The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet 1999/03/29 SUSAN BIGELOW CITY CLERK AGENDA March 29, 1999 6:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Davis, Moot, Padilla, Salas, and Mayor Horton. k Growth ~agemen1 Oversight Commissioners Dull, Fisher, Gray. Hyde, Munoz, P't:i'ez, Tarantino, Thomas, and Chair Hubbard. Planning Commissioners CJ;;;-neda. Hall, O'Neill.l'ky, Tara~o. Thomas. and Chair Willett. ~ f\PPROYA.L OF ~L.lES for Growth Management Oversight Commission meeting of March 4,1999 (GMOC Members only) Bt: SINES S 3 PUBLIC HEARING 0]'\ PCM-98-38, REVIEW MTI CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 1998 ANl\'U.A.L REPORT On March 4. 1999. the GMOC finalized its 1998 Annual Report to the City Council regarding compliance with the City's eleven Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards. The report focuses on the period from July 1. 1997 through June 30, 1998, although issues identified in the second half of 1998 and early 1999 are also included where pertinent A summary of the GMOC's recommendations and staffs proposed implementation actions is included. The report discusses each threshold in terms of threshold compliance, key issues, and corresponding recommendations. The workshop will give the GMOC an opportunity to discuss their findings and recommendations with the Planning Commission .and City Council Staff recommendation A. That the Planning Commission accept the 1998 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations as presented therein, adopt a motion recommending that Council do the same; and B. That the City Council: (a) Accept the GMOC's 1998 ..Iu1nual Report and recommendations contained therein; and (b) Direct staff to undertake actions necessary to implemem those recommendations as presented in "1998 GMOC Recommenda:ions 'Proposed Implementing Actions Summary." ORAL COMMP\JCA TIO"iS ADJOURN~1E"'T The City Council will adjourn 10 the regular City Council meeting on April 13, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The Planning Commission will adjourn to lhe regular Planning Commission meeting on April 14.1999 at 700 pm in the Council Chambers. SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP/ MEETING OF TIIE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION AND GROWTIl MANAGEMENT OVERSIGill COMMISSION COUNCIL CONFERENCE AGENDA STATEMENT Item l Meeting Date 03/29/99 Public Hearing; PCM-98-38, Review and Consideration of the Growth Management Oversight Commission's (GMOC) 1998 Annual Report SUBMu lED BY: Director of Planning and . ding d ~\ On March 4, 1999, the GMOC iin~li7".d its 98 Annual Report to the City Council regllTding compliance with the City's eleven Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards. The Report focuses on the period from July 1, 1997 through June 30, 1998, although issues identified in the second half of 1998 . and early 1999 are also included where pertinent. Staff's responses to the GMOC reco=endations are included in the attached GMOC Recommendationsllmplementation Actions Summary (ft tt~r'lnnP.nt A), and should be reviewed in conjunction with the report. The Report discusses each Threshold in terms of threshold compliance, key issues, and corresponding reco=endations (AUllclnnent B). The workshop will give the GMOC an opportunity to discuss their findings and recommendations with the Planning Co=ission and City Council. ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: City Mana (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X) RECOMMENDATION: 1) That the Pl~ing Commission accept the 1998 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations as presented therein, and adopt a motion recommending thai Council do the same; and 2) That the City Council: a) Accept the GMOC's 1998 Annual Report and reco=endations contained therein; and b) Direct staff to undertake actions necessary to implement those reco=endations as presented in Attachment A - "1998 GMOC Reco=endationslProposed Implementing Actions Summary". Page 2, Item-L Meeting Date 03/29/99 BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission will provide comments and recommendations at the workshop. DISCUSSION: 1. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Potential Non-Compliance Not In Compliance In Compliance Schools (Sweetwater Union High School District) Police FirelEMS Traffic Parks & Rec. Libraries Fiscal Air Quality Sewer Drainage Water 2. SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES Threshold with Potential for Non-ComDliance Schools -Sweetwater Union Hieh School District (SUHSD) continues to experience a significant increase in student enrollment due primarily to new growth in eastern Chula Vista and demographic changes in western Chula Vista. Based on development forecasts, the District bas indicated that existing facility capacity will be consumed by the year 2002. This capacity includes facilities on the ground today, as well 83 more relocatable classrooms that are planned to be placed at existing sites. The participation of new development in the Community Facilities District (CFD) program is essential for ensuring adequate funds to fully mitigate enrollment demands from new development. This participation, however, may be affected by the recent passage of Senate Bill 50 (SB50) which restricts the ability of school districts to require full mitigation for school construction from new residential developments. SUHSD has indicated that SB50 could impact the district's ability to secure adequate funding for new schools. The GMOC recommends that City staffworlc with both school districts to analyze the ramifications of SB50 as it relates to the timing and construction of new schools. SUHSD also informed the GMOC that by the year 2002 they will not be able to accommodate any additional student enrollment in existing facilities in western Chula Vista. Page 3, Item l. Meeting Date 03/29/99 Most older schools, primarily in western Chula Vista, were built around 30 year years ago and were designed for less students. These schools are in desperate need ofmodemization and expansion to meet growing enrollment demands. Passage of a general obligation bond is critical to the district's ability to modernize and expand facilities in western Chula Vista Chula Vista Elementary School District (CVESm also continues to experience these growth pressures. The district's plan to accommodate forecasted growth for the next 5 to 7 years includes the construction of 5 new schools over the next five years. These schools will accommodate about 700 students each, as opposed to existing facilities which were designed for under 600 students. In addition, the district plans to modernize and expand existing schools with revenue from a general obligation bond (Proposition JJ) approved last November. Thresholds Not in Compliance Police - The Threshold for Priority I emergency calls for service (pI CFS) to respond to 84% of calls within 7 m;nnt"S, with an overall average response time of 4.5 minutes, was not met for the eighth consecutive year. The Police Department responded to 75% of calls within 7 minutes with an average response time of 5.46 minutes. This was the first year that the Threshold Standard for Priority II urgent CFS, to respond to 62% of calls within 7 minutes with an overall average response time of 7 minutes, was not met. The Police Department responded to 52.9% of PI CFS within 7 minutes, with an average response time of 8.13 minutes. In comparison to previous reporting periods, 1he Police Department experienced a significant drop in service levels. This decrease is primarily attributed to growth and the need for additional staffing. Accordiog to the Police Department, without 1he addition of two beats (one in western Chula Vista and one roving beat in eastern Chula Vista) and more staff in 1he dispatch center, current service levels will remain relatively constant This request for additional staff only addresses immediate needs. Long-range staffing needs to meet projected growth demands will be identified through the Police Department's "Strategic Plan", e>"'"Pected to be completed in June 1999. The strategic plan win also evaluate false alarms as they relate to Threshold Standard performance. Other factors contributing to the Threshold deficiency include: 1. The high volume of false alarms, 2. Unf"m;!;ar (new) staff, 3. Implementation of1he Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system, and 4. 25% turnover due to retirement and attrition. Page 4, Item ---1- Meeting Date 03/29/99 The first factor, false alarms, continues to be the most significant contributor. Alann calls for service continue to represent 25% of all Priority I CFS. 98% of these alarm CFS are false. The GMOC recommends that the Police Department prepare a goal oriented action plan for the reduction in the number of false alarms, including evaluation of a possible requirement for residential alann system owners to contract with a private alann company for the first level of response to alarms, nrtherthan the current practice of having the Police Department provide the first response. FirelEMS - The Threshold for Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) to respond to 85% of calls for service (CFS) within 7 minutes was not met. The Fire Department responded to 81 % of CFS within 7 minutes. .As stated in the Fire Station Master Plan (FSMP) update, when the FirelEMS Threshold Standard was being established, the City had only a rudimentary technical capability to assess the response time components. At the time, the dispatch time +tmnout time averaged 13 minutes. This established the overall percentage of responses thought to be within the 7-minute target. Since 1987, the City's measurement techniques have improved. Present esh,.""tp<: are that the dispatch + turnout time averages 2.0 minutes NOT 13 minutes. The error reflects the fact that different portions of the dispatch process are being measured today than were measured in the past. Additionally, back in 1987, the Threshold was set a 5% below the 7-minute response time rate. This offset factor was applied to account for normal year-to-year variation and for the lag time in constructing new fire stations. A smaller offset factor of 2% would be recommended today. Using the 2.0 minute dispatch + turnout time average and the 2% offset factor the true Threshold should have been set to respond to 79.7% of calls within 7 minutes. Based on the findings of the FSMP update, the GMOC concurs that a FirelEMS Threshold Standard amendment should be considered; however, consideration should be deferred until two years of data from the CAD system have been collected. The CAD system will provide a more accurate data base to determine an adequate threshold standard for fire service delivery. Two years of data should be available by the end of the year 2000. Thresholds in Compliance Parks and Recreation - The GMOC continues to emphasize the urgency for a parks master plan, greenbelt master plan, and Threshold Standard amendment As stated in Attachment A., staff is in the process of selecting a consultant to prepare a parks and a greenbelt mater plan. Staff will proceed to Council for appropriation of funds in the near future and anticipates completion by this summer. Page 5, Item -L Meeting Date 03/29/99 The GMOC recommends an amendment to the Threshold Standard to be processed concurrently with the parks and greenbelt master plans for City Council adoption. The proposed Threshold Standard amendment would apply the Standard City-wide, and includes the addition of an implementation measure to addresses the parkland deficiency for the area west ofT-80S. The added implementation measure requires an ann1lll1 evaluation by the GMOC of the City's progress in implementing the parks master plan's strategies for moving the area west ofI-80S towards 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents over the long-term (20+ years). lfthe GMOC determines that appropriate progress is not being made, the proposed amended Threshold calls for the City Council to adopt and fund tactics to achieve implementation consistent with the measures in the parks master plan. Air Quality - The GMOC recommends that the City Council review <md consider adoption of the CO2 Reduction Plan. Once adopted, growth related air quality improvement policies can be prioritized for implementation. The Growth Management Program requires an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) for major developments of 50 units or more at the Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan level. The GMOC =ognizes that implementing certain project design features, such as pedestrian-friendly and multi-modal circulation patterns, requires early planning, typically before preparation of the SPA Plan and AQIP. The GMOC reco=ends that project design policies, consistent with the CO2 Reduction Plan, be considered for integration into the development review process at the earliest stages, and if necessary, prior to preparation of SPA Plans. Traffic - Development in eastem Chula Vista has generated increased traffic volumes. Although these traffic increases have not resulted in a Threshold Standard deficiency, they have caused concem among City residents. The contin1lll1 rapid pace of development in eastern Chula Vista, coupled with traffic delays from roadway construction, is likely to magnify these concerns. The GMOC recommends that the City expand its public information efforts to inform the public about current and long-range transportation planning efforts. Although new residential projects are conditioned to pay their fair share for the new street system, and are approved with building permit limitations linked to roadway improvements, there is still a need for the Engineering and Planning Divisions to prepare a phasing plan for development projects not currently contemplated in the City's traffic model for 2005, and to coordinate the amount, location, and timing of development in relation to the available roadway capacity pre-SR-125. The GMOC recommends that City staff develop a contingency plan for the allocation of building permits in the event that the construction of SR-125 is delayed. Page 6, Item -1- Meeting Date 03/29/99 Recoeni?:ing that improvements and additions to alternative modes of transportation may decrease the demand on the roads and :freeways, the GMOC reco=ends that the City Council continue to request that the Metropolitan Transportation Development Board (MTDB) develop and-fund right-of-way and design studies for the extension of the trolley line from 1-5 to Otay Ranch. Fiscal- The GMOC continues to reco=end a standard procedure for the annual review of Development Impact Fees (DIF). The lIIlIlual review should be a part of the annual DIF Funds Report and should include five year growth projections for each DIF and an evaluation of projections, facility cost, and other assumptions. . Libraries -Consistent with the updated Library Master Plan, an amendment to the Library Threshold Standard from 500 to 600 square feet of library facility per 1,000 population is reco=ended. The proposed amendment corrects a discrepancy between the Growth Management Program's hlrrary service goal (500 square feetl 1000 population) and the Libraries component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee wmch has collected funds under a 600 square feetll,OOO population formula. Relative to the ~adequately equipped and staffed" portion of the Threshold Standard, the GMOC reco=ends an increase in staff and in the materials collection (books, videos, compact discs, talking books, and audio cassettes). The GMOC reco=ends that Council allocate adequate resources to bring the materials collection ratio up from 2.8 to 3.0 items per person as identified in the General Plan. To meet public demand, the GMOC reco=ends additional staff to provide 8 to 12 additional weekly hours at the South Chula Vista Library. Drainage - In light of the continuing coSt and lengthy permit process associated with the maint""''''"..e of earth bottom drainage facilities and detention basins, the GMOC once again reco=ends that the City prepare a master maintenance agreement with wildlife agencies. Unfunded drainage improvements needed in western Chula Vista continue to concern the GMOC. The GMOC recommends that the City Council seek funding to annually complete priority projects on the Engineering Division's list of needed, but unfunded projects. Sewer - No issues were identified Water - No issues were identified Page 7, Item ..L Meeting Date 03/29/99 CONCLUSION: To assist Council in evaluating and acting upon the Report's twenty-three recommendations, a concise summary of the GMOC's recommendations and proposed Council implementing actions is presented in Attaclnnent A. Staff requests direction from Council to implement those recommendations as outlined in the right-hand column of Attachment A. Appendices to the Report contain the Threshold compliance questionnaireslreports presented to the GMOC by the various City departments and outside agencies. FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. As specific follow-up actions are brought forward to the City Council, fiscal analysis of these actions will be provided.. AttachmentS A - 1998 GMOC Recommendations! Proposed Implementing Actions Swmnary B - Chainnan's Cover Memo and GMOC 1998 Annual Report C - App::ndiccs ATIACHME!\"'T A 1998 GMOC Recommendations/ Proposed Implementing Actions Summary ~ ;,,; 0;;.- :;=: ~< ~- z:S OG -::> mm :!am -z :50 G_ O!-< uU ;...< =" ;:"Z -,... ml"" :::z """" ;;;.- O~ ;.....;j Z::" ~~ -- ""- ~cr.> "z <2 z!-< -<< -0 Gz =~ ~- ;;;.G ".- oG "",0 -u o~ OlO"'" ",- '" 0Il~ .: ~ .... -:;: :: ~ c u .;;;' o.2~ gfc;v; =Ec..~ o 0 ~ ~ '00 i= " " ~ - . ttl.t;--E ~ " ~ - ~ ~ i> ~ >. QI;~C:;c 52 V') ~ u _ _ v. ~ c-=:'= "" Ol) ::: ... ::: "C-- G.J U... =- IV C u -g'E~E-- ;; 0 - - E-E~ iiOe..... .3~v;:!J ~~ ~~ ~o2~ ll) - _ g .~.~ c:: ~ "0 00 ::: c.. G.J ~ =.'~ ~ ~ ~V;u~ ~;; E~ .s ~ '" " ~ t;iE: ;.; Il) .i~ ~~ ~ - Eo. .!2 ~ '" "'3-::: 0; - "-~ ~ = ~~ -g~ mD " " -; u .: .- '" :> " .s ~ ~- =: -- '" UO:;~ .c~.E 0=0 "0 C,)~o ..:::.- N - ~ ' s~~ i=~o-. ft, .,.,_--< 5 e= [;-3-5 .=:~_c_~~o-'- t..;.,ttii E~t':~... o~ Cl '0 .: ~ - o."=: 1::co;.5!:'"Ol- -ttlUJDlIU_ ~:E ... 0 CI) a lV ~ --O~S-' g..... ~'"E Cl ;; u~E;v.J~iiE CIJ 0:0.. llJ."::; E ~-o~;; >,- BOc:iE.~>..2 ~ ;> == :; c.. c.. ~""OOJu~...aJa lI.) ::: 0,;= 0 '"0 .- c;= - c.. III 0 D~ ~;; :~5~~.~;;r.: :s-:.== oa....,-o m~~~;;...2:.s_~ '"05.ll.lui'CCl"dU'l ::: o.c::: ~ - Oll Cl c.. ~ c;; .2 E,..: g; >. U) ::: 0 r.fl ;;. ~ en Q()-'- c.. ~ ..... Cg..~..cDDQ)..:a-= ~o '=-==~-~ ... - ::~. ..::: .5 o.o~ = g . >. ::: .!a en ~ E - ~~ ~ _ 1l UO v'u ~ ~ co ~ ....;:t:::.= 0..1.,;;., B rn~ cc ....o.u:; 0-"'':'"0;::- 0_ ___c:_->.o..u 0000 N ii ~:= VI 2 . ~.:-=....:::::: v.J-$; c:l L:J ~ :-' c.. :::'- ~ ::: .: - IU..E :: 0........;:: U) ~ 9 _ u = - ... ll) 0\ 'Ql):: ;> :: E -; ::: _ ~-= ~ 0 ~ c i=O\~u.::uo~iZi "! >..t::: 0 . .o~-~ :::u.i"'OC; '" " -0 "E....!€]! ~ .~ ~ ~ ti5 ~~ m::::l mt;.e.,g ._ ~ m CI) i:: ~ ~ " " 2!lCl)....- - ~ '., f:! ~ -- U I ll) 0_ 0Il~ c g=5>.::'" - c:l :: G,.I co ~ c=l-E ,,:; .i S ;j ?; g-v; ~ E c; ii ;::!: u_ - c; c.. ~ ._ ;.,- _E .;t% =- " " - _ U " " ~ c...:: l...., ._ ~ v. 0 ll) - G,.I .~ ~,.= ~ ;;.. U - ..... .... :.;' ~ ~ .., cr.. CJ l...., ~~E~ ~~ ~,...c;_ " 5 ;> "i) ..::;~-=' "! .;; __ Il.J f ;... -- ~ ~:. t.f':~ ~~ c;: ~ c:: ~.~ ~ ~ GJ._ ~ ~ = ~ a:: - ;., 2=~ " g"E g.2 O\a:~- 0\ -::l g --" ><~<~ L:....::: 5 U u 2 .!.: oJ ~ C-c.B >. ~ .~ _ t':l ~ -- Ol.l Ql)::: >. ~'V,j :::r - " " .::: "": 1: c:l ii v. .... ..... ~GJ22 ~.D .- CI) -- t ~ ~l1 ~ ~= - OIl U C:-~ s.: C2-g:::; GJ'-'uu""::I .~"":l .~ tIl._ 0 ~ ~~ GJ c.. ~ - g..!J co"ii ~ 0= ~ ~ ~::"'::'--:::...o '" -:3 ~ .in ~ ~ <2 " ;;;, ~~ ~"E t=: c; ~ .:~ ~ " u: n:; G,.IV: E ~ 5 ~;., ;;.-:: ~~ S " .~ ~-~ " " ~~ " ::- ~ ~~~ J: ~ 0 ,... U ;.; '" 1C .F ~ .~ '" Il.J Il.J (;-- c;u~~ in OJ; '"C OJ) 1l.J.2 E..- ::: r:; _ u ...., "i: ':::-' c...: ;.. .~_ ~ ~ "": ::: ;:: v. .... l1.I ~~-:::~ ~~ ..::. c:l rc .~ .... is'V,j ~ ~~.= c.Sc.[i~. ..zGJ- ~ -ce~~$!..~.o .- II) l1.I :: C; ~~ = GJt;::rcl.J-ce 0 i::~ ~i::::'=:'~.2 '_II)~~~Ul_v. .~.,g c;<_GJ .... _~ ~2P ~ rn .... - l1.I :: c;: -ttl..::--< rn Ul l1.I... .B"= rc ~ ~ ~u ~~~v. u;~ u~-= e_~~~ c: ll) C': ;... .- - -;: -",.~ ::: U 5 ..::: ;n -0 :::: 55 .....- ;> ~ m O~'"OE.o::; ~<"=-;jt6- ... u::: ,>...z '-' ~ --:c=::=o__ E~'-='""='=....t':la:: 1:'O'j!;~~-clJ t':I ... ..... ""::l._ v..3 g fr::" .; .5 .B t ~ u ~E-U'J ~.....v. ~ ~ :: '""=' .3 -- 0'- ~ ._<GJ_-:::O::..._-", - E g ~.. o J::::r = U c... GJ 1: -;; c _ 0.. v. Q)U)~_~_. OcU=~:: "=tUll). l..=..___Q,JO';i;c:: :.;..""::--' C C1 CIl C;; "": " " OIl . ~ E t; 0 Cr;;"'i) .s >.;;. coUJ~ " " ~ ~ E r;; -- coe ~~a; -l...., ~ .s 0.: ~ ~ Q,J '0 ~ ~~~ 2 ~. ::: ~ _S-:: QjQ)-- C-E2u " .:::.- t; :: -0 ::::: c::: c... 0: E C; ~ u': ~ -:::::: ::l ':I'" ~ ""::l I:) ~ v " ~ Q) - c: - ... ~ '0 c: .- ~ ~.2 ~ - ::.. c;;~. v 0E;;~ .q'~ ~ u u" ~~~_!~ ~ c;_ ."_ - "- U ~ UJ ~ 0:.5 0 ~ "": " ~ u " ! '" r.l U - > :::: r.l '" ...:i <: ;.; - Ci ::l '" .... ;.; Z; r.l :.:> :::: r.l - '" r.l 8 - ::' - Qj:: ~ ~ = "- 5-< "'ii .S :> " - D.E: ~E. .~ .g == co .- ~ ~2 ,.. .~ ~ :5 .D 0 ,;:u o -0 - =-=> "'.!! "" :: ~ ~ '" ~ ,..0. " -=>..0 " c; -0;1: go.!;! '" "-0 ~g. INI N <ii E: '" r.l U - > :::: r.l '" :;;] U - Ci ::l I'" ;... ;.; 'Z; r.l (;I "" - r.l :; r.l ~ "" ~ .!! UJb ~u ~ .9 :: -ce2 in ~ " 0:; ~ !< ~ ;:; CO .~ '" :> '" t - ~ " ~ -:Sl: ~ - " "-~ o ~ ~ ~ :;;; .- = v :=u E:.: U ~ ;.,.!< .-: c=l U"R " :: .;:~ -2 ~'" 'r'""1.:.. ,...~ NI N ~ u 0;.- :i;=: 0< --.... z~ 0"" -;:l mm :!am :;;z :;;8 OE-< uU ;.,.< ::0 OZ -- mE-< =:z Toilllil ,:;; Ollil E-<""" z=- roil:; :;;~ m roilZ ~8 ~~ :;;Q Z ::llil E-<:;; ~:;; 00 =:u ~~ "" "" - ~ .E " "'" c " "" '" .5 >'.c~ ::: Q)""O 'E~-'=~-=~ ~~~~~~ E -E (; ON . U c - c.."Uj -E :;.. cr; VJ ._ af E ~ 1 -< .0 ~ ~~ .8~';O -;i I::: E c,::3 g-o =al::=6-9 -gr;;fi~E~u c;; -. t - QO "(;j tIJ GJ 0 Q) J... _ 0 VJ tIDe::: ~ 0 00 ~ ~= ~-:::::- - .~ ~ E ~ ": ~ ii"Uj c: ... _..:: :: ....::: =- lo': c.. .... =o~'?!:!Ql)E ... u ... ... _ c (':l:. c:::: Q)'= I::: 0. -v :.. .... c; Q) Q) c~ 5" O?;:uiti-<;""'(;; tlD=.x>~t::...:: .... - ... II) 0- .=::OCl'}oo'- :Eo3:=l.,..,~V~ ':;Uoo~c5 ::Q__ > Q..lU._ '"CI 5~ u~u~~ -.----- .- ;.E~i;::~g. bO u .... Gl..= u :::.QJ CrJ""O CIS CIS "2r-'::uU;t::QJ ::: bf.l~='-~:= as ::: ::: :::> CI'} Ul C::'2t::~m-o ~;;!.o~a.,g ~c::~8D~~ c o U -5. S ~ ~ .~ "E..C:i .E E " " ~~ .U)~ _ c "..... ",,- "'-;: ::::: .