hedenkamp 896 990 94 1 YRS 2 SH classes
Heritage 876 772 164 36 112 YRS
McMiliin 858 772 80 -6 21 YRS 1 SH class
NORTHEAST
Allen/Ann Dalv 406 446 0 40 Trad 3 NSH classes
Casillas 678 645 173 140 YRS 1 NSH classes
Chula Vista Hills 554 554 60 60 3 Trad 1 NSH class
Clear View 526 514 120 108 Ex!. T rad Charter, 1 Sp. Ed. class
Discoverv 784 603 352 171 YRS Charter; 2 SH classes
Eastlake 624 508 270 154 YRS 1 NSH class
Halecrest 499 565 80 146 Trad 1 NSH class
Liberty 444 726 282 YRS 2 NSH classes, 1 SH class
Marshall 711 621 133 43 YRS 1 Sp. Ed. class
Salt Creek 410 918 508 Trad
Tiffany 630 641 201 212 Trad 2 NSH classes
*TUG - Targeted Improvement Grant
"NCLB - No child left behind
"PIS - Program improvement school
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Retumed quest\CVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 2
2. Please fill in the tables below (insert new schools into the table as appropriate) to indicate the projected
conditions for December 2006 (a) and 2009 (b) based on the City's forecast.
2 a.
Cook
Feaster-Edison
Hilltop Drive
Mueller
Rosebank
Vista Square
Learning Comm.
Castle Park
Harborside
Kellog
Lauderbach
Loma Verde
Montgomerv
Otay
Palomar
Rice
~ -
Arroyo Vista
Olympic View
Parkview
Rocers
Valle Lindo
Hedenkamp
Heritage
McMillin
Allen/Ann Daly
Casillas
Chula Vista Hills
Clear View
Discovery
Eastlake
Halecrest
Liberty
Marshall
C:\dffiles\GMOC\GMOC 04=05\Returned quest\CVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 3
ISalt Creek
Tiffany
*(-) denotes amount over capacity
2.b
Cook
Feaster-Edison
Hilltop Drive
Mueller
Rosebank
Vista S uare
Learning Comm.
Castle Park
Harborside
Kellog
Lauderbach
Lorna Verde
MonlQomerv
Otav
Palomar
Rice
Rohr
Arroyo Vista
Olvmpic View
Parkview
Rogers
Valle Lindo
Hedenkamp
Heritage
McMillin
;
.
Allen/Ann Daly
Casillas
Chula Vista Hills
Clear View
Discovery
Eastlake
Halecrest
Liberty
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned questlCVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 4
I I I
I I
1-""
Salt Creek
Tiffany
'(-j denotes amount over capacity
3. Please fill in the table below to indicate enrollment history.
Total Enrollment
% of Change Over the Previous Year
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista
6,266
5,562
5,395
11%
3%
0%
97%
97%
97%
Total Enrollment 23,020 21,455 21,348
% of Change Over the Previous Year 7% 1% 4%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 97% 97% 97%
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Districts ability to accommodate
student enrollment?
x
Yes
No
Explain: Extra capacity was added during the summer of 2004 by opening two new schools.
5. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth through December 2005?
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lReturned questlCVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 5
Yes
x_
No
Explain:
6. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5-year (December 2009) time frame?
Yes
No
x_
Explain: As development occurs in Eastern Chula Vista the District plans to open additional schools to
accommodate the students generated by new housing. Veteran's School in otay Ranch Village 6 is
currently under construction.
7. Will new facilities/schools be required to accommodate forecasted growth over the next 5 years?
During the next five years schools are planned for construction in Otay Ranch Villages 11,2 and 7.
Yes
x
No
If yes, please indicate when the facility/school is needed and identify the major milestone points
(indicated below) and timing that each facility/school should normally be expected to meet. Please
indicate if the particular milestone is not relevant or if others should be noted:
A Site Selection - Tentative sites are identified for Otay Ranch Villages 2 & 7.
B. Architectural Review - Same as A
C. Funding identification for land and construction - Same as A
D. Commencement of site preparation
E. Service by utilities and road
F. Commencement of construction - Pending School site approval by California Department of
Education, district eligibility, and State Funding.