= '" 0 ::E:; $0 -- 0 u-= U '" ;( g .: - U ~ 3~ ,.., ~ ,.., ~ e;-c= 'E.s~~ -. E i)..= ~=:5!o o C3 ::: EEiEii U _ tr.l=~ii":: ""0 ~ u""O ;; u>"B.a-= = VJUl:- i: ee;::::: .... Q) O-:-uin c..;.,.E_~_~ ~ug~ -::: .,::..1>, i3 !! u :::-"::: ~"=tIJ';~ ... ~~-E~ _!! =.- c:: IU ;=-gao 8 .... = ;; OD"" S ::: ... =' i3 -:;: = 00 -=g -:5 8 5 " u_ ~ _ c CI o Q) >.'- o:.:..c;~o - >- ~~~;B .... co Co.) ":J'" ut-~~E. ~~tr.lc:..2 u::'"O ,0 ~ Q.):=- ll) .: E al ~""O ~"O.2 : > 0 -:::..:: ]; c"::":::: u :-o~~~ .......... o 0 ~ "" .9 .:: -; E u '':: c: __ -0 E C '" " - - ....,"- - ~ " E- N 0 ~"ii ., > C" "'-0 0..... - 0 ~ - "" .~ ::: - -- - ~ ~ '" O-E.- -B~ " 'i ~ ~~ ::> := ::: 5 I::: ". 19 E! Vi ~ - >.;:! g .':: C;'= u U ~o~ ~:Q ~ ~tij~ .... N ,..., >> -E ~ -0 " d " ] ~ ~ tU - " '" '::e ;;; o~ 0- %~ - - ~_5 -= " ""- ~~ - " = " o = -a-; ::>C _ 0 "-,, -; '" ~g. ~~ '" '" ,,= ..= .- :-- ::: "l ,..., '" .; .gg :5 S! ~!1 " - c;-~ ?; '" " - " >> ?; --:: "'- " " .;:~ >. 10-. Vi .D t8 .~ U) .':: S 12 u EE~ Go).o ~ ~ca~ aiU)\.o..o -::: ~ 0 8,.c..E &0::: ----:j ~ -::: U ., ; 'f ~ -~- 0'- ~ uCla ~o"'2 (] 9 c; Go) u U)~ -::;tr.l..g " _.~ On ~ -"- :-.....=' ,..., ,..., z; o - ~ ~ u ~ ::l ~ '" 2 < .. '-' .s ...: ~.~ =-" ~ 5"_ c..~", ~ ~.~ _ca..:: ~~- co a >. "-- -" llJ -- :: _ U 0 c..:: .- S g~ _ u "- :: 0 E .9_0 -=-oU ~ ~ ~ 5 g C; u _ t:- c::I c..'u Oll=~ :E'~ c t:1:::"g 'Ul:!a:: rn en !IJ .... - oVi.a ~5t2 ,,- - u "-" 0_" ~ Q) :: "-- " 2~"= -=E- :: -'- ':"ii~ ._.g :: l:::Q)!.::: $~\.o..o '" "" 0 "':1 .i z; o - ,... < ~ U ~ ::l ~ ~ .. .... o C _S e " "- " - "- J; -'" "g:: ~- ~ - '" o "" " ::> 0< - >> >>-" U; ~ S~ :=: .c. ;.; .... " ~ t:-~ " '" llJ E ~ ~ -0 " " ,,-5 u " E " "-.. ~-o U~ !!:!~ - - - ., '" "- - " "f=-5 "':1 .i -::: ~ ;; iZi -0 1i u; " '" f=: -0 d ".!!! ~"" go!i - ~ "-'" ,,::;: -= ~ -...: ;; ,,0.. ~ " ,,-= - - c. .~ ?; \.0..0 '0 ..... '" '" '" Ui8 . 0 -0_ .!! ~ - " " &8 ,,-0 - C rn ~ < ;; ~ .... -0 == '" U '" C ::> o U ~ ...: - '" 0.. 15 -0= ~< 8,." e;o c.. E ~ !!:! g: a; -=<c. E-t =' _ "Ui e ~ ~ 0..0 .: ~~] '" E c - '" " rn -0 ~ U'; tltl ,,-0 -0 .:: :: C -o$ca '" ~ 'u -0 ~ 3 ~ E- o en ll) UllJ"::: - ~ br: ..:: ._ r-'.':: U c?; ....,2.:2 c _ C; .:2 " - -; u go p~~ - -E ;; iZi v, ~ ~ E .~J ~ E! - -'; .EB..o c..-:=:-o o :: u '" - - " - " '" -" ~ " U " - -0 1i u; ~ f=: -0 d " " ~- o "- "-- o " -- "-::l - " '" -=~ -...: - " ij, 0.. ~ " ,,-= 0.- --- == ::: ?;- l:= 'g '" '" "Ui8 ~.E ~- ~ - " " 5-: ,,-0 - c rn ~ <;; " " >-= Cl - >....... ...:: ,-.':: ~ If) 0 tU Of) ~.-:=: g:~ ~::_"'O ::>Su .. -=;; a~!U If) __ --::l ~E~"ii .9 ~.: l:: uc...=~ ; ll)'?; :8. t;:j ~ l:::::: rn :: ca ca ca _2!J~ii5~ ~< Q) ""0 ll) :; ~~ _~ $ ui ;; .... s~ 00- !.~ CI:l 5-0 ll) U- -_ ll)"" c,.'::I E -..... 0 Oll c:l ~ bOd:) f: - 0 :: .> - .c. 0..-- ll) Cl o;:;-::g -0 U 28-= ll) E - - -' .. t-_=~ClO ,..., .i "': .... ~ -0 " ~o-:; -0-" -o~-= c:l ....._ S;: ?; "E~~ ~b"E ;; go t:: [j) g. E :E 2 g ui o ~ (,) :: _!"" '" ~ .-oc.. .... V) ll) ... r=OUl,B t""'ao~1f) -o~g~ ~ II,) .... c .;: -= c..~ u,- U ~ : O..D = _ 0_ t c,.u- .... o ~.- 01) ""0 .... ~-o "'>> c u _ '" .- = C II') g -~ ~ ~ 5 ~.g tU Ull)Cc:;l., "'O~~ .q~ 5::: u;; 0 1I,):;2"'C C -= ~ :;.:2 _ c:;l., -a 0... ~~B.g :-<;tf.lc:l ~ " :; ~ ~ ~.s .9] - Qj, .~ ~ ~m .;~ "'..... ,,-0 -" S " -c E. o S.9 0:; - '" 1:::-" .5-0 ~ c - '" U-o ~ " ;:.;~ --- -- ~ " " c"'" g ~ U '" ~~ u~ " -:5~ ]'~ t-<Q.. "! .... ,..., .... "': .". G 0;;.. ;;=: :;< -.... z~ ~"'" :::;;J VJVJ ~VJ -Z :;;0 ""- 0""' UU -< ::t.:) '"Z =~ VJ"" :::Z "-lr-< ;;..~ Or-< ....... Z~ ~~ -- G- ~rIJ c;iZ <S z""' << -0 ""'Z ;::~ -.... . "'" ~.-c 0"'" ....0 ;-';U '-'r-< 00::: "" '" .... ;~;: "E~- u i!: '" ::; '" l.,:;. ::: ~~rE - cD g~ ;j.D ~ ~ '" " '" - ~("..,.E ;; 0 ~ ~ 55- U._ =- ~~: "'-- ~~ ~:::.. E '-< " " 0_ V. " ~ ~ ~ ~ " " U-ol o _ - - c..tj .=-= " ~:i '" ._ .~ '0 0'\ .~_. .. ~ :::.s g .s~c:: ~::=..2 c.l) ~ ilJ .: E E u c :.., ~ - _ t':!- - ~ fr p -:::...J vi r5 u c:: '" - -ol -B '-< o ~ 5" -ol '" - " """ .~ ::; U ~ ;; " .~ ,. " s ::; u ~{E. 0- __~ .:e u Ci~ ~~ vi """ """ " u; ~ 6- 1: ~ " -ol " " U o 0. " ~ " Vi N on D"1 \\) ~ .~ ;; a:l .~ ~ go) -0 as C ",- 0 ,-:: .- o ~ E -t;~ .~: -~ 5' ~ 0 -ol"U '" U o _ ~ 5...~ ~~~ ~.;;: __ Q) C ", - " _ C .9 a:i eLl !- ::: S . "'; E.. E.~ iii..9 :-e w ~.- ~ Q) ~.-2 8.- ~~ti:i~ ~.~ g.~ 5 <n': ~ U ~ co U') >.== \\) t'l:I ::::~.~ ] u.; to) _ ~ OD~ ~ -" ... Q) - _0 ~ ~::g-~g- :-' t':I _'= N on .2 ~ .:: o .~ ;; E JJ .~ % ;; U I i I II~ ~ ;... -;! Cii .,g t E! Eu ;: 0] o -~ :::5 ~ = :: Q., - '" 2", o -;; ~ ~ -g-::: ::....E ~ - ~;;..... ~ -- u~ " 0 - - -=-" u 0 .~ ~ OE ";1 >0 u - - '" is - ;... ~ '"E ..: -;:: ;; a vi' 5 --.L .g_ B c:: "iJ ~ u; E ~.2 " " .!!: ::.!::: :: ~ 2 .c eo;: ::= ~ -: 2!Jz:: 0-" - ::..::: eJ:l -~ E E ~8B ....~'"E t':I 20-- :: :: C'I: _ .- ;; tt.2 ~ c..g ~ .gt~~ c.. iii >. u;- c:s - ::: ~ E ~ --= r.i l:.l c:; -: ~ S 0.. Q) .... .... x ::: u ;... eLl - .3 ~ ~~ I1l 5 0:5- ~";;.~ Ci -= .::! E i) ]:g03E r- 0.. ~ U 1";1 >0 __~ b =_~ .'U .- is ~ u 0 cr: :) ... _ t.J -::: llJ ::: >. C 0 u ,.... -,'- :.: =- 0 C;; :? i: ::"t:: -_ t':I 0 c::: g ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ tI:I- ~ 00 i: .= ,g _::""0 .~ ::: 0 - .... u o.g ..2 ~ d ~gBa:; ~ ~ o"J l.o.., ~ C'J.... o " -;:::-,v) E ~~ ~ 2__5- c..~2"'ii Q) ....- ;> - - Q) Q) -=..2]-:1 ~ ::: l.o.., .- Q) - 0 ~""" U ~ .;] j.~ Ul!aUl- ~~.q"3 g :.)~U~:.; N -=i " '-< ;; o ~ :: .2~ ;;;- ~ .- aJ;!; E."~ ~~ ~2,D -::J= "..:=. Co'::; . ~.D~ '-< '" B ::> c:l -;; t:5-::J ~ c;.~ uon -U..3N ~ C; I '" --~ '" '5 ~2 ~ .E ~ ; U ~c..5 u c:: _ 0 -=~ c:; U .~ .5 ~,..E 5 i u-= N -=i E :::l~ o t: o"J .c. '" ~ ~ 0:: u _=.0 E '" ~ '" ::; - 'Ui~ :E~ '"' - --ol cD~ .::: u ~ ;; ~ ~ .~ ;; ~ - ~ ::; =:; .g ~ ;: ii " - E t::.. >. -ol""" I1.l ... ::: ..::iiiiii...J ;; ~l~ III u ~ len Ul~I:-' C'- ~t... ,.-, -=i ~ >> - '" ;;- !!! ;;.....0 ::> Cl II.) . ~-:5; ..,., ~ _00 ::: 0 c::: ~-::~ ~~-:: ~ .~.:: 5 ;: =-~c-..J s~ ~ c. _ 0 ~ llJU>'Q(j :E1:l~~ iii=e~ 11.l~~ce " .3 -= '" .... -1.0... ~. _ E :> ~_...;:;--.35 -~.L ==> _ -!-<~c;j 8 ~ ~ ~ "- ..::: ~ -::J _ -= ::: g -: g U=::l2Ul ~ '" "u :::: i::;';.~ u=E2 Q) ..... Ul C. o --;; ~ t ~~ .~~ ~ - " '" -ol'" ,.-, -=i c:: c.2 ~ ~ ~ _.~ ~_' ~tIlUJ:@ - - "._=- Q..- ::: ~ ......s~ :.a-'o-,v.u ~~ ~Cl_~~ u _'~ Ul_:::_ ::::>,Q)oJEO C'I: ""O-=....-I1.l'-- ~ 5 go E.. c....;: .-= ~ C l.: ~::. u.=:::UiU-I1.l-- Q) CI) E 8:a5.:: a:;.~CI) ..0 u 0.. E Ul Ul_ '> Of) tI:I ::: __ Cl !a"'~= .E-2C'JN"U t;~='-;o s.:3r...... ~ -::J e:I c",,::, ::: lU 1I) 0::: c..""O ""0 0.. 1-00.....- P..... =:l c..c.. =:l Ul 0 0 .... Ul ...... u.. ::::::;: .- ~~ B ~;a l..:..N;:;;-m~,......:.,gc..E =? ~:- __..... -5 Of) Ul Ul l-o ~ --.... =:::Q)~"':::: ~e:I~~~QI)~~ ~~..od) _u.-t:':::o -.... - - - .c.. _-=::> C'J oo::.~u Q(j_0 ~ ~ 0 -ol - ... Ul U U 1;:.::: .c.. =_9 ~ UJ B ~ .... 2 .~~._ >. CD",,:, :::: ~ u; ::: ii .... "'_ u;.::~;.a -= = -,..., 0 o_=t::E~8-_~ _~::_ E 5! ~ 0.. 0 ......- Q) ~. = ~t)o~Q)Q) _ Q) lI) II) ~ ~"";:l -= ::: E ....:::: >, u .lI)=-;..E~_~u 1I).*-=~.2 OD::::e:I:: C'J 11.lt)~=C'c.u __~ Q(j- a:I E~ f::.sc: ::: __= -v.; _:.= t) Q,) ._ ,--,g:-;~~~>(..o::;!~ "c; ==_ _':' _l1.l ..- -~ lI) :::I .,...~ ...... 2: '""0._ ? _ ti5 C5 e:;.:: f:: c..":: e: ~ t'; "":1 ,...: ~ .~= o ~ ~ C'I::.E U);-. .!! c - ~-g~ 3Cl~ u - ~ u '" - ... "":1 ,...: ~ w '"' ...;;.. -..., ""- ,,< ~... z:;;; 0"" -;;l "'''' ~'" -Z ::;:0 ""- 0"" uU <:: ::D "Z -- rJ:J~ :::::Z ~~ >~ 0[;;;] ...-:l Zl:. [;;;]:; -- -=- r_~ tf.l 5z <2 z,.. << -:::l ""z =~ ;:; ....... 015 :::::u ,,[;;;] 00"" ",,- "" ~ u ~ u " E ~ o := '-"-,; ~ := 2 ~ - ;; _S< - ~ ~~ ~ :: :: .5 =:;U'; u .g ;:....,-;; ;a " ~ ~ " u ~ c::: - ~ lU g, - := " ;a " c._ ,,= ~'- =0 .;;~ ~ ~ t:~ " - U3~ 00 o .... C I:J -~,s,s Q:)!:!-;::I ::: ~ :: ...; >. CI _ --~l;..I i)~o :: e= 0 0 as 5--=-- ~~tt:: U'l r; :::...5 0,- v, Soe:: =:.c =i-- u C,) ~Ul:= .::: ;;) 0"= ;o~~E -0 -.- ~v)o~o.. - ... -...... .... 5== -5 u 0 0 0.0 ca t=: '=.~ c; .- -o.!!! :: C,) ... :::: - - > cc 0.. e:I .... 2~!2E:2 :::.. c; -_ 0 ~Uj g ;j ~ .- :2 q ~ u ::! 0 :: :: -=.... - 5 t1 ~ w 8 UJ::>. ... >.~:=o.::: :: ;;....:-= U U lo.o U - u~~>.~ ::-:: >.~:..:s -...J~'-'E s: CI) - eJ - ;=-=~:5 00 '- ~=- l' ~ '" -- ". -" (;;1:: ~.!: ".--;: ::: u ~ ,,- ..0 .~ - " 0- :: ~ :::~ >- <; - en ~ fliE .~ .5 ::::: ..,., 5 " ._ v. ... e:I c." _ u ~.= T; ~ ~ ..o-~ ~ - _C? ~ 0 -~:=> :::: :;:::. CI) 0...... ~ ~::. N CO b -" " " " '" t: o -'5 '" N E ;;;.:.. CIO C ~ ~ 2~ "....J _ u E~ '" := on::" " .!! :.~ 1::> u '" .: - ~D 5 _ Ua ~" u= ~2 ~ ;S ~ CO .!2 t. E: CI) r::: .... "'::'::CI) ::; ~ ~ b~ .... -- ~ ~ -- .9 _ 01J c.. CI .:: Vi ~ ~ ~g2 ~.1:> ~ =0:': d to:;, ~ C;;~. rn':: >. ~ -g ~ g ~.- ~.:.....J a:;U~ ~!U~ ......::-- 3-d o ~= o C1"::: 2 Q:i"'5..U 6- '" " O\...._~ 0" -_" >-:J5Ul -:= - " 1U=c:::..: =2~- e.D u; _~ C': .: ~.!! ~ :::-I:e t': ..... Q) :: - -. co ~~ 0'\ ;g " ;:; .:;::: ;; COE:: .- N_ ~ '" " ~ u _ " ~ - - _ c.:: Qj ~ c..D ~::~ =-- ~ E .- =-"'E (1).S: I.:: tU'U :: l;..I .... ~= CI) ~83 :::.2: ~ ':::.:: c:: I- 0 :.J IU ." 2 S i1_ '" - ~ ..... IU IU U "- g~~ u'E ~ _.1:> '::-00 C =....; ~ ~.s: -;:~5 c::;..o ." ~~--~ :- 0 -. CO " ~ ~ ~ ~ " E ~ g <; on 5i " ~ I I I , 1 , I j~ I:;" ,-< iZ ,- I~ ,::: I I I _I ,,,, " ~--= E"'2 - - ;5 ,s'-' " - .r:::: 0 :- :; - ..... .2 <:; " ::: " i/3 _ ". i I I I I i i I I~ I:;" .-< :Z :< I::::: I::: ! ~ >-. u ~- ;.; IU :: ~..e ~ ~ c:: t IU - = ~ .... oLi:: ;r CCI 0 ~ C,.l I- e.o .2 ~ ~:E :; r: 5- - " .~ CCI.... > ,,~ ....... = 0 ~ oLi Q.j ~ -i;; = r:;; - Cl t5:E~ :: = - .= ~ -E .... 011-.- -' .S = ~'';: - 0 - E) ~ CJ c::; -' -= ""::i uE c.J E).2 ... = Vl t"; <; " u -;:::: 'w C,.l ~g-~oLi 0'- O[j ~ :-- -' to.~ ~tOr.!! e,; -" U.2~ Q.l _._ C,) ~ - to ;;.. ;;. i! -:: ~~ ':'.= ~ ~:::::. = Cl ~ 5.. ~ ~ _ ;~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S <; on " " __ .5 -:= ~ " Li " " " =-= ~ W ::> ,,- .;::-> ." - " u ~ <2 ~ ?!'U -~ c " " " .- 5 .S -; -" ~ "'U;.- . = _=:... e 0;, ,5' ~~ 0 ~... - N 0: E ~ ".-,; := " ;';~l!a =..:;. u c: ~G.J ,;:!'o ",:,::U:E.. ~;; '"C ~ " -=:! --2 '-' ~ -' g:;Z:;-S (;;...0 " . -;0..""0 ~-~ .- -_ a:) -' en ~ Cl"E~ ';::" 0 C,.l ...,- ~ ;:: .~ Cl -- :: _~ In :; ~ 'Vi - .; . ~ :5 '--' " >:'9- ~ :=: = .:: U 8 ~ lU >,.: -= - r:w - -; = -:=::.l ,g :: C,.l ~;:-5 N 0: :=: '" I:: '" '" ,.,;[ 1- .2 --E ~ :; u " :>:: o Z :=: '"I i-< -< == .E ;a " ~ :; u " :>:: o Z :::1 ATTACHMENT B Chairman's Cover Memo & . GMOC 1998 Annual Report DATE: March 1, 1999 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission City of Chula Vista ~ Tris Hubbard,' ~ Growth Management 'ssion (GMOC) FROM: SUBJECT: 1997 GMOC Annual Report Y 1997 to June 30, 1998) The GMOC extends its appreciation to Bob Leiter, Director of Planning and Building; Duane Bazzel, Principal Planner; Ed Batchelder, Senior Planner; Edalia Olivo-Gomez, P1RT1ning Associate; and Clerical Staff: Linda Bond and Charline Long for their assistance in the development of this report. The .dedication, orgmrlv.Hfional skills, efficient scheduling of meetings, expeditious reporting of meeting minutes by the Planning Department was greatly <1J.>.I.1lcdated by the Growth Management Commission. The Saturday field trip organi7p.d and led by Duane, Ed, and Edalia gave the GMOC a:first hand perspective of the accelerated growth in om City. The GMOC is equally appreciative of the comprehensive written and verbal reports from the various City department staff 115 well 115 the school districts, water authorities, and Air Pollution Control District The GMOC was impressed with the technological enhancements of several of the department's presentations. The visual presentations helped to assimilate the comparative statistics of the threshold standards from year to year. NINE OF ELEVEN THRESHOLD STANDARDS MET FOR 1997 Thresholds in Compliance Thresholds Not in Compliance Air Quality Fiscal Drainage Libraries Parks & Recreation Sewer Schools Traffic Water FirelEMS Police GROWTH FORECAST The City of Chula Vista is e>.:periencing unprecedented growth. To illustrate; the City of Chula Vista Residential Forecasts from SANDAG (see page 3) project an annual average of over 2,000 new residences between 1998 and 2005. Forecasts are typically not reached, but it is noted that the forecast for this year are significantly higher. This projected growth accentuates the importance of managed growth to assme "Quality of Life Thresholds. " 1 1. Completion, adoption, and annual review of facility master plans. 2. Annual review of DIF' s with timely adoption and implementation of changes as required. 3. Annual review of current and five-year growth forecasts. 4. Following the review, analysis, and acceptance of the GMOC Report, City Council's willingness to slow and or call a moratorium on growth as necessary to maintain "Quality of Life Standards." THRESHOLDS MET AIR QUALITY The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Air Quality Threshold. The GMOC recommends the adoption of the CO2 Reduction Plan that has been reviewed by the CO2 Reduction Task Force, Planning Commission, Resource Conservation Commi~qoD, and Economic Development Commission. The GMOC also recommends that the Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) be adopted with the Sectional PIHnn;ne Area (SPA) Plan, and be required at the General Development Plan stage to assure that air quality improvement measures are incoIporated into the project's design. FISCAL The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Fiscal Threshold. The GMOC recommends that the City Council direct staff to define both the procedure and specific responsibilities for the annual review of the DIF's. DRAINAGE The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Drainage Threshold. The GMOC recommends that a plan be worked out with the wildlife agencies to assure maintenance of environmentally sensitive drainage and detention basins. The GMOC encourages the City to budget and complete a portion of the priority projects in western Chula Vista annually to assure that drainage thresholds are maintained. LmRARIES The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Library Threshold. The GMOC recommends that the Library Threshold be changed from 500 square feet per thousand population to 600 square feet per thousand population to be in compliance with the Public Facility DlF Standard. The GMOC commends the Library Department for the 2 development, and the City Council for the adoption, of a comprehensive Library Master Plan in December 1998. PARKS AND RECREATION The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Parks and Recreation Threshold. The GMOC encomages the City staff and Council to move with expediency toward the adoption and implementation of a citywide Parks and Recreation threshold. In addition, the GMOC strongly advocates the completion and adoption of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the Multiple Species Conservation Plan, and the Greenbelt Master Plan as expeditiously as possible. Once the City is built-out, it will be very difficult to complete a comprehensive Greenbelt Master Plan. Weare very aware that implementing a three-acre park threshold per thousand population in the western portion of the City seems almost unattainable due to build-out. Let US Dot let history repeat itseill SEWER The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Sewer Threshold. SCHOOLS The GMOC finds that the Chula Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District are in compliance with the School Tlrreshold. However, Sweetwater Union High School District has a potential for noncompliance in the year 2002 when existing school facilities will be unable to acco=odate any additional student enrollment. In view of the current and projected accelerated growth, the GMOC highly reco=ends that the City Council, School District Board, and designated staff work collaboratively to assure the timely construction of new school facilities. TRAFFIC The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Traffic Threshold. The GMOC has concern that without the timely completion of SR-125 and other key traffic arteries, such as Olympic Parkway, noncompliance and severe traffic deadlock will occur. It is imperative that the Engineering Division maintains close cooperation vl'ith Caltrans to assure phasing of Olympic Parkway and Palomar freeway interchanges. Expansion of alternative modes of transportation, such as light-rail and citywide bus systems, needs to be emphasized. WATER The GMOC finds that the Otay Water District and Sweetwater Authority are in compliance with the Water Threshold. 3 The GMOC commends the water authorities for their vision aud success in assuring an uninterrupted supply of water to the South Bay through cooperative sharing of reservoirs and water systems during times of emergency. THRESHOLDS NOT MET FIREIEMS The GMOC finds that the City is not in compliance with the Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Threshold. While this is the sixth straight year, that Fire/EMS has not met the threshold the GMOC concludes that Fire/EMS services have not declined clue to growth. The Fire Department and City staff are commended for the completion of the Fire Station Master Plan <md implementation of the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system. TheGMOC recommends adoption of the Fire Master Plan as soon as possible <md consideration should be given to modify the emergency response threshold st<mdard a:fteranother review cycle. POLICE The GMOC finds that the City is not in compliance with the Police Threshold. The GMOC is concerned that the Police Department experienced a significant drop in service levels ibis reporting year. The department attributes the drop in service level to growth <md insufficient police staff. While growth was in the eastern area of the City the highest crime rate and requests for service were in the western corridor along Broadway. In spite of the decreased response time, the department reports that a 1997 residential public opinion survey indicated that 93% of City residents were satisfied with police services. The GMOC is pleased to note that the CAD system has been implemented and some progress has been made toward the development of a Police Department Strategic Plan. Strategies to resolve the false alarm burden must be implemented to help stop the continued slide in levels of service. It is highly recommended that Council support the earliest possible completion of the Police Department Strategic Plan and Facility Master Plan. 4 CITY OF CHULA VISTA GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION 1998 REPORT (Threshold Standard Review Period 7/1/97 to 6/30/98) Commission Members Tris Hubbard, Chair (Education) C. Lynn Dull, Vice-Chair (Sweetwater) Walter L. Fisher, (MontgomeI)') Bud Gray (Development) Will T. Hyde (Environmental) Rafael L. Munoz (Eastern Territories) Gustavo Perez (Business) Loren R. Tarantino (Center City) Bob Thomas (planning Commission) Staff Edgar Batchelder, Senior Planner Edalia Olivo-Gomez, Associate Planner Charline Long, Administrative Office Assistant ill March 1999 Table of Contents Page 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1 Purpose.........................................................................................................1 Review Process ............................................................................................1 Development Forecasts ................................................................................1 IT. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE SUMMARY.........................................................4 ill. F1NDlNGS, KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Police............................................................................................................5 FirelEmergency Medical Services ...............................................................8 Schoo1s.........................................................................................................9 Parks and Recreation..................................................................................ll Air Quality .................................................................................................13 Traffic ........................................................................................................14 Fiscal..........................................................................................................16 Libraries .....................................................................................................17 Drainage .....................................................................................................19 Sewer........................................................................................................,21 Water .........................................................................................................22 Appendices (bound under separate cover) APPENDIX A - THRESHOLD QUESTIONNAlRES....................................................Al (attachments on file in the Planning Department) APPENDIX B - GROWTH FORECASTS ......................................................................Bl I. INTRODUCTION PURPOSE In November 1987, the City Council adopted the original Threshold Standards Policy for ChuJa Vista establishing "quality-of-life~ indicators for 11 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, Citywide Threshold Standards compliance review, the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) was created. It is composed of9 members representing a geographical balance of residents, as well as a cross section of interests including education, environment, business, development, and the City Pl:mn;ne Commission. The GMOC's review is structured around.a fiscal year cycle to accommodate City Council review of GMOC recommendations which may have budget implications. The official review period for this report is July 1, 1997 through June 30, 1998, although pertinent issues identified during the second halfof1998 and early 1999 are also addressed as necessary. REVIEW PROCESS The GMOC held 10 meetings from October 1998 through March 1999. A joint workshop with the Pl:mn;ne Commission was also held on Febmary 17, 1999 to further discuss traffic. Threshold reports were submitted and orally presented by a nmnber of City departments and external agencies, to determine the compliance status for each Threshold. The GMOC also reviewed whether or not it was 4!'fJlllfJriate to issue a "statement of concern" or to make other recommendations regarding each Threshold. Following completion of the individual Threshold reviews, the GMOC prepared this annual report for presentation to the Planning Commission and City Council. DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS The Threshold Standards Policy calls for the City to prepare both short-range (12 to 18-month) and midrange (5 to 7-year) development forecasts at the beginning of the annual GMOC review process. Complementary to Threshold performance evaluations, which review the prior year period, these forecasts serve to provide a common basis by which the GMOC, staff and e},:ternal agencies can identiiY and address any potential Threshold issues before a problem arises. A copy of this year's forecast information is included as Appendix B and summarized below. 12 to] 8-Month Forecast The 12 to 18-month forecast is the main set of development projections employed for annual Threshold reviews. This forecast focuses on near-t= development which will place demands on available infrastructure and services, and presents information at the project-specific level. The -1- forecast is derived from a survey oflocal developers and builders. Historically, the 12- to l8-month forecast is an aggressive, or wom case, scenario. Such a worst case scenario, however, is beneficial for growth management pwposes in that it represents a maximum potential impact to facilities and ServIces. Two tables are used in Appendix B to present the forecast figures; one for the Otay Water District area which encompasses new development east of the I-80S freeway; and one for the Sweetwater Authority area which encompasses mostly in-fill development m older areas of the City west ofI- 805. The figures cover the l8-month period from July 1998 through December 1999. Results of the developers survey for the Otay Water District area are 4.197 IIssued) dwe11lng units authorized for construction, and 3.453 (finaled) dwe11lng units to be completed for occupancy. For the SweetWater Authority service area, the l8-month projections are 22 (issued) dwelllng units to be authorized for construction, and 22 (imaled) dwe11lng units to be completed for occupancy. Actual residential activity m eastern Chula Vista tends to be somewhat less than these collective developer forecasts. Applying percentages from past comparison of forecast-ta-actual activity results m projections for approximately 2.728 (issued) dwe11lng units to be authorized for construction and 2.935 (floaled) dwe11lng units to be completed for occupancy. 5- to 7- Y ear Forecast The midrange (5- to 7-year) forecast is more general, and presents information on a Citywide basis. It is intended to provide sufficient foresight to identify potential growth management issues before they become a problem. The City used SANDAG's Series 8 Interim Forecast to produce figures starting from 1998-2000 and rontinumg m 5 year mcrements from 2000 to 2015. As indicated on the following page, 4.516 dwe11lng units are projected for the period between 1998- 2000. That represents a yearly average of 1.806 dwe11lng units. It is likely that the average, annual projections for the 1998-2000 increment will not be fully rea1ized. These dwe11lng units would then be added to the next increment (years 2000-2005), raising the annual average to slightly more than 2,000 units per year. -2- - en I- z W ::E W ~ (,) z a:: <( W >- It) - It) ..... Ow NI- oet _0 CO~ C)IL 0)- ....0 -II) 'w en~ I-::i enE <(et OIL W2 ~iil 0;:'(1) u. a.. I- eto ...JI-W <( (I).... _>0 1-:3g: Z;:,O W:I:W CoZ -ILZ en 0:3 W>n. ~!:: a: ..... ow ..... ..1- l-"'tI) enll)et -w::': >a:et .....WI- ..... Ul tI) ..J Cl :;: :::Iet:3 J: ~;:, (,)ct:x: u.UlO OOZ !!!a: ~ILW -I- Otl) ,.. 0 et .....::.:W a-., -,. "J:-~ CI) - _g ....I ~-, <C oi I- 0.. 1-- o I- 'C~~.'('I)~'V /t')c,.ar, <t':)':N~ v~"O -It"J ,'U).-~ m-tO ~ ~-r'i ;r.;;..o"1.O ~ 'N- ':'to- _,~ ~-1&O'--'N ~ 10 .,.... U)C'J.. .,(\1 "JD ""'Ct ~N .-"--- - 'O:t'- g:) 'N "CD1D 0' It) .1D.....,....- tCO -;fooo - ~ ~'.15 "cS~: .-~ .- ~ ,(1'):_'.0 .:cD CJ) ~ :N' .. - _ C> U" "0 "0 ~ n. or-"'V~('f')Q)CO cocoO>~""lt__ CONM O>tC N~~ "":N" ~OLO"'N . COCO,...,.lOmod' ~N_COCO~M N..... ...-as ..-'" '_.c:.~_" -=,,".'1~~:;':--, ~:- ~.-'J!!-.,"" ~";;,;,"-,-,,,.' ,~,":-. ...-[")=0 N It)~ND:l 0 lO""lt......tDa) 10 0 m ~ .... "'0 CO'" NN ~~~~rt~~~~~t. .:~.~~r~!k . ",0 0.... 00 "IN o o LO I'- LO N. 101'- 1O""'Ct M M It) mcooo U) M~~"V ~ .... c ";'_~ _ff.r~r--;::~/- '~'. -:~.:""'lt'~::"",*, ___:_._~~.-~ft'jC_~~~ , 1'-'" CD~ N. N '" 10 CO. ~~ ... .... C ,.;; .-~ '...-.. #~ ~~ :'1 '0 COo "'0 ~N "''''0 "'NO "'CDN ""10 I'- ""10 ~ "'''' "" ~ ~ 0'" ~ '" ~ur I'- .... . 10 '" "< ~ . '" "< .... o!l ~ __~::::J >t~UE' ....il::.: a:a:a:~ -..-.._ C>> .!! ....c: - CC~--:i: o o.E',g ~ l:D ..c:..c:_"" 0 UUc.,.a.:: J:CC.C= alllII._~O a: a: tI)>Ul a: z U I: .. a: ~ .. .. ~ o - ~ !!!. c..O ..I- ~o ., COCf)- i ."'O~:: 1>>- 0 C- ....0.. Cl,=~",,:;: CD. . . CD .:JI:..JtJ:.JJ&..:JI:..:JI:. . ., .. . CD .................... ----- It) 1ft.. If) as ca III., III WWWWW ..c: u I: .. a: tI) Ul .... .... < et I- I- o 0 I- I- III III ;:, :;) tI) tI) I- _ ~1- Z . ... Z ::>> CD. CD ::>> W :!: .. n. ->.:I: ~--SCDU. ct et.. "'- Z '" ..J n. c..W .. et ~ I- t/)Ul~> a:: 0 tI) ..c:..c: u >. > 'li: <(UUi:.!.....CD W <:1:-0....- ....:. 1-"" a:a: "0" >.~..c:; == cacaU_ c: --=::J 0 00 III u. III -3- . >. I: .. c.. E o o "Cl I: .. .... <: o '" - .. :!: '" ~ '"'- U> . U> ..; '" - ,., '" '" I'- U> r:S .... on ,., ~ .. ... ,., "'. - U> .... .. ~ ... C> ~ Ul !:: Z ;:, .... et I- o I- W Cl i:i W ~ .... < ;:, Z Z ct .; ~ '" .., '" <C - .!1 '5 .g '5 ..Q ~ Gi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ {g II " .E il: ~ e ;; ~ :g t!) l! " 'E o {g ", .. ~ I!! 1: "" .. " .. " 1ii ~ itj S ;).,. eOi.!! '0 Ul 0 ~ : c - '" '" ~ '" = - .!!! '" = 2- E-< "0 - = ;:; = u r;.. '" :;:,;. ::o..l!: CA "0 '" -<-< '" - "0 = - '" ~ ~E "'''0 '" - ... - -< -= ~ .... E-< = "" "0-< ~ "'''0 ;::l '" ... CI.lCO C CIl 0\ ::0."0 ::0 C = ... = I;;ij"" ll._ -- rF.J :>'=' ~S - ~5 '" ~ ;::lC:: "0 z= Q - ~::: - '" t -I ~ - ~~ f=:; '" QO '" ~i:2 ... = ~.! t-of"l - - Cl., rF.Jll. .!! - Q~ - = - C ,..:If''l Ciju 0- - , C = ...:> ll. C -l"l Z (1.)..,. l"l- c:: - - - C E-< Z co "0 - 0\ ] '" 0\ .... - -;;; "" t - f=:; ~ -< ~ ~ ;:;l 1J'.J ~ U Z -< - ~ ::.. ~ o U Q ~ o == 1J'.J ~ == Eo- - - = - .E - - - Cil ~ CIl '" r;;:a ... == '" '" = '" = .. c:: - '" ;., '" '" '" - - "0 = - CI.l :> = '" '" ~ ~ = - '" CIl Clll '" .!!! - = = .. - = I;;ij '0 '" .. ... '" '" 0' E - = = .. ~ -- C = '" ...: = ... -; '" '" '" .:: ~ ... = .. ~ - '0 ... .:: U = .. ... '" -= ... = - '" CI.l < ii: :i '" ~ ll. r;.. (I.) ll. E-< Q (I.) -4- Ill. FINDINGS, KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS POLICE Threshold Finding The GMOC fmds that the Cit)' is not in compliance with the Police Threshold for Priority I and Priority n calls for sen'ice (CFS). The Threshold Standard for Priority I calIs is to respond to 84% of CFS within 7 minutes with an average response time of 4.5 minutes. The Threshold Standard for Priority II calls is to respond to 62% of CFS within 7 minutes with an overall average response time of 7 minutes. During this reporting period the Police Department responded to 75% of Priority I calls within an average of 4.5 minutes and 52.9% of Priority II calls within an average response time of 7 minutes. TIlls is the 8th consecutive vear that Priority I CFS standard has not been met and the 1st year Priority n CFS standard has not been met. It should also be noted, however, that despite the Threshold deficiency public opinion of police services remains high among City residents. The results of a residential police survey show that 93% of City residents are satisfied with police services (1997 Police Department Residential Opinion Survey). Key Issues" Threshold Standard Deficiencv In comparison to previous reporting periods. the Police Department eA-perienced a significant drop in service levels. This decrease was attributed to growth and the need for additional staffing. Without additional staff resources Police response time is e},,-pected to remain at this level. Other factors contributing to the Threshold deficiency include: I) the high volume of false alarms, 2) unfamiliar (new) staff, 3) implementation of the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system, and 4) 25% turnover due to retirement and attrition. Immediate Solutions Additional Staff VI'hiJe increased familiarity V\~th the City by new officers. and the implementation of the CAD s)'stem should aid in impTO\~g police response time. shortage in staffing continues to be the most significant problem. The Police Department has identified the folloV\~g staffmg needs: I. A TOving beat (one position. 7 da)'s/24 hours) in eastern Chula Vista that would also overlap western beats. TIlls would require the addition of 5.5 officers. vehicles. and equipment. -5- 2. An additional beat in western Chula Vista to handle the high volume of calls. The additional beat would require 5.5 officers, equipment, and vehicles. 3. Additional staff in the dispatch center. 4. A background investigator to expedite the hiring process. Long Term Solutions Police Department Strategic Plan The GMOC continues to reiterate the need for a long-range strategic plan and a facility master plan. Until such plans are developed, it will be diflicultto determine the ultimate staffing, equipment, and facility needs of the department. The strategic plan is also necessary to evaluate current deployment methods, the Threshold Standard, and other factors related to service delivery. Completion of the strategic plan is expected by June 1999 and the facility master plan is anticipated to be completed by the end of1999. The GMOC notes the progress toward completion of these plans, and the need to expeditiously complete and implement them. Reducing False Alarms 25% oftota! PI and PIT calls for service are due to alarm activation and 98% of alarm calls for service are flUse. The Police Department has been working to reduce the high incidence offalse alarms through participation in the Model States False Alarm Reduction Program. By participating in this program, the department now has the ability to track the total number of false alanns (not just billable alarms) and categorize alarms to highlight chronic offenders. . In addition to working with chronic violators, the department is evaluating a procedure to suspend police response to chronic violators, is working on developing a model alarm .ordinance, and is considering restructuring the false alann fee schedule. Another potential solution is to require that residential alann system oWners contract with a private alarm company for the :first level of response. Implementing Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD)/ Evaluation of the Threshold Standard The installation of the CAD system is currently in progress. The CAD system has the ability to capture the complete dispatch time and to track the number of responses to specific locations. The system will enable data management to readily quantify whether increases in calls for service are grov,1h related. Two years of CAD data will help determine if current issues influencing police performance can be solved through managerial techniques, or if an alteration of the current Threshold Standard is warranted. An evaluation of the existing Threshold Standard is anticipated by the end of the year 2000 after CAD data is available and the strategic plan is completed. -6- Recommendations . That the City Council evaluate and respond to the immediate staffing needs identified by the Police Department as part of the Fiscal Year 1999-2000 budget. . That the Police Department complete a long-range strategic plan by June 1999. The strategic plan should address service levels, staff levels, methods of deployment, and any other factors related to delivery of service in compliance with the Police Threshold Standard. . That the City Conncil provide adequate staff and funding for the completion of a police facility master plan and aggressive implementation. . That the City Council direct the Police Department to prepare a goal oriented action plan for rednction in the nnmber of false alarms, including further evaluation of a requirement for residential alarm system OWDers to contract with a privllte alarm company for the first level of response. -7- FIRE/ EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that the City is not in compliance with the Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Threshold Standard ofresponding to calls throughout1he City within 7 minutes in 85% of the cases. During the 1997-98 fiscal year, the Fire Department responded to 81.8% of the calls within 7 minntes. This non-compliance is attributable to changes in 1he manner of data collection and not a reduction in fire service levels. Despite the continuing non-cornpliance (6" consecutive year) the GMOC is satisfied that the pending Fire Station Master Plan (FSMP) update and the installation of the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system will address and clarify the deficiency. Key Issnes Re-evalnation of the Threshold Standard As stated last year, as a result of the draft 1998 FSMP update, it was discovered that the current 1breshold was formulated based on erroneous data. The error reflects the fact that different portions of the dispa1Ch process are being measured today than were measured in the past In order to account for the original measurement error, the draft FSMP update suggests the true Threshold should have been set to respond to 79.7% ofeaDs within 7 minutes. Based on the findings of the FSMP update, the Threshold should be modified, however, a modifica1ion should be deferred until two years of da1a from the CAD system have been collected. The CAD system will provide a more accurate da1a base for determining an adequate threshold for fire service delivery. lithe CAD system is accepted, as anticipated, in June 1999, two years of da1a should be available by the end of the year 2000. Recommendations . That the City Conncil adopt the 1998 Fire Station Master Plan update which addresses fire service needs for the City. -8- SCHOOLS Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that both the Chula Vista Elementary School and Sweetwater Union High School Districts are in compliance with the School Threshold Standard. However, Sweetwater Union High School District has a potential for non-compliance in the year 2002 when existing school facilities will be unable to accommodate any additional student enrollment. Key Issues Sweetwater Union Hi!!h School District (SUHSD) Potential for Non-comp1iance In its report SUHSD indicated that by the year 2002 existing school facilities wotild be unable to accommodate any additional student emollment A letter to City residents from SUHSD's Superintendent stresses the difficulties facing the District in JlToviding facilities to meet soaring enrollment (See Appendix A). The ability to finance the expansion of existing facilities is largely dependent on the passage of a local bond measure. The District's attempt to pass a bond in 1997 was unsuccessful. A campaign is currently underway for another bond measme. New Growth in Eastern ChuUz Vista The passage of Senate Bill 50 (SB50) can restrict the ability of school districts to exact full miti~~tion for schools. Without full mitigation from futUTe developments the district may not be able to finance the construction of new schools in eastem Chula Vista. Demographic Growth in Western Chula Vista Recent demographic changes in westem Chula Vista have resulted in an increased student population. In addition, implementation of class size reduction and the rapid growth in special education student population have resulted in the need for additional floor space. These factors create a need to expand existing school facilities without JlTOviding fiscal resources. Chnla Vista Elementarv School District (CVESD) NeH' Growth in Eastern ChuUz Vista CVESD has planned for projected enrollment in eastem Chula Vista and has secmed the funding for 5 new schools expected to be built over the next 5 years. Due to the trend of more children per household, increased enrollment at all sites, and State mandated class size reduction the district needs to evaluate if 10-acre sites are adequate for new school construction. Demographic Growth in Western ChuUz Vista -9- Demographics in western Chula Vista have resulted in an increased student population. The implementation of class size reduction and the rapid growth in special education student population has resulted in the need fOT additional floor space. CVESD uses relocatable classrooIDS, boundary adjus1ments, and classroom cODversions to accommodate increased student enrollment. The recent passage of a local bond initiative for $95 million provides the district with fiscal resources to implement long-term solutions to accommodate increased student enrollment. Recommendations . That the City Council, through the recently formed Schools Joint Governmental Task Force, encourage the Chula Vista Elementary School and the Sweetwater Uuion High School Districts to identify solutions for adequately accommodating increased student enrollment such as development of.a long-range facilities master plan. . That City staff work with the Districts to analyze 1he r.amifications ofSB50 and to coordin..tp the pbasingof development 1Illd timing of new schools. . That the City Council :support any efforts by 1he Sweetwater Union High School District to pass a general obligation bond for facility maintenance, upgr.ades, and for the .addition of Dew facilities. -10- PARKS & RECREATION Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that the City meets and exceeds the Parks and Recreation Threshold ratio oB acres -of parkland per 1,000 population east ofl-80S. Key Issues Master Plans The GMOC continues to emphasize the need to accelerate the preparation and adoption of a parks master plan and greenbelt master plan. There is an urgent need to develop a parks master plan in order to identify programs for upgrading and expanding older parks and recreation facilities in western ChuJa Vista and to establish guidelines for the orderly development of future parks and recreation facilities in eastern ChuJa Vista Of equal importance is the need for a greenbelt master plan to provide an open space system as envisioned in the General Plan. Staff is in the process of selecting a consu1tant to prepare a parks master plan, a greenbelt master plan, and a parks financing study and has identified August 1999 as the target completion date. The GMOC requests that staff adhere to the outlined schedule and complete both master plans in time for the next GMOC review. Proposed Threshold Standard Revision The need for adoption of a revised Threshold Standard to address the parkland deficiency west of 1-805 continues to be a concern of the GMOC. Implementation of the revised Threshold Standard for the area west ofI-805 would consist of an annual evaluation by the GMOC of the City's progress in implementing the parks masterplan's strategies that will move western ChuJa Vista towards the 3 acres/l,OOO compliance over the long-t= (20+ year) period. The proposed revised Threshold Standard also provides that if the GMOC det=ines that appropriate progress is not being made, then the City Council shall formally adopt and fund tactics necessary to achieve implementation consistent with the parks master plan's measures. Park Desit!D With regard to the appropriate facilities portion of the Threshold Standard, the GMOC notes that several parks with sports fields were not built to official game regulations, limiting their use. Staff should exert more quality control measures to assure that future sports fields are designed and built to official game regulations. Recommendations . That the City proceeds expeditiously to complete the preparation of the parks and greenbelt master plans by August 1999. -11- · That the City Council direct staff to return the proposed Parks and Recreation Threshold Standard amendment (Appendix A) for Council adoption with the parks and greenbelt master plans. · That the City Council adopt a revised Threshold Standard to address the parkland deficiency west of the 1-805. The proposed Threshold Standard amendment shonld be processed concurrently with the adoption of the parks and greenbelt master plans. · That the City Council direct staff to monitor park design to assure that playing fields are designed and bnilt to meet official regulations. -12- AIR QUALITY Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Air Quality Threshold. The City's regulatioDsare consistent with Federal, State 3Dd Regional air quality regulations. Key Issues Carbon Dioxide (CO: ) Reduction Plan The adoption of a CO, Reduction Plan for the City of Chula Vista could result in the reduction of emissions through the implementation of certain land use policies. The draft CO2 Reduction Plan was completed in August 1996.and has been reviewed by the CO2 Reduction Task Force, the Planning Commission, Resource Conservation Commission, and the Economic Development Commission. By adopting this plan priorities will be placed on the implementation of its growth- related air quality improvement policies. Air OnaIitv Improvement Plans The Growth Management Program requires that an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) be prepared and adopted for major developments (50 units or greater). The GMOC recognizes that implementing certain project design features, such as pedestrian-friendly and multi-modal circulation p.rt","", requires early planning, typically before preparation of the SPA Plan and AQIP. The GMOC recommends that project design policies, consistent with the CO2 Reduction Plan, be considered for integration into the development review process at the earliest stages, and if necessary, prior to preparation of the SPA Plan. This could assure greater effectiveness of air quality improvement land use designs. Recommendations . That the City Council review aud consider adoption of the draft CO, Reduction Plan. . That the City Couucil direct staff to pursue the adoption of policies and/or guidelines in the development review process that will assure that effective air quality improvement design considerations are implemented as early as possible in that process. -13- TRAFFIC Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Traffic Threshold Standard. The resnlt of the 1998 Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) shows that all segments studied are operating within the Traffic Threshold Standard. Key Issues Infonnine: the Pnblic The GMOC notes that residential development