8. Is the school district considering alternative site and facility design and configuration standards in
response to the scarcity and cost of land particularly in western Chula Vista?
Yes
x
No
Explain: The District requires the assistance of the City of Chula Vista in identifying affordable school sites
in Western Chula Vista.
9. Please list current joint use activitieslfacilities between the City of Chula Vista and the CVESD.
The District has joint use of play fields (soccer, baseball and basketball) at Rogers and Harborside with the
City of Chula Vista.
10. Please comment on the potential for expanding joint use arrangements, please be specific where
possible. The process of co-locating elementary schools and city parks will continue.
11. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the maintenance of the level of service as Chula
Vista's population increases?
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05lRelurned quesllCVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 6
Yes
No_x_
Explain:
12. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes_x
No
Explain: Per State Law 3% of the Districts annual budget is reserved for facilities maintenance in addition
the district qualifies for and will receive State deferred maintenance funds.
13. Are there any major upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the School District's current 1-
year and 5-year CIP that will add capacity?
Yes
No _x_
Explain: The District will complete its school modernization projects in the summer of 2005, with the
modernization of Tiffany and Otay Elementary Schools.
14. Does the CVESD maintain an inventory for how each school/facility meets state of district facility
standards, with a corresponding program for improving facilities that may not meet that standard?
Yes_x_ No
Explain: The District has a deferred maintenance plan.
MISCELLANEOUS
15. In what ways has the school district benefited from S850, what have been the shortcomings, if any?
Describe: The District received funds, which helped modernize our older schools.
16. Please identify ways that the GMOC can assist the CVESD in keeping pace with growth by making
recommendations to City Departments and the City Council.
Describe: Constant communication with the City and the School District. Identify affordable school
locations in Western Chula Vista that will accommodate the increase of students that result from the city
redevelopment plans.
17. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and GMOC.
Yes_x_ No
Explain: The District continues to work with the Office of Public School Construction to increase it's
Unhoused student eligibility. If eligibility is not increased the district may not qualify for school construction
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04~05lReturned questlCVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 7
funding. Without State Funding school construction will not keep pace with growth.
Prepared by: Yolanda Sierra & Dee Peralta
Title: Student Placement & Planning Department
Date: January 5, 2005
C:ldffilesIGMOCIGMOC 04=05IReturned questlCVESD GMOC 05_.doc
Page 8
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ACCEPTING THE 2005 GMOC ANNUAL REPORT AND
APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN;
AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO UNDERTAKE ACTIONS
NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AS
PRESENTED IN THE "2005 GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS/PROPOSED
IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS SUMMARY"
WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) is
responsible for monitoring the City's eleven growth management quality of life threshold
standards and reporting their findings and recommendations to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2005, the GMOC finalized its 2005 Annual Report; and
WHEREAS, the report covers the period from July 1, 2003 through June 30,
2004, identifies current issues in the second half of 2004 and early 2005, and finally
assesses threshold compliance concerns over the next 5 years.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista accepts the 2005 GMOC Annual Report and approves the
18commendations contained therein;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council directs
the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to implement those recommendations
as presented in the "2005 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed Implementing Actions
Summary."
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
James Sandoval
Director of Planning and Building
RESOLUTION NO. PCM 05-01
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING AND APPROVING
THE 2005 GMOC ANNUAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDING
ACCEPTANCE AND APPRO V AL BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) is
responsible for monitoring the City's eleven growth management quality of life threshold
standards, and to submit their annual report to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2005, the GMOC finalized its 2005 Annual Report
regarding compliance with the City's eleven quality of life threshold standards; and
WHEREAS, the report covers the period from July 1, 2003 through June 30,
2004, identifies current issues in the second half of 2004 and early 2005, and finally
assesses threshold compliance concerns over the next 5 years.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the
City of Chula accepts the 2005 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations contained
therein;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning
Commission recommends that the City Council accept and approve the 2005 GMOC
Annual Report and the recommendations contained therein.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 23rd day of June, 2005 by the following vote to-
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Marco Cortez, Chairman
Diana Vargas
Secretary to Planning Commission