in eastern Chula Vista has generated increased traffic volumes. Although these traffic increases have not resulted in a Ibreshold Standard deficiency, they have caused concern mnong City residents. The continual rapid pace of development in eastern Chula Vista, coupled with traffic delays from roadway improvements is likely to TTlllgJ1iry these concerns. To address these concerns, information must be provided to residents about proposed development, expected Levels of Service on arterial segments (Traffic Ibreshold Standard), and the timing of improvements and additions to the existing roadway and freeway systems. Development Phasine: The City has measures in place to assure that infrastructure will be improved and/or added to accommodate residential development. For example new residential projects are conditioned to pay therr fair share for the new street system and are approved with building permit limitations. However, there is still a need for the Engineering and Planning Divisions to prepare a phasing plan to coordinate the amount, location, and timing of development in relation to the available roadway capacity. Development phasing is a critical factor in ensuring maintenance of the Traffic Ibreshold Standard in eastern Chula Vista prior to the completion of Olympic Parkway and the construction ofSR-125. Alternative Modes of Transportation The improvement and addition of alternative modes of transportation may decrease the demand on the roadway and freeway systems. The Otay Ranch General Development Plan includes right-of- way for light rail service. The realization of these plans, however, will require a continued effort by the City to encourage Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) to evaluate the e>.:tension of the trolley line from 1-5 to the Otay Ranch project's northwest boundary at Telegraph Canyon Road. -14- Recommendations . That the City expand its public information efforts to inform the pnblic via the media, master planned community newsletters, and presentations to community groups and local organizations abont it's .current and long-range tnmsportation planning efforts. . That the City Council direct staff to expedite the preparation of a contingency plan for the allocation of building permits in the event that the construction of SR-125 is delayed. . That the City Council continues to request Metropolitan Transportation Development Board (MTDB) to fund and develop right-of-way and design studies for the extension of the trolley line from 1-5 to the Otay Ranch project's northwest boundary at Telegraph Canyon Road. -15- FISCAL Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Fiscal Threshold on both a project and cnmnlative basis. The City's Development Impact Fee (DIF) programs continue to produce snfficient revenne to fund current., related facilities. Key Issues Develoument Imnact Fee (Dm Uudates While the Public Facilities and Tnmsportation DIP updates are currently in process, a standard procedure for periodic reviews of the DIPs bas not been established. Recommendation . That the City Council direct City Arlmmilrtration to identify and work with appropriate departments to incorporate an annnal review of the Development Impact Fees {DlFs), to identify the need for npdates, as part of the annual Development Impact Fee (DIF) Funds Report. This annual review shouldincJude: 1. An evalnation {If the accnracy of projections, facility cost., and other assnmptions, and 2. Cnrrent 5-year growth projections in each of the DlF npdates. -16- LIBRARIES Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that the City continues to be in compliance with the Library Threshold Standard of 500 square feet of adequately equipped and staffed library per 1,000 population. The Library Master Plan Update as adopted by the City Council on December 8, 1998 addresses many issues the GMOC has raised over the years; such as library siting and phasing, floor space needs, and the impacts of new technologies on library usage. Key Issues Threshold Ameudment In the course of preparing the Library Master Plan, staff discovered a discrepancy between the GTOwth Management's Library Threshold Standard (50D-sq. ft./ 1,000 population) and the Public Facility Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) standard (600 sq. ft./l,OOO population) for libraries. The standard used in the PFDIF program was established on the basis of the Citywide hbrary service goal of 600 sq. ft. per 1,000 population, which was adopted by Council as part of the City's Growth Management Program. The GMOC concurs with the recommendations of the Library Master Plan to amend the Library Threshold Standard to 600 square feet per 1,000 population, bringing it into compliance with the Growth Management Program's stated service goal and the PFDIF standard for libraries. Stafiin!! Although current staff levels are sufficient to maintain existing levels of service, they do not allow for longer daily operating hours at the South Chula Vista Library as requested by the public. The Civic Center Library is open 64 hours a week and the South Chula Vista Library currently operates 48 hours a week. The South Chula Vista Library is closed two evenings and 3 mornings a week. The addition of 8 to 12 hours a week for mornings and evenings should adequately address public demand for library services. Material Collections Although the Threshold has been met, the GMOC is concemed about the "adequately equipped and staffed" portion of the Threshold Standard. The General Plan goal is 3.0 items per person. Libraries currently have 2.8 items per person, which translates into a 9% deficiency in material collections (books, videos, compact discs, talking books and audiocassettes). The proposed Rancho Del Rey -17- Library would eliminate the current deficit, however, it is not expected to be constructed until 2004- 2005. Recommendations . That the City Council approve in concept the proposed amendment to the Library Threshold Standard from 500 sq. It. {If library facility adequately staffed per 1,000 population to 600 sq. It. per 1,000, lIDd that the City Council direct Planning Department staff to return the amendment to Conncil for formal adoption. . That the City Council increase staffing for 8 to 12 additional weekly hours for the South Chnla Vista Public Library. . That the City Council allocate adequate fiscal resources in the Fiscal Year 1999-2000 budget to bring the materials collection ratio up from 2.8 items per person to 3.0 items per person as identified in the Library Master Plan. -18- DRAINAGE Threshold Finding The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Drainage Threshold Standard on both a project and cumulative basis. Current facilities are adequate to handle forecasted growth for the next 12- to 18-months. Existing facilities in all basins, except the Telegraph Canyon Channel, are adequate for the 5- to 7-year growth time-frame. The completion of the planned drainage improvement between First Avenue and Third Avenue to the Telegraph Canyon channel will adequately handle the projected growth. Also, the drainage studies of development draining into the Poggi drainage basin indicate no appreciable increase in the overall runoff due to the construction of detention basins. Key Issues Maintenance of Earth Bottom Channels and Basins Once again, the GMOC is concerned with the cost and time associated with the maintenance of earth bottom storm drain channels and retention/detention basins. New drainage facilities are required to be built with the environment in mind and are intended to establish a wetland habitat. However, when significant plant materials are established in these "natural" channels and basins, the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Army Corps of Fngin"eI"S considers the channelslbasins environmentally sensitive, and require a lengthy permit process and mitigation in order to maintain them. Given the fact that ongoing maintenance will occur, a mec.h>mi= for addressing cost and permitting difficulties must be establiShed. A master maintenance scbedule agreement with wildlife agencies would decrease the maintenance cost and expedite the permitting process. Unfunded Draina!!e Improvements For the last 3 years, the GMOC has mentioned that $23 million of unfunded drainage improvements need to be made in western Chula Vista. Sources of funding for many of these drainage projects are limited and may be further impacted by the passage of Proposition 218.' The GMOC will continue to request a list of these improvements and a summary of progress in funding and completing them. I Proposition 218 approved by the Stalx:'s voten; in November 1996 limits the authority of local government to impose taxes and property related assessments, fees and charges without a majority vote. -19- Recommendations . That the City Council direct the Engineering Division to expedite the preparation and implementation of tbe master maintenance agreement with wildlife agencies for tbe maintenance of all environmentally sensitive drainage and detention basins requiring periodic maintenance. . Tbat the City Council make a diligent effort to seek fDDding to annnally complete priority projects in western Chula Vista. based on the Eugineering Division's list of needed, but unfunded projects. -20- SEWER Threshold Ymding The GMOC finds that the City is in compliance with the Sewer Threshold Standard on both a project and cnmulative basis. Key Issues No issues identified Recommendation No recommendations -21- WATER Threshold Finding The GMOC fmlls that both the Sweetwater Authority aud Dtay Water Districts are iu compliance with the Water Threshold Staudard in that the districts have sufficient water supply aud availability to meet short-term (12 to 18 mouths) aud long-term (5 to 7 years) growth projections for the City. Key Issues No issues identified Recommendations No recommendations -22- ATTACHMEl'iTT C Appendices APPENDIX A Threshold Questionnaires Page Police.................................................................................................................................Al FirelEmergency Medical SeIVices ......................................................................................A Schools................................................................................................................................A Letter from Superintendent Edward M. Brand .............................................................A Parks and Recreation...........................................................................................................A Proposed Parks and Recreation Threshold Amendment...............................................A JIir Quality ..........................................................................................................................A Traffic .................................................................................................................................A Fiscal...................................................................................................................................A Libraries ..............................................................................................................................A Drainage..............................................................................................................................A Sewer...................................................................................................................................A Water ...................................................................................................................................A APPENDIX B Growth Forecasts Growth Forecast lnformation............................................................................................ B I FlGURE 1- Historic Housing and Population Growth Table .........................................B3 FlGURE 2 - Major Projects Map .....................................................................................B4 FlGURE 3 - Current Twelve to Eighteen Month Residential Forecasts..........................B5 FlGURE 4A - Previous Period's Forecasts and Comparison to actual Development .....B6 FlGURE 4B - Building Permit's Forecast.......................................................................B7 FlGURE 5 - Five Year Phased and Buildout Residential Forecasts for Master Planned Projects........................................................................................... B8 FlGURE 6A - SANDAG Series 8 Regional Growth ForecasL........................................B9 FlGURE 6B - SANDAG Series 8 Regional Growth Forecast (Sphere of Influence ).... B 10 FlGURE 6C - Sphere of Influence Map......................................................................... B 11 FlGURE 7 - CommerciallIndustriallInstitutional Project Status Table .........................B12 APPENDIX A Threshold Questionnaires TI.fRFSHOLD STANDARD: Emergency response: Property equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 84% of the Priority I emergency calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an average Tesponse time to all Priority I calls of four minutes and thirty seconds (4.5 minutes) or less (measured annually). Urgent response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 62% 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 (7.0 minutes) or less (measured annually). 1. Please fill in the blanks on this1able. FY 1997-98 FY 1996-97 FY 1995-96 FY 1994-95 FY 1993-94 1,512 of 69,196 1,968 of 69,904 1,915 of 71 ,197 2,453 of 73,485 3,184 of 74,749 75.0% 83.8% 83.0% 84.9% 85.4% FY 1997-98 77.342 of 69,196 52.9% 8:13 FY 1996-97 22,140 of 69,904 62.2% 6:50 FY 1995-96 21,743 of 71,197 64.5% 6:38 FY 1994-95 21,900 of 73,485 63.4"10 6:49 FY 1993-94 20,580 of 74,749 63.5"10 6:48 Please provide bJ:jcf narrative responses to the following: 2. 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? Yes x No Explain: The department was property equipped with patrol vehicles, motorcycles and communication equipment to deliver services. Two new four-wheel drive utility vehicles are in the process of being purchased to service off-road areas within the City jurisdiction primarily in the eastem territories. 3. Was the Police Oepartment property staffed to deliver services at the Jevel necessary to maintain Priority I and II threshold standard compliance during the reporting period? Yes No X Explain: Additional staff is necessary to improve response times for Priority 1 and 2 calls. This conclusion has been drawn after a detailed review and analysis of call for service data includ"mg those response times and false alarms as evident in the attached maps. Our Priority 1 calls (shown !lT1 the attached map) continue 10 be primarily on the west side .of Chula Vista. Additionally Priority 2 calls (shown on 1he attached map) continue to be very high along the Broadway mrridorand sporadic clusters of Priority 2 calls are beginning to surface in the eastem portion of Chula VISta. The higher concentrations 10 the east are primarily in the sectors (94th, 125'" and 126"'). A look at false a1anns which constitute 25% of Priority 2 calls for service also show a higher occurrence in the westem side of Chula VISta. Call for Service volume indicated in the chart on page 1, t1roppedfrom 1,968 in the previous year to 1,512 in FY 97-98. During the same time frame the percent of calls within the 7-minute threshold standard dropped from 83.810 75 percent. The average response time also increased from 4 minutes and 52 seconds to 5 minutes and 46 seconds. Priority 2 calls remain relatively the same; however, experienced a drop in the percent of calls within the 7 -minute threshold standard. The same is true for average response time. Priority 2 calls increased from 6 minutes and 50 seconds to 8 minutes and 13 seconds. Addilionally in comparing dispatch and travel time for Priority 1 and II calls, it appears the amount of time required has incrementally increased since FIScal Year 94-95. The largest increase in both dispatch and travel time occurred during FY 97-98 resulting in an increase in total call for service response time. We believe some of the increase in required dispatch time may have been the result of a high turn-over rate and the simultaneous implementation of new CAD. Patrol travel time also increased during FY 97-98 by approximately % a minute for Priority 1 calls and by 27 seconds for Priority II calls. Some of the contributing factors explaining the increase in travel time are listed below the following chart. Mr_t_N~_.~fi@I;\*t.f._)MIt$gg.h1l'WW...",w.gMiWWii#)~i!:tm%\\qr.,elrdfiMiiiPJ.e;;V t.:, . :.....:~ ~i&. ....\fl:~i,.W~Ht@$~<<wJlm*~,~,7:#~tt~!:~MhMi*fWi#mi:~del.ffi*ff.t%HMr~ff@~ Total Fiscal Dispatch Travel Response Year Priority 1 - 2 Time Time Time FY 94/95 Priority I 1:07 3:31 4:36 Priority II 1:39 4:56 6:37 FY 95/96 Priority I 1:09 3:41 4:50 Priority II 1:46 4:54 6:40 FY 96/97 Priority I 1:12 3:40 4:52 Priority II 1:55 4:56 6:53 FY 97/96 Priority I 1:33 4:14 5:47 Priority II 2:45 5:25 6:10 The followin.Q variables were the contributing factors 10 ihe reduction and ihe percent of calls within the 1hreshold and an increase in the average response time: . The actual deployment of Patrol staff was not sufficient 10 deliver services at the level necessary 10 maintain Priority 1 and 2 threshold compliance. Patrol staffing fell short due to officer injuries (and higher turnover). Staffing levels within the Dispatch Center also fell short due to injuries, family leave and smaller than enough qualified candidates resulting from recruitment . . Approximately 25% ofPatrol officers (22of79) were new and unfamiliar with streets and locations thus requiring the use of grid books 10 locate destinations. So while we met Patrol minimum staffing standards, exposure to incidents are first experiences for new employees. . While we added 5 Patrol Officers during Fiscal Year 1997-96, the amount of time involved in putting an officer through a 7-month academy and four months of on-tha-job training contributed 10 a shortage of available .self-directed" officers in Patrol. . Sixty percent (60%) of Watch Commanders (Lieutenants) are new in Patrol. Of the total of five only two Patrol Lieutenants have had recent Patrol experience. The same is true among the sergeant rank. Grid books were old and outdated for most of 1997-96. This made it difficult for officers to locate new streets within Chula Vista. (This issue has been resolved.) A new grid system was developed by Agent Dan Hardman for both Police and Rre was developed with grant funding and new grid maps have been issued. . The Dispatch Center was adding parallel systems with old and new CAD operating during half of FY 1997-96. Additionally, Dispatchers were being retrained to use new CAD procedures. . The Patrol Staffing Study used to determine the number of officers needed is outdated and in need of revision. Staff is currently working with Marty Chase who originally developed the model in 1986 to update the formula. Solutions Despite the lack of a high volume in call for service in eastern Chula Vista, it is necessary to add a sector car which will overlap with the beat car and help improve response times. In oreler to cover one position on a 7-day, 24-hour period, it will require the addition of 5.5 officers, plus vehicles and equipment which will cost the CitY approximately $390,000. . Using new CAD data, Priority 1 calls exceeding 10 minutes in terms of response times will be documented daily on the Patrol Watch Commander's log and investigated immediately. This is a procedural change which we believe will help Watch Commanders manage officers, the Dispatch Center and iix avoidable problems. Additionally, we believe this tool will offer some consistency among the four shifts. This procedural change was implemented immediately upon our iindings. New Grid books have been distributed to all Patrol staff. This was done in late FY 97-98. They have been a valuable tool assisting officers in arriving at destinations. . The Police Department will be proposing the addition of a Background Investigator to help expedite the hiring of Patrol Officers and Dispatchers, as well as other staff throughout the department. The rlepartment currently has enough openings; but, not enough qualified candidates for the positions of officers and dispatch. In December. 1998, we added two additional Traffic Officers through an Office of Traffic Safety Serious Traffic Offender Program which provides additional resources for Patrol. . Add additional Dispatchers to the Communications Center. The Dispatch Center has been operating with 20% less staff. In order to keep minimums, Dispatchers have worked an enormous amount of overtime. We suspect the overburden may have an impact on quality control. . Add a beat to West Chula Vista to handle the Call For Service volume. The beat would be comprised of 5.5 officers, equipment and vehicle. It is necessary based on the Call For Service volume. . Implementation of an integrated Problem Solving model based on computerized crime statistics. The Police Department is currently working on a system tailored to the department's and the communitY's needs. Several law enforcement agencies throughout the United States have established and participated in crime control strategy meetings as a means to increase the flow of information between all levels of police department staff. This comprehensive interactive management strategy enhances a=untabilitY while providing those directly involved in crime reduction tactics considerable discretion and the necessary resources to manage their commands. The process allows staff to carefully monitor issues and activities within the department's operational unit, evaluate skills and effectiveness and properly allocate the resources necessary to reduce crime and improve police performance. This model provides the tools necessary to track and strategically deal with crime via team problem solving while maintaining a=untability. The plan is to integrate this model in the daily activities of Patrol and Investigative staff. The flow of information including a mapping of crimes would be presented at the start of roll calls during each shift. . As part of the Strategic Planning process, the Task Force dealing with growth will address the need to potentially restructure beats. Staff will continue to work with the Model States False Alarm Program and "horrible performers" to reduce the number of false alarms occurring in the City. This effort has already been initiated. Please see Item #1 0 relating to false alarms for more details. Crime Reduction strateav On November 18, 1997, Council approved acceptance of funds from the U. S. Department of Justice for a COPS Problem-Solving Partnership Study to be conducted by the Police Department. One part of the study has focused on improving new home safety and security through target- hardening and other preventive measures. These measures were co-formulated with the Police Department and developers Ibuilders who will sign an implementation agreement at the Council's meeting of February 16, 1998. A second focus of the study has been improving on-scene evidence colleclion and increasing suspect arrests. This was achieved during the life of the grant, with the addition of a temporary Latent Print Examiner. A third part of the study specifically addressed crime problems occurring in multi-family housing. Council authorized the department to initiate a Crime Free Multi Housing Program in Chula Vista. This is a program aimed at reducing burglaries as well as overall crime rates in Chula Vista's multi-family complexes. During the first months of the COPS Problem-Solving Grant, the Department identified two distinct targets of residential burglary: single-family homes and multi-family housing. Each has a largely unique underlying set of causative factors that must be addressed differently. Roughlyforty-five percent (45%) of Chula Vista's current housing is "multi-family: consisting of apartments, condominiums and mobile homes. By the year 2015, fifty-nine percent (59%) additional growth is projected for this type housing in Chula Vista. As in most communities, multi-family housing a=unts for a disproportionately higher rate of residential burglaries and overall calls for service. Compare, for example, one 65-unit apartment complex (with 41 calls for service between January and mid-August), to a nearby block of 68 single-family homes (with only 18 calls for service). Moreover, while single-family residences have a repeat burglary rate of only 4%, multi-family units have a repeat rate of 26%. The Crime Free Multi-Housing (CFMH) concept was first developed in the City of Mesa, Arizona in 1992. Three (3) years after the program's inception, the city's multi-housing calls for service had declined by 40%. In 1997, the City of EI Cajon (with 59% multi-family housing) instituted its own CFMH Program. One particularly troublesome complex had generated 179 calls for service during 1997, but over the first seven months of 1998, has generated only 12 service calls. To achieve these successes, the CFMH Program focuses on three areas: . Environmental Desian. In order to qualify as a Crime Free Multi-Housing property, the buildings must meet certain design criteria, such as acceptable deadbolt locks on all entry doors, adequate lighting throughout the grounds and parking lots, trimmed shrubbery, and locking rrP4f;~'i;:I'.i"_..'...tIK~Jr.la."'"~...; devices on sliding glass doors and windows. . Trainin!}. Apartment managers are trained by the CFMH coordinator to properly and thoroughly screen applicants. Proper screening can prevent many problems before they occur. To eliminate opportunity for crime, residents are trained to be the "eyes and ears" for the property. . - Crime Free Lease Addendum. Court tested, this addendum provides for much quicker evictions if tenants engage in criminal activity. This is a significant benefit to property owners. Once the property has been certified in these areas, the complex receives CFMH Program signs that are prominently displayed on the building exterior. These remain the property of the City and are removed if the complex fails to maintain requisite standards. After becoming members of the CFMH program, complexes may lJse the program logo in their advertisements. In other communities where the CFMH Program has been successfully implemented, participating complexes have achieved a significantly more stable tenant base with lower tumover ,and vacancy rates, lower maintenance and repair costs, and increased property values. GROWTH IMPACTS 4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Department's ability to maintain service levels consistent with the threshold standard? Yes No Unknown x Explain: As explained in Section 3 there were many factors contributing to the inability to meet Priority 1 and Priority 2 threshold compliance. 5.' Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18 month and 5 to 7 year time frame? Yes No x Explain: For the next 12 to 18 months current facilities (Police building and Patrol vehicles) and equipment will be able to absorb forecasted growth. Minor building modifications including a designated Patrol Roll Call RoomlEmergency Command Center, additional office & crime lab storage space are currently in progress. Additional swom and civilian staff may be necessary to meet forecasted growth within this time period. Staffing needs will be addressed during FY 99-00 budget deliberations. The current pOlice facility, equipment and staff will be insufficient to absorb forecasted growth during the next 5 to 7 year time frame. Additional facility space, patrol vehicles and swam and civilian staff will be necessary to meet forecasted growth. As part of the Strategic Planning process, eight focus groups have been formed to examine the following areas: 1) Population GrowIhIManagement; 2) Regional Issues; 3) Technologies; 4) Resource Development (Funding); 5) Social Crime Trends; 6) Community Issues; 7) Police Facilities and 8) Organizational Development. A Request for Proposal (RFP) for the consultant which will validate the findings and recommendations has been released. Additionally, the RFP for a consultant to conduct the new facility space needs assessment, siting analysis and conceptual design will be released in March, '99. The department is working with the City Manager to address these needs during the FY 99-00 budget 6. Are new facilities, equipment andlor staff needed to accommodate the forecasted growth? Yes X No Explain: a. Are there sites/resources available for the needed facilities, equipment andlor staff? No site or resources have been allocated for construction of a new police station. The Civic Center Facility Master Plan includes a component for modification of the existing facility to accommodate forecasted growth in the short term. A Development Impact Fee has been established for partial payment of a new facility. The plan is to build a new facility within the next 3-5 yeariime-frame. D1F will pay for 48.5% of the new facility cost estimated to be around $20 million. The balance of the funding has not been identified at this time. How will these be funded? DIF, general fund, grant funding and other sources to be identified. Are there appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding? Yes. Development Impact Fees and the City's Capital Improvement Project process. Additionally, the department has been successful in obtaining non- general funding for needed equipment and staff. b. c. 7. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the provision of police services? Yes X No Explain: Growth has affected 800 MHz communications. Expansion to the east has resulted in unforeseen communication "dead spots" due to the topography and eastern expansion. Staff is currently working with Motorola and the City of San Diego to address this issue. Additional funds may be necessary to fix the problem. Future growth will add to the diverse composition of Chula Vista's population. This will require the development and implementation of law enforcement deployment strategies. This would include examining community based policing strategies for the provision of mixed services. These issues are currently being addressed by the department's Strategic Plan. MA.JNTENANCE 8. Is adequate funding secured andlor identified for maintenance of existing facilities and equipment? Yes X No Explain: Modifications to the existing facility are currently in progress. Funding has been identified to make the necessary modifications. 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: . Purchase of a Computer Aided Dispatch system and Mobile Data Computers for patrol vehicles. This project is currently in progress. We anticipate final acceptance of the project by mid-year 1999. Construction of a new animal control shelter. Estimated completion date: 12/99. . 800 MHZ Communications Project. . Construction of a new police facility within the next 3 to 5 years. FALSE ALARMS The GMOC recommended that the Police Department create a course of action to reduce the number of false alarms. 10. Please fill the blanks on the table below. "NOTE: From FY 93-94 to FY 96-97, the above statistic reflects billable alarms only nQ1 total false alarms. FY 97-98 reflects the total number of false alarms. We had estimated that approximately 1,000 alarms were not previously recorded. As evident in the total number of alarms recorded for FY 97-98, there has been a slight increase in false alarm activity of approximately 461 which are probably attributed to new alarm activations throughout the city. 11. Has the Department instituted any new measures/programs to reduce the number of false alarms? Yes x No Explain: a. Identify new measures/programs. The Police Department began false alarm data collection and utilizing the false alarm analysis program (FAAP Program) provided by the Model States' Program in March, 1998. False alarm activations are ClJrrently being entered into the data base and provided to the Califomia Model States coordinator on a monthly basis. The software has been beneficial in capturing false alarm information previously not captured. All the false alarms are entered into the FAAP data files. Our previous system only captured false alarms eligible for billing. h. Is there an indication that the chosen course of action is having an effect? Use of the FAA? software has allowed for the identification of all false alarms induding alarms by category which help highlight chronic offenders including both alarm owners and alarm dealers. The following is a summary of the total false alarm ac:tivations between March and December of 199B, by alarm owner category: Alann Owner Cateaorv False Alarms Commerc:ial Residential Schools Banks and Credit Unions City of Chula Vista facilities County of San Diego facilities State of California facilities U. S. Governmentfacilities Total false alarms 2,601 2,125 4B6 59 36 12 B ---2 5,333 Of the top 20 worst offenders during the period Marc:h through December, 199B, eleven were elementary schools. The worst offender, having 52 false alarms was the Chula Vista Elementary School District Office. Additionally, we were able to identify that 184 alarm owners had more than five false alarms in a 9-month period of data collected. Correc:tive ac:tion has been taken for numerous chronic alarm offenders. In addition, the department has taken corrective actions directly with chronic false alarm system owners. Assistant Chief ZelI met with the Chula Vista Elementary School District and the Sweetwater Union High School Districts in October, 199B, to address the problem offalse alarms at the schools. A follow-up meeting, based on false alarm data from the last quarter of 199B, will be scheduled later this month. Assistant Chief ZelI also plans to meet with City departments and banks having false alarm activations in an effort to increase their awareness and implement correc:tive ac:tion plans. The Crime Analysis Manager has also spoken with several chronic false alarm owners regarding the high number of false alarm activations. This has resulted in complete alarm replacements for one alarm location and a greater cooperation and understanding on the part of several others. Other Model States Program measures are currently planned to be implemented in the near future. Staff is currently evaluating implementation of a locally predetermined procedure to restrict or suspend police response to chronic abusers of alarm systems and implement procedures to allow resumption of police response after correc:tive ac:tion has been taken. Additionally, staff will be proceeding with development of a model alarm ordinance which will provide the framework to develop steps to combat this problem in concert with local representatives of the alarm industry. Staff is also looking to modify the false alarm fee schedule. CADIMDC (Mobile Data Comouter) The GMOC recommended that the Police Department complete the installation of the CAD System by December 199B. 12. Has the installation of the CAD system been completed? "W..i&..,..,.'.'tW.1#Alit'.'.'.,.,....'.'i.'."'...,..,.,'l'i.1f#F".'."*%_;!'il'W. .......'.I~%!'i"""".'Wd...IR""4f&Eff&M'i.,.'~M_4@iJ&JKV.'.'"lW''j.@,\'j'.. ~.'~'.. .,.../_..;.~*:...~;~_f~tIA~11'liili*.8.%t. ~~:.::.~~~.ltwi(~~il~~: *.'fllw4lleAJ/' Yes x No Explain: CAD went on-line in August, 1998, and has been operating relatively error-free. Staff is in the process of testing data collected and leaming crystal reports. Staff has delayed system acceptance until all components are fully operational. We anticipate completion by June, 1999. 13. Has the installation of the Mobile Data Computer (MDC) system been completed? Yes x No Explain: All Mobile Data Computers have been installed. Patrol Agents are currently being trained to do inquiries from the field. The plan is to have Patrol Agents train Patrol Officers in the field. License plate checks and the inquiries can be done without disrupting Dispatch. Staff has delayed system acceptance until all MDC report writing and data retrieval issues are resolved. We anticipate completion by June, 1999. LONG RANGE PLAN FOR POLICE SERVICES The GMOC recommended that the Police Department complete a long range strategic plan for the future delivery of police services by October 1998. 14. Has a consultant been selected/retained to prepare a long range strategic plan? Yes X (Strategic Plan facilitator hired. Selection of a Strategic Plan Consultant in progress.) Explain: The first phase of the Strategic Plan was completed in 1997. In FY 1997 a cilizens' survey was conducted by SANDAG at the request of the Police Department The survey was conducted to measure how residents perceived crime and the level of safety, as well as how residents rate the performance of 1he Chula Vista Police Department. SANDAG assisted the department in designing and administering a survey that was distributed to a random sample of 3,000 households in the City of Chula Vista. The survey addressed topics such as personal perceptions about the amount of crime in the. city, community issues of top concem, level of satisfaction with Police, and ways in which Police can improve services to citizens. A final report summarizing the results of the survey and offering recommendations was compiled by SANDAG. Of signilicant.importance, the department received a 93% approval rating from the residents of the City of Chula Vista. The response rate of the survey 37% was higher 1han a typical mailed out survey, suggesting that residents have an interest in providing feedback to the Police Department The majority of the survey participants believe that their chance of becoming a crime victim in Chula Vista had not increased over the previous year. Further, the level of crime in the neighborhoods and in the City of Chula Vista is perceived to be relatively stable. In response to the specific question of whether the Police Department responded in a reasonable time, 91 % of the 55 or older age group agreed. In response to the question of whether Police officers responded within reasonable time by sector, over 85% of the respondents agreed. Strateaic Planning Process On December 9, 1998, the Police Department kicked-off its Strategic Planning process. Approximately 60 members of the department attended the kick-off meeting. Currently over 80 members of the department and other City staff are participating in the development of the j..&,..rfJfi'_~!:I!lrftjl""I~lIr('lf!~"I!I!!:I'''!I$III. Strategic Plan. At the kick-off meeting an overview of the entire Strategic Planning process was presented by Captain Leonard Miranda followed by a presentation by Chris Salomone, the Director of Community Development The goals of the Strategic Plan were clearly defined. With the goals in mind, eiJ;jht focus J;jroups were formed to look at specific areas that will impact the Police Department in the next 5 year period. These focus groups will address the following: 1) Population Growth/Management 2) Regionallssues 3) Technologies 4) Funding 5) Social Crime Trends 6) Community Issues 7) Police Facility Br Organizational Development Additionally, Alan Kumamoto of Kumamoto & Associates was hired 10 facilitate focus group discussions. Alan a partner of Kumamoto & Associates has over 30 years of experience in organizational development, management consultation and community relations/multi-cultural training with public agencies, non-profrt organizations and private corporations. Alan is the Executive Director of Southem Califomia Centerfor Non-Profit Management. a technical assistance consulting practice. He teaches in the School of Joumalism, Public Relations and Fund-raising at the University of Califomia at Los Angeles. He is a native Califomian and is familiar with Southem Catifomia He has worked in San Diego County with the City of San Diego Public Ubrary, the Bank of America Consumer Education Fund Recipients and with the City of Carlsbad - City Arts Commission, Public Ubrary, Arts Council and Sister City Program. He has serviced other clients such as the City of Long Beach, San Jose, Inglewood, Los Angeles and many non-profrt and private businesses and corporations. With Alan's help a model and planning time-line for completion of the Strategic Plan was developed. A copy of both is attached. Since the kick-off, each task force has been meeting frequently. Additionally, there have been several large focus group update meetings to keep the project on track. Simultaneously, an RFP has been released for Strategic Planning consulting services. The plan is to have all focus group draft plans integrated and combined into one Strategic Plan by June, 1999. During this time-frame, it is also our goal to hire the consultant (sometime in March, 1999) to assist in the integration of the focus group plans and to validate the findings of the focus groups, It is our thought that from all materials gathered by focus groups that the consultant will be able to renew and analyze as well as validate the findings. In addition, we expect the consultant to identify similar agencies and establish benchmarks. Upon completion of the Strategic Plan, it is hoped that recommendations will be incorporated into the FY 1999-00 Budget. a Has funding been obtained/identified to complete the long range strategic plan? Yes. DIF, Grant and General Fund funding. 15. Has the Police Facility Committee selected/retained a consultant to prepare a needs assessment, siting analysis, and concept design for a new police facility? Yes No X Explain: The release of the RFP was delayed to give the Strategic Plan Facility Focus Group time to review space needs and plan for future growth and service delivery. The RFP is planned to be released in March, 1999. Selection of a consultant is planned to be completed by June, 1999. a. Has funding been identified to provide a new police facility? Staff is currently working on identifying a funding source to pay for construction of a new facility. Development Impact Fees will be used to pay for 48.5% of the project. The project is planned to be financed over a 15-30 yeartime-frame. The Finance Department has acquired services to work with City staff and identify a financing plan that best meets the City's needs. MISCELLANEOUS 16. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes x No Explain: Yes. The Police Department recommends modification be made after CAD information is available and our Research Analyst has completed an evaluation of the thresholds. 17. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes No x Explain: None at this time. 18. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate to the GMOC? Yes x No Explain: A map showing call for service destination is attached. Prepared for: Prepared by: Date: R. P. Emerson. Chief of Police lracsema Quilantan. Princioal Management Assistant. ex!. 5144 Januarv 26.1999 (H:_\gmoc\question\98police.q) THRESHOLD STANDARD: Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the eJty within seven (7) minutes in 85"kof the cases (measured annually). 1. Please fill in the blanks in the following table: FY1997~8 FY 1!1!16-!l1 FY 1995-96 FY1994-95 FY 1993-94 6848 6455 ii682 6194 5923 81.8% 81.0% 752% 81.8% 80.0% 7:18 7:19 7:50 7:16 7:2.7 3:59 3:40 4:30 4:05 4:47 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? Please explain. Yes x No Explain: The Fire Department emergency response vehicles are properly equipped as necessary to respond to calls for service. 3. Did the Fire Department bave proper staffing for fire and medical units as necessary to maintain threshold standard service levels during the reporting period? Yes x No Explain: The Fire Department emergency response vehicles are properly staffed to respond to calls for service. GROWTH IMPACTS 4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Department's ability to maintain service levels? Yes No x Explain: Fire Department service level has remained constant. 5. Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18 month and 5 to 7 year time frame? Yes x No x Explain: The Fire Department is sufficiently staffed and equipped for the near1erm (12-18 month) period. For the 5 to 7 -year period, however, growth-related needs have been studied and are identified in the attached excerpt from the Proposed Fire Station Master Plan Update, Executive Summary. 6. Are new facilities, equipment and/or staff needed to accommodate the forecasted growth? Yes x No Explain: For additional detail on each of these areas, -please refer to the attached -excerpt from the Executive Summary of the Proposed Fire Station Master Plan Update. a. Are there sites/resources C1vailable for the needed facilities? Yes b. How will these be funded? DIF c. Are there appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding? Yes. 7. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the provision of fire services? Yes x No Explain: To the extent that new developments can be designed with street infrastructure which is conducive to safe and efficient travel of emergency response vehicles, the City can provide fire protection and emergency medical services in a more cost-effective manner. The City Council was briefed, during the review and adoption of the current year budget, on the existing need for a second ladder truck company to serve the Eastern Territories. Fire staff proposed that the existing Telesqurt, if staffing was increased from three to four, could serve the truck company needs as an interim measure. The proposal included the relocation of this unit from Fire Station #2 to Fire Station #4 in Rancho del Rey. While this change in operation will be coincident with the opening of the new station next fiscal year, Council approved funding to purchase and install the additional equipment needed for the apparatus in the current year. MAINTENANCE B. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities and equipment? Yes x No Explain: Taking recent economic conditions and the resulting budget constraints into account, funding has been available to maintain existing facilities and equipment at a basic level. 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: Fire Station #5 is located in the Montgomery area, and is quite old. A recent inspection performed by Risk Management and the Building Services Division of Public Works, further identified the needior a major remodel/reconstruction of the facility. As the project is not DIF-eligible, funding depends on the availability non-DIF sources. LAST YEAR'S RECOMMENDATIONS 10. Has the Fire Station Master Plan Update been adopted by the City Council? Yes No x Explain: The Fire Station Master Plan Update has been completed and has been presented to the Commission. It has been Staff's position to present the Fire Station Master Plan Update to the City Council in conjunction with the DIF Update, whose completion has been recently delayed until FebruarylMarch of 1999. 11. Has the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) System been installed and implemented? Yes x No Explain: The system cut-overtook place in August. this past Summer. The system is operational with training and process issues being addressed as they become apparent. 12. Has the Mobile Data Computer (MDC) System been installed and implemented? Yes x No Explain: The hardware has been installed into the emergency response and staff vehicles. MIS is working diligently toward implementing the necessary link-interface software. 13. Has Phase I of the signal preemption equipment (H Street corridor, from Woodlawn to the eastern terminus of East H Street) been completed? Yes x No Explain: Per the CIP. 14. Has Phase II (4th Avenue corridor) been included in the 1998-99 CIP? Yes x No a. When is the installation expected to be completed? May, 1999 15. Has the Fire Department assessed the causes in the deterioration of travel time rates? Yes x No Explain: As per the detailed disc:ussion in the Fire Station Master Plan Update, the deterioration in travel time results from the movement away from a flat grid system layout of streets (as is the case West of 1-805), to a system involving more topographic: changes and streets which c:urve (as is the case East of 1-805). This creates a situation which limits travel speed of advance and ac:c:ess to addresses from multiple points of approach. Even though travel times West of 1-805 remain c:onstant, the limitations placed on emergency vehic:le travel in the East will c:ontinue to make for longer average travel times overall as the Eastern call volume represents a greater and greater portion of the whole. a. Have mitigation strategies been identified to alleviate this problem? Yes b. Have funding sources been identified to jmplement mitigation? Yes MISCFI I ANEOUS 16. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes x No Explain: The Proposed Fire Station Master Plan Update disc:usses an inherent flaw in the methodology used to develop the Fire threshold standard. The c:urrent threshold was developed to primarily reflect :the response time characteristics of Fire districts 1 and 5. As referenced above in item #15, future fire stations will more dosely resemble the operating characteristics found in districts 2,3,4, and 6. This will make for longer average travel times as the call volume in these areas represent a greater and greater portion of the whole. If the threshold standard were to be adjusted for the original measurement error, the standard would have been set at 79.7% in 7 minutes. Consistent with past rec:ommendations, it is recommended that the Threshold be studied for potential reformulation after one year's worth of data is available from the CAD. 17. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes No None at this time. 18. Do you have any other relevant information the Department desires to communicate to the GMOC? Yes No Not at this time. Prepared by: Trtle: Date: James B. Hardiman Fire Chief 11/04/98 i~~~f';t~~~ii~~ii'i:Jof1~~; .,... . ........ ......... ............... ,,< . .-..-......,.;-:-:-,.:.;y,_.,. "-:'-"""::"'''.'.'-,:-''-: .c-;.,.:.:...:::.:.:.:.;.:.;.:_'..:.;.... "",,;,::,-,>,,:,:,.,:,:.: .,:.:._.:.,..:.... -.,:,.-:,:,:,'-'-',;,'-:-'-:-:-:-',',,-,-,'. ...-...-.'.-........-...-."..... .....,............. -. .'.........-.....-.-.........,.-........-...-, .'-:.-..-.-'..-'..'.'-.,-.-,.-.,.-......-,.-'. -.-.-.'.....-.---...-.-..,.-..... .................... ,'..-.........."....-...,.... ...-........,.-_....,...,....-,-.... ..-'-.-...-....-...-.....-..---.-..... '-"', ................. .....-.,-,......---,..,...-. .,-,'.........,,-,..-.-.....,..,. .,-.-,..",.,.,.... .,.-.,..,--........-..,. .:-..-.-.-.-._.-_.._-.-..-'.'-,'..'.. ...................... --",_...---...",.,. ........,...........,.'...-.....-.. WM:;~.~HW.:~(~%Pf.(i~::~~~~W~;~~:~;::::::P*~~Wif~J~W~~1M:p~:?:nWM:#:(#~1~:H/f:?ct::::::::::n::~~~~~:::~~~1f:gNMy~~~t:~;t:::~:~::~:t~~ifJt@f~~t~~::wm~: ""'.".,..,..,..-~'''..,.;-\l.''''''''.....",.,..",.".'~..~....cu~.{~t;.~..w....,',.",',........... :~;~.ffl:~~~~.&;;,II:~~;:I~~!.~~~::~ n~~-4~~~~~:::::,<;-.::;;:<::::'~;-,;<.,.:~::~:::,:;:::::;:: .:.;.:.;.;.;-;.;.". :::::;:;,:::::::::~::: THRESHOLD :ii::i1\lil~~~~~jllifJt1~~i~~i*f:~ :::.:::::::<::;.'::::::C::::::::::~::::::;:::: .,.,.....,..-.....-....,... ;:i:::;::~:mi~tf:r*~m:i:i:: 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 information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC. 1. Please fill in the table below to indicate the existing enrollment conditions and capacity at the end of the review period noted above. Information the District has already compiled, which is close, or subsequent to this date, is also acceptable. II .. ........ ... .... ....'.~ST1NG90NDrrjQN~. ... . ..... .. "1;): it ~'......;!t!e7..." ~~$I~rtafjj;f.~i3\lllr;:~~! ItlClR#IWEsr.'.. .'. ,. '" ,..>'.>>..i, I Cook 509 1~72 60 23 15 ITrad'1 IFeaster-Eliis:m 1,093 1400 682 -11 10 lEx!. Trad', Charter I Hilltop Drive 555 1500 72 17 10 IT rad'j IMueller 1767 !~72 1170 40 10 IOrchardfTrad' !-Charter I Rosebank 697 1490 60 -27 11 Trad" wi'l rec. add" relo Vista Square 680 1482 180 2 17 YRS. . SOUTHWEsT ....i. ... ....... .'>:. ......: >'...,. .. '..i... i> ..> >: ...i.'...{.'." IChula VIS1a UC 218 10 290 32 10 ITrad'1 I Castle Part< 1579 1524 60 5 16 IT rad'l Harborside 793 1480 302 1-11 135 Trad" Kello9g 1~17 1392 60 35 14 Trad'l lLauderba::i1 1897 1510 1240 40.5 !45 Multiltrack lLoma Verde 1723 1~72 1240 -11 126 YRS Montgomery 1460 1512 0 52 12 Trad" Otay 1653 1550 60 -33 112 I rad" Palomar 447 1444 0 -3 12 !Trad'l Rice 704 602 1210 108 15 IT rad" Rohr 551 !552 40 31 13 IYRS SOUTHEAST i .. . . Olympic:view 1852 1520 1450 118 10 YRS iPart<view 1~39 !526 140 127 10 ITrad'1 11_ 1_ ~ I...,.... I..." 1 '"' 1_ l~..__>_._____.____ ...1 .. . ..., ,. ..,: i ':,. ... ... ... .i. . .. . will ree. add" relo CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 2 I! II EXISTING CONDITIONS (Continued) , , I Schools Current Capacity Amount Overflowed Type'of Comments Enrollment Permanent Portables Under/Over Out School ,..' I (Date) . Capa~ . I. calender '. .. .. !SOUTHEAST (continiJed) . . ..' ......... / .......... ....'. .....: ,........... ..... ..' ......,. IValle Undo 487 482 130 25 12 ITrad'1 I NORTHEAST ., '" ..... ............ '.'" . <.. .... '. ... ..,: .... iCasillas 374 512 0 288 0 YRS IAllen 441 1464 0 23 2 ITrad'1 I Chula Vista i-liIis 153s 1522 SO 4S 0 Trad'l I Clear View 1559 !532 Iso 23 10 ITrad'1 ICnarter I Discovery 850 1570 260 80 0 IYRS Charter j=astLake 1781 1520 240 -21 19 YRS j Halecrest 53S 1500 62 2S 0 Tracfl ITlffany 1734 1514 210 -10 0 Trad'l 9(_) denotes amount over capacity 2. Please fill in the table below to indicate the projected conditions for 12131/99 based on the City's 12-18 month forecast ~~., ,,:;' .:.:-,_....,.:.:..... . .,.-.-..'...............-. -.."...:.,..-,.,.,....-..... ".., ......... -... '-::::;'::;:f;:;:::t;::.::::A:~;::::';::::: .... ........'.:.;.:.:-:-:.,... :;:.c:,::,,;,;::;:,::,';:;:::;:o::;:;::. .'.'. ;}:::;::::w:::~:::::~:rt:.: , ...... ................,...--- ......... "." ''''.- -,. ................--.........-.............-----.......-.-.......------ .-'-- . . ;;FORECA~.~~'CO.NIlJEO.NSi :ii~~'t.ni=~i . .' '. .... '(?'/")?": !Cook 509 1472 SO !Feaster-Edison /1,193 1400 S82 Hilltop Drive 1555 500 72 Mueller 1757 1472 170 Rosebank 1727 1490 1S0 VISta SQuare /S80 1482 180 seiJiHWEsr.':'>'" .... .........~.. Chula VISta uc 1218 ICastIe Park 1579 IHarborside 1793 Kellogg <; 17 I Laudecbach 1947 Loma Verde 1743 Montgomery 14s0 ~y 1653 Palomar 447 ,Ri::e 704 Rohr 551 SOUTHEAST Olympicview i ~;:Jrln1ip.w 11,052 15::!Q .:.., ....'S 0 290 32 524 SO 5 <;80 302 -11 1352 SO 35 1510 240 -10 1:72 240 -31 1512 0 52 560 SO -33 1444 0 -3 S02 210 108 1552 30 31 . ". . . 1520 450 -82 15?!'; 40 In ;..,......:'~;":';>:;ill.. -- I~ . .:.....:.... ~f tuffi)GifMf~: ' ovem z ,. 4 m '.', ~~~lt;~t;l.jiil~~~ CilpaClIN"':/...,:.,:..,:....:..'.':::./....".,:,:.:t:akmdat: ......: .......:: 23 N1A Trad'l -111 - I ExtITrad'l 17 - Trad'l 40 ,- OrchardfTrad' 1- Charter -57 - T rad'j 2 - YRS /<2...... ./:.:...'J.... ........i/. C - Trad'l - Trad'l - Trad'l - Trad'l - Mutii-track Charter 3:. CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 3 I FORECASTED CONDmONS (Continued) ]' Schoois Projected Projected Capacity Amount Overflow Type of Comments Enrollment .... OverlUnder . Out School '. ..... {Date) . P.ennanent Portables . Capacity" .. . Calendar . SOlJTliEAST(CoritinUed) ............ .. .....i...... ...........i... ....i.. .............iii. ........ .. ......... .... ~- IRogers 544 456 32 -6 N/A IYRS IVal1e Lindo 487 1482 30 25 . ITrad'1 NORTHEAST i .. <..... i.i .. 'ii.. .. .................. .' .....ii..... ........iii.... · ..i' Casillas 624 1512 0 38 . IYRS I Allen 1441 1464 10 23 . ITrad'1 I Chula Vista i-iilis 586 1522 160 -4 . ITrad'l Clear View 599 1532 60 -7 . ITrad'1 Charter IDisCDvery 860 1670 1260 70 . YRS Charter EastLake 681 1520 240 79 . YRS I Halecrest 496 500 62 66 . Trad'1 Tdiany 734 1514 210 -10 . Trad'l I "(-) denotes ","ount over capacity 3. Please fill in the table below to indicate enrollment history. T alai Enrollmenl % of Change Over the Previous Year % of Enrollrnent irom Chula Vista 4,301 4,239 3,933 1% 982% B% 3% 975% 98% :::::":::::::;:;::::.:::;::::.:.,~:~_._:.;::~~~~~$tf:til~t{jlHt{rtf~~1:~:WEr~~]~twj~~jtI1::~~I::ItI:]~~t1.i:tt.*Jf~&;tl}1~~,~~jI*~@tff:rlgi[iMlj~m]Mf.~_f~lwf:~t.1g_r T alai Enro1iment % of Change-Over the Previous Year % of Enrollrnent irom Chula VISta 6,442 6,190 6.038 3% 975% 4% 3% 982% 98% T olal Enrollment ::::::.:::::DIii~Jl~]!~:!!!lwftl~:titH~t\i~m~f:~tllfff:~$i~~~~~:~~~}~IHt?~if~ittfrlt~ftrW~~:~l~~tj~~~~~~f:l_~\~llM[~~iflftj~~fli~ff~TIIDlI-l4BI~: 2.D50 % of Change Over the Previous Year I % of Enrollmem irom Chula Vista f4~;.?!:::t!~rft1g{l~~:~~~~:f{f~~:~t:I1I: T DIal Enrollrnent % of Change Over the Previous Year % of Enrollment irom Chula VISta lDlsjt(j!i>l WIDE.> T DIal Enrollment % of Change Over the Previ:l~S Year ID.~ .....r.t:...n"\lI'!"l"l.Q..,..Tro-.""'rhlll:::\r.~ 12,322 2.234 9% 98% 975% 4% 14% 982% .....,.,..,.-,....,....,. ~:::::~:::::::~:::::~::~;::::~:{M::::;:;::;:: I~:~\~Jili\~:1\~m~:~~;~rtf~~@ttl%~~~~1ft~:I:Miltt~~f.t~ ::;:;?:::;::=;:::~:::;~:::; ...._ :~;:~:@t{::=::: .::'::;;(.~::::;:::~~:, ...................._........._......w .;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.'.,... ..,.. :"':':':':':':':':';':';':'~: 4,821 4,621 4% 4% 982% 98% I... I 117.886 17284 13% 14.9% lop ?Dt. I 4,450 4% 975% I 116.421 I I CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 4 4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the District's ability to accommodate student enrollment? Yes No x 50 Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 12 - 18-month time frame? Yes No x Explain: New relocatable buildings to be purchased. 60 Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth? Yes x No Explain: ao What facirJties will be needed? Two new schools and additional classrooms b. Are there sites available for the needed facilities? Yes co How will these facilities be funded? CFD and developer fee do Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s)in place to provide this funding? Yes - 7. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5 to 7 year time frame. Yes No x Explain: New school construction anticipated: 2000 - 2 schools 2001 - 1 school 2002 - 1 school 2003 - 1 or 2 schools Bo Are .there any growth-related issues affecting the maintenance of the level of service as Chula VISta's population increases? Yes x No Explain: Size of school site @ 10 acres might be inadequate for schools of 650+ students K-6 with reduced class size K-3. MAINTENANCE 90 Is adequate funding secured andlor identified for maintenance of existing facilities? Yes x No Explain: GO 30nd passed 11/98 @ $95 million. An oversight committee for the GO Bond is under formation. CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCI100L DISTRICT PAGE 5 10. Are there any major upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the School District's current 1-year and 5-year CIP which will add capacity? Yes x No Explain: Modernization of 11 sites. GMOC'S PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS 11. Has a schools task force been formed? Yes x No Explain: On July 14, 1998, the Chula Vista Elementary School District Board of Education adopted a resolution to create a joint governmental task lorce. The task force will consist of at least one (but not more than two) Chula Vista Elementary School District Board member, along with staff, to support policy direction of expanding joint projects and services to children and families. The task force is expected to meet in January. 1999 (see Attachm=mt A). MISCELLANEOUS :2. Does tile current tilreshold standard need any modification? Yes No x 13. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes No x 14. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and GMOC. Yes No x Prepared by: Cheryl CDX for Lowell Billings Title: Assis+..mt Superintendent of Business Services Date: December 15,1998 (H:\shared\gmo:;'v;westion\9&::vesO.t;.1 ) SWEETWATEt<. UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning & Facilities 1130 FIFTII AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNL" 9] 911 PHONE (619) 691.5553 FAX (619) 420.0339 January 6, ] 999 Ms, Ulalia Olivo-Gomez Associate Planner Cn}' of Chula Vista 276 ?ourth Avenue Chuic Yisra. CA 9} 9] 0 Dear 10...5, Edalia Olivo-Gomez: Rc: Growth Management Oversight Commission . The Sweetwater Union High School District is again pleased to provide input to the Growth Managemeut Oversight Commission, Since our February 1998 report to the GMOC, the District bas accomplished the following: . completed construction of ~ new middle school (Rancho del Rey), . initiated planning and commenced site acquisition for a new high schoo] in San Y sidro/Otay Mesa, . canstru.."ted and installed twenty-five reloca1abJe classrooms, and . initiated the process to build an additi~ 53 relocatable classrooms, Enrollmeut Summan: Enrollment within the District continues to push capacn}', However, the coIlSIrl1ction effot!5 noted above along with schoo] =dance boundary adjustments, have allowed the Distri::;: 10 accommodate growth to date. T able ] is a summary of enrollment conditions 81 District schools within Chula Vista. It should be noted, tha1 SDIdems in Cnula Vista represeut approximately 50 perceut of the 33,817 District-wide studeut popularion attending 10 high schools and 10 middle schools. Within Chula YlStli City limits, 17,088 full- time day students were enrolled in October 1998 815 high schools and 5 middle schools (a student increase of 1.013 from 1997). Distri::;:-wide, the special education student population has experienced a tremendous growth surge and totals nearly 3200 STUdents (1,029 within the City of Chula Vista). Within the special education program, the SAC (5p"'...cial abilities cluster) studeut population has experienced a 400 perceut increase since 1985. This STUdent population is not accounted for in the CBEDs enrollment of 17,088 provided for Chula Vista schools and is therefore accounted for as "SAC/Other" in Table 1. School Facilitv Canacitv: Table '2 provides a summary of school site capacily. Nearly 20 percent of school housing in the District is provided through portable systems. At Rancho de] Rey Middle and Eastlake High Schools, these ponable facilities are virtually indistinguishable from the rest of the campus and are installed consistent with the Office of Public School Construction guidelines. However, in the older schools, the portable/relocatable housing ranges from semi-permanent housing built on concrete foundations to rented trailers. Table 2 also 2 indi=s that today. the school housing capacity is generally adequate for CBEDs and special education stua:n!S. Class-size reduction programs have had a serious impact on school capacity. District-wide programs have beeD instituted to cap enrolhnent in 9th grade English and math at 20 students per class. These programs, design:d to improve the educational quality for the stwL'"Ilt have had a cumulative impact on the District throngb a "loss~ of 147 classrooms. This is a significant .impact not reflected in Table 2. If this impact was spread evenly across all campuses, an average loss of 7 classrooms per school site would result by not fully "Ioading~ the classrooms. New Faci]ities: Critical to our ongoing success in m<:eting growth .demands in the eastern territory of the City, will be the rimel)' construction of a new high school (High School No. 13) on the Otay Ranch and the next middle school in Eastlake. On the Otay Mesa, the planning and programming stages are currently underway for High School No. 12. The site is located in the southern most portion of the District, and although this facilil}' is not located within the City of Chula Vista, impacts to Sweetwater facilities within Chula Vista could conceivably be .impacted should this facility not come on line by 2002. The City has provided the District with a long-term development forecast. Utilizing our current generation rate., Table 3 shows that the forecasted mits would genera1e approximmely 5,500 new high school students and 2.900 middle school students in ChuIa Vista. This translates into a need for 2.5 high schools and 2 middle schools to.Sf:rVe Chula Vista based students. The District's master plan ca1ls for 3 new high schools and 3 new middle schools to meet the needs of the entire District service area. Projected New Facility Tuning: . 2002 - High School No. 12 - Otay Mesa . 2007.. High School No. 13 - Otay Ranch . 2012.. High School No. 14 - Otay Ranch . 2003 - Junior High Schoo] No. ] I - Eastlake . 2008 - Junior High School No. I2 - Otay Ranch . 2013 - Junior High School No. 13 - Otay Ranch cnherIssues/()uestions Q4. . During the reporting period has the District been able to accommodare growth? Tne District bas been able 10 accommodate student enrollment during the reporting period through construction of reJocatable facilities and modifications to attendance boundaries. Q5. Are existingfacilities able to ahsorbforecasted growthfor the 12-18 month time frame? Two District schools have the capacity to accommodate future growth. Rancho del Rey Middle School is and bas an available capacity for 1,000 students. EastIake High School has an available capacity of 2approximately 700 students. In addition, 16 new relocatables will be instaJled in ] 999 which will provide interim housing for 480 students. 3 Q6. What newfacilities will be required to accommodate forecast growth? This issue has been addressed above in terms of school siting. Facilities will be funded through the community facilities distri::t (CFD) mechanisms currently in place in most new communities in the eastern territories. New projects beyond Villages 1 and 5 in the Oray Ranch will likewise be required to create CFD's in order to fund school capacity. Q8. What growth-related issues do you see affecting maintenance af the current level of service as Chula Vista 's population increases? The District was unsuccessful in passing a bond in 1997 that would have targeted repair and in some cases, replac..'"IDent of schoo] facilities 30 years and older. The District must now pass a bond in order 10 be eligible for State modernization money for 18 District schools, 9 of which are located in Chula Vista. Without this bond, the District will be unable to provide el'.:t...'"Ilsive modification/expansion of existing faciiities to meet growth demands. Tne second issue is the restricted ability of the District to form CFDs in new communities. The District needs for all new projects to fully mitiga1e school impacts. New projects beyond Village 1 and 5 in Otay Ranch may be reluctant to participate in Mello-Roos Districts and this could impact the ability to secure adequate funding for new schools. Q9. is adequate jimding secured and/or identifiedfar maintenance af existingfacilities? The District reserves approximately 2 percent of the annual operating budget of $160 million for maintenance. This is within State guidelines for maintenance budgets. However, since the vast majority of the District's school sites are over 25 years old, this 2 pereent allotment will continue to be stretched. 01 O.What mqiar maintenance/upgrade projects are to be undertaken pursuant to the District's current 1 year and 5 year CIP? As previously stated, the District will instalJ 16 additional relo::atahle classrooms by mid-1999 and replace 30 lnlilers with more permanent facilities. In addition, we plan to commence grading on High School No. 12 by late 1999 or early 2000. Fina1ly, by late 1999 or early 2000, the District will need to lCCJuire the junior high school site in Eastlake and commence planning efforts. With the passage of Senate Bill 50 and Proposition 1A, the Sweetwater Union High School District may experience difficulty in forming community facilities district's (CFD) the prescribed funding mechanism for new schoo] facilities. To date, the District has been fortunate to experience a cooperative environment with the development community. We are hopeful that this cooperative environment can be maintained and that new land owners in the Orav Ranch will lU!Tee to form CFDs so that eouitable finanein!! mechanisms are assi!!l1ed to all new homeowners. Second, corporation will be needed to enforce permit threshold compliance on the Dray Ranch property owners. This threshold will trigger if a high school site is not deliver-..d to the District in a timely manner. Thank you for this opporrunity to comment. Sincerely, a)gr Katy Wright Dire::to.ofPlanning TABLrl:CBEDSE~ROLLME~T TOTAL Chula Vista 17,088 . CBEDs 1I1IDlher less SAC aDd Learning Ccnta Students 10/1198 1011197 Change SAC/Other 1.440 1.384 56 15 1.270 1,256 ]4 30 2,253 2,178 75 91 1,963 1,783 ]80 240 i!l1'!:~':6:926i ~60l" l'f;.&.::t325j $(1':;-'i,"'..3]fi, Castle Pm'I: Middle 1.315 1.269 46 12 Castle Park High 2,034 1,993 41 240 Palomar High 572 470 ] 02 :rota1;;;;:'''V,*';;'~ ~:-.,3;921~ '""~S;732, ",,',= ,-:j'1i!9." ~.i.'":: 252 Bonita Vista High 2.377 2.253 ]24 J 94 Bonita VISl8 Middle 1.335 1,494 (J59) 26 Eastlak<High 1.859 1,7]] ]48 J81 RDR Middle 670 284 386 'f"Q~ 16,075 Schoof Site Chula Vista Middle Hilltop Middle Chula Vista High Hilltop High Northwest Southwest Northeast TABLL2: CONDmONS AS OF JANUARY 1, 1999 Sehool Capacity Capacity Adjusted S~ Penn. Portable Total Capacity Nortbwest Chula Vista Middle 1,050 420 1,470 1,440 Hilltop Middle 1,350 120 1,470 1,170 Chula Vista High 1,560 660 2,220 ~~?O Hilltop High l,530 360 1,890 1.830 Southwest Castle Park Middle 1.530 - 1,530 1,530 Castle Park High 1,740 330 2,070 2.0JO Palomar High 5JO 60 570 570 Northeast Bonita Vista High 1.860 540 2,400 2.070 Bonita Vista Middle 1.470 270 1,740 J,7JO Eastlak< High 1,950 840 2,790 2.610 RDR Middle Ll40 540 1.680 1.680 ~~4..d;::_'"'7..;,~ 15,690 I . 4,]40 19..830 ]8.840 TABLE 3: STUDEl\'T GENERATION Impact of 1998 Units JHS HS Forecast Projected Impact Impact J 998-2000 4.5J6 452 858 2000-2005 9.680 968 1.839 2005--2010 ]0.676 ].068 2,028 20]0-2015 4.157 416 790 Total 29,029 2.903 5.516 Clpa:.:ity l.'L~ ~. f~t~~ ~ll ~ SWEE. /VATER UNION HIGH SCHL..JL DISTRICT ~~3D ~~. /""venue. Shu:e: VI5""~. c/.. ::'~2i i . (fiB) 5P~.5555. F!-.X .42[-2252 ::.=::= :--ar=n!.~ a:~: :;: =:::gnoo:-1. v-rn~ 1 b--~ superimenri"llt fOT the high s::hoo] district four years ago, on:: of my initialli:"j~, wa; 1:) lake a lr.,,,.i;;md look l!! = s::hoo]s, Whl!! J Slnl' shocked me. D::spite the obvious hard WD~i: by T.?-n::rS. Staf' zn.d parents 10 ::r.sur:: quaii!: ::dn::ationaJ programs fo;- smdems, s::hoo] facilitie, had 2.g::-: znd becCJIre.s.~ ov:rcrow~ Liley v.'=re aff~"1ing t::a=hing and le.anring. Let me e;:::>;nwhat ] m:z-.. 2\1051 0: 0:.-:- 3..:TI::lOls a:~ wJ:"t!han 30 y=ars. aid.. v:Jrrl five beinf nuill OVei 50 years ago. Tn= n= i:rr signiiicz:;: T~air and r::na\'allon is critical. Brtiidings l::ak, h::ating and plumbing ~ysr::ID5 a:r:: i=!::!iorarinf. zru:: outda!::d ei::..-trical S)'SI..."!Il5 cannot =ommodat:: r::chnology n=ds. Bathrooms blJlj: in to:: 1930'5 = in Vf:!}'PO:Jr ::ondirionlllld th::re =f.ar IOO fewfOTthe number of srudems a:':'..,,-m,g om s::ilDals today. .A,miqmued science classrooms lack to:: Jab stations required for n=s5alJ' ""hands on~ iearning. J =ite rlama~. is ~ve. Doors and windows .n~..d replacement, an: ::: some =es.. v:alis lIlld building foundations zre ri=ioraring. School cUSIodians lIlld -mz:::-=an::e "."7', =omplish 2. lot v.>ith limited resom-..::s; however, b--..::au~e of the age of our s=n:::;)ls. th=.y :::ann:J: De fixed ~. tP~se kinds of e.uuJ.iS a1on~. Crverthe y~ our commmriti~s nave grov.."Il ri:ramari:::alJy Tw(-tirirds of our s::hools must now .--=odar:: more Ii:an twice 1h:: number of smd:::nts fOT which rile)' w= originaliy built. 'Qrtire sin:;;J;y. w~ are nmning oUI of room. Hun~ds of ponab1e classro0ID5 have b--= added to our cam;r'-5es. D-<;i~r, to be .'r::mp:mrr.l',~ many = Oilapidared and have far outlived rileir anticipated y= of use. ummmnar::i)', more pomible classrooms will have to be added. Anomer 83 are sciJ::jn]ed 1:0 be piz::erl on our campuses in the near iu= and rilry ...'ill continue 10 srrain rile already o"::::'urtL~ed s::no:>; inirasrru..o-mre. =-ven wien rh=, we ma)' have IO consider putting schools on spii: ~ssi:TI:s Dr mu1ri-!:"'..:l: ~::hedule, umiJ more lo!:!g-t= solutions are found IO accommodate ~oaring em:>illnenL ~sidems a: co=urtirie, se:>'eo by OUT higiJ scnao] district ha"e indicar::d therr concern ror pro-:::::ng .an edn::aIional envir=t tha! mee" the highest =dards. Tne recem passage of local bani; f:>r schoo:" il: rile f=d::r ej=emary distriClS indi::ar::s srrong SUPPOI1 for quabl}' education. v,cr.z: you may na:~...aiiz:: is that me middle, jurtio;:, and =ior high s::hools in the 5w=twar::r distri::l wIT n:>l benefi!:from mese iDea] funds. identifying and se..."llriug me resources necessarY!D r~air and ren;,,'are !he~e campU5es is OUT di.';trict's highest prioril}'. With your help and invol"ern~L I am C:>DSri"ll1 a ~olutio:c ::an be roune:.. Tne 'board 0: ~5te~S and } 2r~ zskint the n:m::ipals. tea::he:""S. s::hoo] 5"'"..fu"""1. and communiT\' - . . .,I I!l::=~:-5 to p\'~ '!2.S iupu! re~ardi.~~ upgracies and mDd~tion needs. Your feedba::k will help u.s, Jh1U_l "'7" pTOj~~.2::1= develop.2. :a:ilities plan te ~1 srucient n~cis at eve;').' school. Your corrunenlS an:: ~ggestions 2:'e rnponanl 10 me. Please!ak:: a few minutes IO respand on the enclosed card. Tn~: ~'ou for YOU:- ?ar..iciparior.. Sin=Jy. a--J M/7----/ =-6waro M. BramL Sup::'11m~dent SVlLryv;"ATER UNJOl\-HlGH SCHOOLDISTPJCT . FA ClLIIT [!UESTlO.fI,'NA.IP.E The foIiowir:; faciliric., nc!:.:: have been iJientified at district schools. Cirde ",1>..' for those you feel arc n.~'ln( r..it'hc~ prioriry. .'B.' for those of ir;,:~rmediale prioriTJ, and 4'C" for those of lnwcsi prioriTy. Pleas!: ::om,ni!:lf ,ryy jQnua~' J. Thank you. .""...rid cl2.Ssro~ to T~lie\'~ :w:r=rowdinE IL-place olIl~"'~d hearing. -\'=ntiiation and air conditioning sySL'1I!5 Upgrade d===i::aJ servj~ for safety, capa..;ry and u:clmoJogy (su::h as compn=J Build :p=t classroOIll5 to replace ~g portables and mUL-rs MocL-mize s::ience classrooms and add more where Deeded IL-place old.. nndependable pimnbing and sewer systems P..esmiace =i;ed and ri..,e:ioraring asphllh, bla::l.."tOps and v:a]];wlI)'s P~air or rep"-- riDers. ..:ills and other SlJ'D..-nrresdmnaged by =ites Renovate "::Tn.: restrooms ;md provide adciitionaJ =5 Commen:::; A .:, C A ~ C A B C A B C A 13 C A 13 C A -, r L A 3 C A ~ C z, Name .-:.dress Plume: day Eve. ."~"'~::~.-'i'';'.l;:;~::",:;~TC:;~;~'it~[;;..i:';3;~~~f';;'~'6:~~~2:~;~4_,:.~u~-:. ~- ':;;"~'- . . cSr,1;F[';r,'P.\1Pe;'~i~'i'~W)t~~ier~~~~\"/;:l\j,..}.e;;iI1~l":tf-;'~-:'~"2~'~:S!~_. . ._ ;",:-'Hc~~~~~jit';'7,.'~~;E~'?~;IiR:.;E.i;<~#~<f'''': .--. , . '<-':r,;lIlltr'\['-,;';., r'?'1ll:J;.1 i';.'" "",",~:.:;." ;""::<i'fff!f;:ffftrJEP~c' ~_,,,,,':'~'~{.f-:f''',~c?:o,,,,,,_....;>,:,;-,;-,,~,'C',.,,,,,,,,,-,,,,,, . .;"'~ ~lii~~~~~ii~ THRESHOLD STANDARD Population Ratio: three (3) acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east of 1-805. 1. Please fill in the following park acreage and population table. ~~-~~~r~~~~~?:~~~~:\~.€~~~~~~,~~~:~.~~,;i~.=;~~:'-~~~?~~~~*~~:J:~~~..::?-~,;,t.i':}f<~; .--,~~~..,.~~~.~",~"t;~~"'~PARKACREAGE~''''";,,<:';<<'''-'~':'''''- ...~:r;...,;"c<.." 1E::;-";?.J!B'J-~::o,~~'~iU::;~t~!:s~;;~''-'"...",. ;~"-'~-"" .,.,.- ,Y0';.,'.~3~ t-,~.:;_\r:;',"~\:':'T:-<~ ' :;D,t~~Jire~ :or(PiEoc.eciilstiIana~,COmparlsons:?',"'; ,'<.<' , ._ _ ..,:.,--.-. _ ~' _~__M'.'~':.I~"" _~......",,~t..-.......-: ~.',.-. ; , . "-- '..- -",.:.' ;.;.... -"- .- . .... ~, .:.,:"'-' -:.....;;,;:...":-~. . ::,""M~.., '_"(~""'~';""''t?~,;;,~;J!..-"~-.~.?""",,.. ,.., ..,,,,,,,,,-,,,,,~.., """';'.,i;\-?t"'.,...._.,.r.-"~'#. ~ ., " -...,,'';; _:-::'~_---=J<__:'~':'-: _;~::~~1~-~~"",o;~"L.:...:..,:,:::.:......:~.::::-....:.;-.'..'~.7:;"!j,:-::,:.:-;:r. - . ~.<,~.;;.~,._~:-~~-t_=."',~J~" .; ~:?'!>?f~!~s c:.:..,.~.~;:.--:.;,'-'_:,.:';:..~.,::;- ~:,THRESHOLD'?'" AREA'OE ,.:CURRENT ; d'sWlDNTlV ~,-.:;:~f~.:\."; ;p'RIOR!rEA'R COMPARISONS', --?-..._,:~......'--....~.... ....,'-'-., 2::CifY1i,; ~.,;~;,t:':#~.~-:-::~.~.. ; ;-,:--=~,'-,T:.p-. . ",. .",' . ::zS'rANDARItE, JUNE 30;~g9B: . :FORECAST' .JUNE1995 ':i!UNE'996 June~997_ EAST I-B05 3 ACRES PER 1 000 'ACt1 000- 4.B5 429 4.75 4.53 4,40 POPULATION EAST WEST I-B05 OF I-B05 ACt1 000 1 .1 3 1 .1 3 1 .20 1 1 9 1 1 8 CITY-WIDE II I AlC1 000 225 2.1 9 220 2 16 2. 1 6 IiACRES OF lEAST 1-805 238 00 I 248.00 203,40 I 203,40 210,40 ~ARKLAND !wEST 1-805 129,45 129,45 129,45 129,45 129,45 , 367,45 37745 332.B5 332.85 33985 ! CITY-WIDE :>:J?ULATION ::AST 1-805 49.025 57.757 42.821 44.885 47,780 , W::ST 1-805 114.392 114,437 108.151 109.162 109.647 i , , ICITY-WIDE- 163,417 .172.194 150.972 154.047 157,427 r..::RE EAST 1-805 90.93 74.73 74.94 68.75 67.06 'SH::>RTFAU - WEST 1-805 -213.73 -21386 -195.00 -198.05 -199.49 JR EXC=SS IclTY -WID:: -12280 -139.13 -120.06 -129.30 I -132,43 'l'lbrmatiDn fDr areas WEST Df 1-805 and CITY-WIDE are shown for cDmparative purposes Dnly. -,he number of acres necessary tD bring the ratio up to 3 acres per 1.0aO populalion. - 4~res per 1 ,ODD populalion -18 m:mth po;:>ulatiDn prDJectiDns are based Dn staff adjusted tDtal Df 2. 925 fl~aled dwelling units. DevelDpers proJectlDn Df 3453 flnaled dwelling units wDuld result in a prDportlonately higher pDpulatiDn figure. 1~_!.1_!I.~@,~1~1r~Ii.~'}~"i~i;ffi~~1!11.'#~ii~~I$.III%?1f19ltli Please provide a brief narrative re~ponse to the following: 2. Pursuant to the Parks Development Ordinance (POD), 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: The Eastern Chula Vista park system meets and exceeds the parkland requirements for the reporting period with a 4.85 acres per thousand ratio. 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 (POD), has the eastern Chula Vista 'parks system had the required facilities during the reporting period? Yes No X Explain: Per the PDD requirement of buildings and facilities, the Eastern Chula Vista parks system is deficient the equivalent of about two and one-half 50 meter swimming pODls and two recreatiDn cDmmunity center/gymnasium facilities. a. What actions are being taken, or need to be taken, to correct any shortages of facilities? ' The City-wide Parks Master Plan, which is currently being prepared, includes an assessment Df park needs within bDth west and east Chula Vista. The establishment Df a defined character fDr future CDmmunity and NeighbDrhDod Parks, inClUding the se/ectiDn Df majDr park facilities targeted fDr new CDmmunity Parks in eastem Chula Vista is being examined. Facilities being targeted fDr future parks include a swim cDmp/ex with a 50 meter swimming pODls 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: Eastern Chula Vista threshold standard has been met and exceeded. No negative effects relative to parkland exist. 5. Are any additional parklands necessary to accommodate forecasted growth for both 1he 12 -18 month and 5 - 7 year time frames? Yes X No Explain: Table 5 (5 Year Increments) indicates 14,096 additional dwelling units will be added through 2005. Utilizing SANDAG's projected persons per household co-efficient of 3.02 persons per household, an additional 42,570 persons will result from the 14,096 additional dwelling units. This population exceeds the population projection identified in Table 6A. The 42,570 persons will generate a need for 127.71 acres of park. Wlfh a current (1998) overage of 63.32 acres, 64.39 additional acres will be needed to meet the total need of 127. 71 acres through 2005. Approximately 92.8 acres of tum-key facilities are scheduled to proceed forward. Some facilities are awaiting acceptance following the end of the maintenance period (Voyager Park), some are currently in construction document preparation phase (Heritage Park, Rolling Hills Ranch Park), and some are at the early master planning phase (P-2, P-5, P-6, P-7, P-8, and EastLake Trails Community). a. What is the amount of needed parkland? 64.39 acres b. Are there sites available for the needed parklands? Yes, sites have been reserved at the Tentative and/or Final (Subdivision) Map phase of development. c. Is funding available for needed parklands? Yes, since they are turn-key facilities being constructed by developers to meet park dedication and improvement requirements. 6. Are any additional facilities necessary to accommodate forecasted growth for both the 12 - 18 month and 5 -7 year time frames? Yes X No Explain: a. What facilities are needed? Based on current PDQ defined facility needs ratios, to accommodate a population increase of 42,570 (Year 2005) and taking into consideration existing (1998) net inventory, the following facilities will be needed in eastem Chula Vista by the year 2005. ::',..R8cnlation , ....,.,....~.....,..."... H"_ ..._".._. lW]Jj+:{5:?~:::::::;::::{~F~:i::r::; Large Picnic Shelter Temis Court BasebalUSoftbal I Basketball Soccer SWim Pool (50 meter) Community ,--:,;",:.:-..".:.,.:. ;WCOiDbliliiilY,! fJie~;~~~~~tt .:::;::::::;:;:::::::~,~: -.-;'....;.:-.:::.:.:.~ 1,000 49 43 92 2,000 5,000 17.5 21 9 39 5 -4 5,000 10,000 20,000 3 -8 2.5 8.5 4 11.5 -4 4.5 2 24,000 2 2 4 Notes: 1. Number of fadlllies needed has been round up wilen ane-haJf or grealer. The exception to lhis is baske1ba1l (half court is consi_ to be functioning) and swimming pool (pool size can vary). 2. ~ values represent number offaclllties beyanlI numeric need. 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 par1dands (tumkey parks) will be available at Final Map recordation. 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 No X f&j~:;::::::::::';::/~di\lilr'.Jl.4f!$Ji~t:tfiJ~itll.tJ;;;;iili;litl~;il{Bi_ Explain: Growth resulting from new development can only occur as long as threshold standards are maintained. Park planning and development track with residential development proposals. Therefore, parkland needs, resulting from new development, will be met and thresholds will be maintained. PARKLAND AND FACILmES MAINTENANCE 8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing parklands and facilities? Yes No ExplaiJr. 8A. Is there adequate stafffor park maintenance? Yes No Explain: 9. Were any major parkland or facilities maintenance/upgrade projects completed during the reporting period? If yes, please list. Yes No Explain: PARKS MASTER PLAN The following questions are follow-ups to previous GMOC recommendations. 10. Has the Parks Master Plan been completed? Yes No X Explain: At the cDmpletiDn Df last year's GMOC review cycle it appeared as thDugh the Parks, Recreation and Open Space and Planning Department staffwDuld .. ..:$~.W....'I~J:~j~._r:t..~AJIIllltIJ~ be able to complete the City-wide Parks Master Plan in advance of this year's review cycle. However, as a result of increased development activities in the eastem portion of the City and the con current reassignment of staff from the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Department to three different departments, completion of the Master Plan has been delayed. A great amount of background information has been developed by staff in preparation of the draft Master Plan and, with the reassignment of staff, a greater level of communication among departments and outside agencies related to outstanding park issues is occurring. However, the City has elected to solicit assistance from outside consulting firms to ensure completion of the Master Plan during the GMOC cycle. Selection of a qualified consultant is expected to occur in January and completion of the Master Plan by April or May of this year. Included with the Master Plan preparation will be the preparation of a Park Facilities Financing Study designed to examine current funding mechanisms and recommend modifications and/or creative new mechanisms for implementation of the Master Plan policies 11. Has the Greenbelt Master Plan been completed? Yes No X Explain: With the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for consulting assistance to complete the City-wide Parks Master Plan, staff has also requested consulting assistance to prepare the City's Greenbelt Open Space and Trails Master Plan. Completion of this Master Plan is not expected until Summer of this year. In its 1997 Annual Report, the GMOC directed staff to comprehensively evaluate projected growth and parkland phasing in eastem Chula Vista to ensure that a deficit does not occur. 12. Has a comprehensive evaluation of projected growth and parkland phasing for eastern Chula Vista been completed? Yes X No Explain: As discussed in Item 7, Growth resulting from new development in the eastem territories can only occur as long as threshold standards are maintained. Park planning and development track with residential development proposals. In this regard, staff is monitoring proposed residential development and park development proposed to coincide with the residential development. The table on the following page represents an accounting of parkland phasing. a. Include a list of all approved parks and those pending approval, and an estimated completion date. Refer to following Table Voyager (RDR) 10.00 Awaiting end of maintenance period Construction drawings completed. Marisol (RDR) 6.00 Heritage (P-1) 10.85 (Olay Ranch Village 1) Alcala (P-5) 0.85 (Olay Ranch Village 1 ) CoIIonwood 629 (p-6) (Olay Ranch Village 5) Santa Cora 5.68 (P-7) (Olay Ranch Village 5) Terra Fina 0.90 (P-8) (Olay Ranch Village 5) Breezewood 2.00 (P-9) (Olay Ranch Village 5) EastI..ake 10.00 Sporis Complex Construction drawings being prepared. Master Plan Approved by Council 12/98. Master Plan Approved by Council 12/98. Master Plan Approved by Council 12/98. Master Plan Approved by Council 12/98. Master Plan Approved by Council 12/98. Master Plan Refinement Pending Anticipated ~Estinlat6d. ::Estimatlid . ~DDstroc:tio~ ,~. .~. .' .~~~~'::j;~~'.; ~8trt........'.... nfa July 1999 nfa First Quarter Last Last of 1999 Quarter Quarter of 1999 of 2000 Second Last Last Quarter Quarter Quarter of 1999 of 1999 of 2000 Second Last Last Quarter Quarter Quarter of 1999 of 1999 of 2000 Second Last Last Quarter Quarter Quarter of 1999 of 1999 of 2000 Second Last Last Quarter Quarter Quarter of 2000 of 2000 of 2001 Second Last Last Quarter Quarter Quarter of 2000 of 2000 of 2001 Posl2000 Post 2000 Post 2001 Third Quarter of 1999 Second Quarter of 2000 Second Quarter of 2001 MISCELLANEOUS 13. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes No X Explain: Over the past two GMOC cycles. recommendations have been forwarded to the City Council by the GMOC to make the 3 acres/1 ,000 population threshold a City-wide goal Staff has been supportive of this revised threshold recommendation; however, adoption has been delayed. pending completion of the City-wide Parks Master Plan. It is expected that with completion of the Master Plan the revised Parks Threshold will also be forwarded to the City Council for consideration and adoption. 14. Are there any suggestions you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes No X Explain: 15. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC. Yes No X Explain: Prepared by: Joe Gamble Title: Landscape Planner Date: December 21, 1998 (H:\SHAREDlGMOClQUESTION\98PARKS.Q) PROPOSED THRESHOLD STANDARD AMENDMENT PARKS AND RECREATION 3.7 Parks and Recreation 3.7.1 Existinl! Threshold Policv Goal To provide a diverse and flexible park system whicb meets both the active and passive recreational needs of the citizens of ChuJa Vista. Obiective Provide public park and recreational opportunities in a timely manner, implementing a ~ yem' master plan whicb descIibes the location, facility improvements, and funding program fox proposed neigbborbood and co=unity parks. Threshold Standard Population ratio: Three (3) acres of neigbborbood and co=unity park land with "'r'pwpllate facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents _ ell3t 6fIm.er.'ltMl: 805. ImDJementation Measures Should the GMOC detennine tbat the Threshold Standard is not being satisfied, then the City Council shall formally adopt and fund tactics to bring the park and recreation system into conformance -1- I. : - ;::-~: _- ~ " ~: ,-, ,. : .... - -. - ~ - , , ,- ~. - - - - I i _' . .' .- \ - -. :' - - - . , . ~ .. ~ - - - . '- . , € construction or other actual solutions forthis area shall be scheduled to commence within three years. If construction of needed new park and recreation facilities is not started within three years of the deficiency reported by the GMOC, then the City Council shall, within 60 days of the GMOC's report, schedule and hold a public hearing for the purpose of adopting a moratorium on the acceptance of new tentative map applications -. based on all of the following criteria: 1. That the moratorium is limited to an area wherein a causal relationship to the problem has been established; and, 2. That the moratorium provides a mitigation measure to a specifically identified impact. Should a moratorium be established, the time shall be used to expeditiously prepare specific mitigation measures for adoption which are intended to bring the condition into conformance. Any such moratorium shall be in effect until construction of the needed new park and recreation facilities has commenced. (H:\HOME\PlANNlNG\EdaliaIGNOC9B\R.EPOR1\PR-lHR-ISTDl -2- THRFSHOLD The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which: 1. Provides an ovelView 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.ldentifjes non-developmentspecific activities being undertaken by the City toward Q)mpliance with relevant Federal, State and local regulations regarding air quality, and whether the 'City has achieved compliance. The City shall provide a ~py of said .report to the Air Quality Pollution Control District (APeD) fur review and ~mment. 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 prUH......s, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and local planning and development activities. Please provide ~ 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. STATE: STANDARDS San Diego Region Chula Vista .".0-'---'" "',' "--'-",'_,_" .,...;.......-...-.......-..-..-.,..;,.-....--.,."....,...- .......--.......,..... - ~r.i::DJi..' . . . \r~.a;;;n.,..~..lr:::;:::::::}:'/\?\?:?( . ,._ . .. __ , __.,_._c, ..., ..---...,.......---.""..........-.-..........-'.-.....',"'," STANDARDS ..... . . San Diego Region Chula Vista 39 3 14 1 12 1 2 o 1 o 9 o 1a. Please note any additional information relevant to regional and local air quality conditions during the reporting period. Ozone levels are a factor of1wo variables: regional emission levels and temperature. While emissions continued 10 drop, unusual warming conditions in 1998 produced higher than expected ozone readings, resulting in an increase in the number of violations of both the state and federal ozone standards. 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: A new Smog Check II program was adopted, concentrating on the 1 0% of vehicles considered "gross polluting vehicles. ~ Diesel ahaustwas declared a hazardous pollutant, . which will increase state regulatory efforts to reduce this pollution source. 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? (1) Distric:lruleswere adopted addressing Adhesives Operations, Fumaces, Water Heaters, and Stationary Combustion Turbines. (2) Rules for New Stationary Sources were revised to eliminate expensive requirements found to be ineffective. (3) An Indirect Source Program was adopted to address emissions from land uses through promotion of alternatives to automobile use. To this end, the publication, Tools for Reducino Vehicle Trios Through Land Use Desion was approved for release. 4. Will the above-noted changes (under questions 2 &3), if any, affect ChillaVista's local planning and development activities and regulations? Yes x No Explain: As discussed in previous years, adoption of strategies contained in Tools for Reducin!;l Vehicle Trios Throuoh Land Use Design, particularly through Chula Vista's Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) requirement, could reduce future development impacts on air quality, traffic flow, etc. IQQIi strategies dovetail with the Regional Growth Management Program and the CO2 Reduction Plan. District staff is available for technical assistance in implementing these strategies. ~~ ~::.::~:~~~~~~~~.~J~~~f~:~~~~~~?1'jj1ifr.~liiU:~fll..~1jf:ii~~i[i"l MISCELLANEOUS 5. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes No x If yes, explain: 6. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes x No Explain: Some major developments now in the pipeline are not required to meet new AQIP reporting and implementation requirements. This means residents of these developments will be more auto-dependent and add to the infrastruc:ture burdens of the city. The Planning Department should be looking for opportunities to negotiate some of the mixed-use, density, and transitlbike/pedestrian-orientation requirements into the project designs as they mature. 7. Do you :have any other relevant information that the APCD desires to communicate to the City and GMOC? Yes x No Explain:lhave offered to work with the Planning Department on developing AQIP implementation requirements and to establish standardized ways to measure the performance of (and give credit for) implemented or planned measures to reduce air emissions. The Council should urge the Department to proceed with this process to ensure as many of these measures as possible are incorporated in future development projects. Implementation of the CO2 Reduction Plan should also be a priority for appropriate city staff, since it will could save infrastruc:ture, maintenance, and operations costs while improving quality of life indicators in Chula Vista. District staff is available for a presentation on the Tools document and related technical assistance program. Favorably-received presentations have recently been made to the MTDB Board. the SANDAG Board Executive Committee, and the San Diego Natural History Museum's Sustainability Roundtable. Prepared by: Andrew Hamilton, Air Pollution Control District Title: Air Quality Specialist, Indirect Sources Date: January 8, 1999 (H~.a) THRr!';HOLD 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, andlorare consistent with current applicable Federal, State and regional air quality regulations and programs. 3. Identifies norKlevelopment 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 ln addition, the APCD shall report on overall regional and local air quality conditions, the status of regional air quality improvement implementation efforts underthe Regional Air Quality Strategy and related Federal and State 'programs, and the affect of those effortsIprograms gn the City of Chula Vista and local planning and development activities. Please provide brief narrative responses to the following: 1. Have any major developments or Master Planned Communities been approved during the reporting period? Yes No x a. Ust any approved projects and indicate to what ~xtent these projects implement measures designed to foster air quafll:y improvement pursuant to relevant federal, state, regional and/or local policies and regulations? Significant planning effort occurred on a variety of Master Planned Community projects during this reporting period; however, none of these projects were actually approved during this period. However, EastLake Trails/Greens Final Subsequent EIR was certified and the EastLake Trails SPA Plan was approved by the City Council in November 1998. Although not applicable to this reporting period. the EastLake Trails Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) was required to be completed concurrent with approval of the SPA Plan. It was dear that in order to effectively implement significant air quality improvement design features into a project, policies need to be implemented during the project design stage, which occurs long before adoption of the SPA Plan and approval of the AQIP. 2. 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 Explain: a. With respect to any inconsistencies, please indicate actions needed to bring development regulations, policies and/or procedures into compliance. 3. 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 following air quality projects reduce air pollution beyond the City limits but not necessarily within the city limits: Staff has developed a draft list of amendments incorporating C02 reduction measures for the City's landscape Manual, and a Land Use Implementation Report. This Report contains recommended techniques and features designed 10 reduce energy consumption and improve air quality, based upon strategic landscaping around residential development and other pedestrian-oriented land use features to reduce energy consumption in the home. This Plan is a direct result of implementing policies contained in the draft C02 Reduction Plan and has not yet been adopted by Council. The Council approved development of a GreenStar Building Incentive Program to encourage developers to build homes in a more energy efficient rnanner_ Staff is now in the process of hiring a consultant to assist in the development of such a program. There have been no projects implemented during this reporting period to reduce automobile related air pollution. However, in September the City Council approved a shift of the City's transit buses to an alternative fuel which is cleaner than what was previously used. The City is installing a compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling facility at its new public works yard. It has purchased 15 new CNG buses and will ultimately phase-in a transition from diesel and gasoline to CNG and other alternative fuels. 4. 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 x Explain: a. If so, please identify. The City is not mandated to do so, but the City Council has requested that staff come back witt"l recomrnendation~ nn ~m;n("1, !1f"lWClr C::llnnli~rc:: ::tnrl "" 'rr+l'~d,",r"! ..,..,,...,c:t ,....f ~ Cl"O"",,' I I...,';::),..{ from renewable power generators for its own facilities. The Council also approved development of an education program targeting Chula Vista residents and businesses to educate the public about the deregulated electricity market and that consumers can now choose to purchase renewable, or 'green' power for their homes and businesses. 5. Are any new air quality programs scheduled for implementation during the next year? Yes X No Explain: See above PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS The GMOC requested that City staff prioritize implementation of the CO2 Reduction Plan's measures. 6. Has 1he City Council adopted the CO2 Reduction Plan? Yes No X Council considered and conceptually approved the Plan and pieces are being implemented as stated beIow_ Staff is in the process of building consensus among affected departments in the City, which includes a budget for implementation of each item within the Plan, prior to going to Council. The Plan will be brought forward with an implementation schedule and budget for each key item. Nevertheless, individual items within the Plan have either been adopted or are in the process of review. The following is a list of those Measures. Measure 1 - Municipal Clean Fuel Vehicles - Switching the City's fleet to altemative fuels - specifically purchasing 15 CNG buses for Transit and CNG vehicles for fleet vehicles (Adopted). Measure 3 - Clean Fuel Demonstration Project (Adopted). M"::."ure4- Telecenters (Adopted). Me::.c:ure 5 - Municipal Building Upgrades & Employee Trip Reduction (Adopted). Measure 14- Energy Efficient Landscaping - Development of a Energy Efficiency Landscape Plan (Under Review). Measure 16 - Traffic Signal and System Upgrades (Adopted). Measure 18 - Energy Efficient Building Recognition Program -Development of GreenStar Building Incentive Program (Adopted). Measures that have not been adopted to date include: Measure 2 - Private fleet clean fuel vehicle purchases Measure 6 - Enhanced pedestrian connections to transit Measure 7 - Increased housing density near transit Measure 8 - Site design with transit orientation Measure 9 - Increased land-use mix Measure 10 - Education Program Measure 11 - Site design with pedestrian/bicycle orientation Measure 12 - Bicycle integration with transit and employment . _. ........,.__. ..01':..'"-'. ~.:__....-~""..1,._."'_,,_ .",.,..."...~_!,:-"._..""."'..~ .,...,-._.:.i;,~"._,. Measure 15 - Solar Pool Heating Measure 17 - Student Transit Subsidy Measure 19 - Municipal life-cycle purchases Measure 20 - Increased ~mployrnent density near transit 7. Has staff prioritized implementation of the CO2 Reduction Plan's measures? Yes No X Explain: A number of measures, as listed above, have been implemented, however staff is developing a process to ensure consensus and implementation among all departments, and a budget for that implementation. S. Have measurable goals been established for monitoring the pelfonnance of the Clty"s H street (Otay Lakes Road) Telecenter? - Yes No Not Applicable X Explain: Due 10 funding constraints, the Telecenter was closed on October 31, 199B. Prior to that time, penon ,..nce measures were developed for the telecenter and a significantmariteting campaign took place, which increased the user rates 10 record levels, however while there was a significant increase in user rates, it was not significant enough to cover the operating costs of1he Telecenter. 9. Have adequate staff resources been allocated for participation in the Regional Growth Management Program? Yes x No Explain: The Planning and Building Department has allocated staff to attend and participate in meetings and programs associated with SANDAG's Regional Growth Management Program. MISCELLANEOUS 10. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes No x Explain: The current threshold standard does not require modification; however, as growth continues to occur, increased vehicular emissions will also occur with increased traffic levels. This suggests that the link between traffic and air quality be examined further. The current threshold standard for air quality is a general reouire~nt to identify both develooment and f~~~~r~2'_~'~.IIF&._il:_.'JI;jlm1!1^ non-clevelopment related measures that have been implemented during the reporting period and to report whether the City is meeting Federal, State and local regulations and strategies. Staff will be analyzing the link between traffic threshold standards and air quality impac:ls and may bring forward recommendations next year which could result in proposed modifications. 11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes x No Explain: The following are suggested modifications to the current master planned community development review process that could result in more effective implementation of air quality policies. a. Last year, a Design Element Checklist (DEC) was developed by City staff to guide, and review Master Planned Community project designs. Modifications were also made to the required content of required Air Quality Improvement Plans. This content integrates the CO2 reduction policies; thus enabling the developer to self- assess whether (and to what degree) their project incorporates such policies. However, because the DEC is applied near the end, rather than the beginning of the planning process, the effectiveness of these guidelines may be limited as it relates to project design features. The DEC can be made more effective if required to be used early on in the design process, say during the General Development Plan (GDP) review phase. By establishing policies in the GDP, this will assure that early Sectional Planning Area (SPA) planning will be required to implement. b. Additionally, stronger emphasis on requiring air quality-related mitigation measures affecting project design should be incorporated in the GDP and SPA Plan Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) through EIR mitigation measures, and be assured implementation by mitigation monitoring efforts. Staff will be pursuing implementation of the above proposed modifications to the development review process. Attached for the Commission's information is an explanation of the current development review process. 12. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC. Yes No x Explain: (H:~M.O) .-... ----- '. THRF!':IiOLDS C"d:y.owide: JlIaintain LOS "e" or better as measured by observed average 'travel speed on all signafl'7..rl arterial segments, exceptthat during peak hours a LOS of "0" can occur for no more than two hours of1he day. West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections which do not meet1hes1andanl above, may continue to operate at 1heir current 1991 LOS, but shall not worsen. 1. Please fill in 1he blanks on 1his table for1he current TMP. ti SIreet (BayBIvd.-WDOdIawn Ave.) 2 C/C DC/D H Street l~ NB- Thin:! A...) EBIWB C/B C/B E tI SlJee! (SIN College Ent.- RlltgeJs Ave) EBiWB B I C B/C Clay llIices Rd. (E.Hst.- leI. Canyanflll.) 1llBISB C./C C/B 'Ii SlnllIl (Bay!llvd. - _ A...) 2 we (only) D D D D "ThirtlA\/!l. IG Street- """Ies SlnllIl) NBlSB 1 11 BIB BIB 1 11 FDlIIIIlA.... 15R-S4 EB 11Imps- H st.) NBISB B/BC" BIB C I C BIB 4 11>'-..; (l st. - S. CVCL) NBISB , 11 C/B C/B BIB 4 H SlnllIl (1-5 NB nomps- ihin:l Ave.) EBiWB C/CB" C IC C/C C/C E tI Slreel (SIN College Ent. - RlltgeJs Ave.) EBiWB C/C B/C B/C B/C Clay I.3kes Rd. (E. H st.- leI. Canyon Rd) NBlSB C/C C/B C/B C/B Paanarst. (1-5 NB nomps - BroacIway) EBiWB C/C C I C C I C C/C no" . "':':'''''':~k:'~'<<_W.~ E S\>eeI (!lay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave.) 2 WB(only) DC" DC" DO- DD" H SlJeel (Bay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave.) 2 WB(only) D D D 0 _st. (!lay Blvd. - Industrial Blvd.) 2 EB(only) 0 D D 0 E Slreel (1-5 NB l'lIl'llDS - ihin:l Ave.) EBiWB OCB/C C I C C I C C/C H Slreel (~5 NB 11Imps - Thin:! Ave.) EBiWB C/C C/B C/C C/C E. H Slreel (SW CoIIeDe Ent. - Rulpers Ave.) EBMIB "BC/C C I C B/C B/C 1. Street (lndustrial- Thin:! Ave) EBiWB B/CB" C/B BIB 1/1 Clay lakes Rd. (E. H st.- Tel. Canyon Rd.) NBiSB O/C C/B C/B C/B Palomar st. 1~5 NB l'lIl'llDS - BIDlllIway) EBiWB C/C C I C C I C "DC/C5 .. Rzsl hour and seconcl hour LOS. 1 Not studied beca_ previous LOS..... B or_. 2 These _.....4l. iIIe 81 Fteeway Interdlanges and are not sul>jecllD thresholcl standards. For infDnnaIion only. :3 East of \.all5. LOS D _ not exceeded for more than two hOUTS. West of ~, only H Slreel (Bay BIvd.-Woodlawn Ave.) ~ l.Ds 0 for more than two hDUTS. See nDle 2. 4 LOS imp""""""nt. 5 LOS redu:::lion. ------ 2. Should any street segmenfsbe added to the above list as a result of the current TMP? Yes_X_ No. Explain: a. Fill in the following table. FDlllthAvenue (SR-54EB Rmpslo.H"Sl) S8 B ICIC 1/B/C Please provide bJjfIf narrative responses to the following: ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS 3. Were any major streets, or other traffic improvemenfs constructed during the reporting period (97/98 fiscal year)? Yes_X_ No Explain: There was highway construction in conjunction with developments such as EastIake. McMillin, Rolling Hills Ranch, Sunbow, and Rancho Del Rey, in addition to city projects. The following is a listing of work constructed during the fiscal year. 1. Proctor Valley Road Extension - Mt. Miguel Road to Hunte Parkway. 2. Hunte Parkway - Proctor Valley Road to Otay Lakes Road. 3. Palomar Street - Oleander Street to Brandywine Street. 4. Medical Center Drive - Naples Street to Orange Avenue. 5. East oJ" Street - Paseo Del Rey to Paseo Ranchero. 6. Fourth Avenue - Orange Avenue to Palomar Street. 7. Intersection improvements on Otay Lakes Road and East oW Street. 8. Olympic Parkway- Hunte Parkway to the Olympic Training Center (under construction). ~ FR;+w4Y ENTRANCES I EXtTS 4. Use the following two tables to report the status of freewayentrance/exit studies and/or improvement projects. ~att;;i~~';""'~~//'~::::. f_~~_g;JiBljfrif.~liii~_' E Street None H Street None J Street None L Street None Palomar Avenue None Main Street CaltIans reports 1hat traffic signal warrants have been met. " E Orange Avenue and E Palomar Street Olay Valley Road None There is a project report dated August 4. 1994 to provide 4 EB lanes, 2 EB to NB on ramp lanes, 3 NB off ramp lanes, 2 WB to NB on ramp lanes, ramp metering and other misc. Improvements. City will award a contract during Spring of 1999 to provide 3 EB lanes, widen and square off the SB off ramp, remove SB to EB access from Halecrest Drive, install a traffic signal at Von's Shopping Center and provide landscaping in the median. Preliminary design and environmental assessment is underway fo interchange improvements and access to 1-805 at Palomar Street. SE Ramp Configuration was changed to provide 2 L T lanes. Bonita Road East H Street T ele. Canyon Road GROWTH IMPACTS 5. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain LOS levels? Yes_X No ---7- Explain: There were three locations that had improved Level of Service (LOS) and three locations that had reduced LOS. See table on page 1 of this report. 6. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth (without exceeding the LOS threshold) for both the 12 to 18 month and 5 to 7 year time frame? Yes_x_ No Explain: Yes for the short term; however, existing facilities will not be able to absorb future growth without additional highway improvements as identified in the various development EIR Studies. 3. Particular attention should be given to the following major arterial corridors identified as concerns in prior GMOC annual reports: p 4Th Avenue (SR~ EB Ramp to H Street) P H Street (l-5NB Ramp to Third Avenue) p Palomar Street (1-5 NB to Broadway) p Otay Lakes Road ( East H Street to Telegraph Canyon Road) p Bonita Road p E Street P East H Street P Telegraph Canyon Road p L Street 7. Will new facilities be required to accommodate forecasted growth? Yes_X_ No a. list the facilities b. How will these facilities be funded? Co Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding? Explain: Construction of Olympic Parkway from 1-805 freeway to Hunte Parkway. That portion from 1-805 freeway to Brandywine Avenue is to be constructed by the city using $5M in Federal Funds, S5M in STP Funds, and $1.14M in Sound Wall Funding for a total of $11.14M. The portion east of Brandywine Avenue to Paseo Ranchero is scheduled to be constructed by developers by December 2000 for a total of $34.8M. However, the city has a building permit limitation of 1414 EDUs in the event that developers cannot perform their portion of the work in a timely manner. 8. What is the Status of SR-125? Caltrans News Release dated Oct. 27, 1998 (copy attached) states that the discovery of endangered specie butterfly has prompted a Supplemental Draft EIRlS which should be available for public review in early 1999. At the Planning Commission Meeting of Dec.15, 1998, Mr. Kent Olc:;can I""\f f"".T\f C:~;"" ho #o.,......_L..~ "''''''_.1. C""..... "'....~ ..._ ,'~' L _ 9. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current level of service as Chula V"JSta's transportation demand increases? Yes_~ No Explain: The timely construction of SR-125 is a growth-related issue that would affect the maintenance of current LOS levels. If SR-125 is not constructed by 2005 and 1he projected level of Development is reached, some east-west arterial segments will exceed threshold standards. Those locations are the subject of a separate report. The level ofiunding in 1he lDlF account is also another growth-related issue in providing transportation facilities that will be Tle"'...ded in the future. The city is currently administrating a contract with a consultant 10 update file current lDJF Program. It 15 anticipated that a significant increase in the lDlF fees will be .required to construct all the needed "transportation facilities. Preliminaty estimate is for $23BM of improvements and a fee increase from $3998 per EDU 10 about $5200 per EDU. MAINTENANCE 1 D. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities? Yes No_X Explain: The maintenance program for streets and highways, traffic signals, street lights and Other highway related equipment is under funded at this time. For example, using a pave- ment management ranking of 50 (terrible conamon) to 1 DO (excellent condition), the City's current ranking is 79. To maintain this level of pavement quality would require an expenditure of $27.67M over the next five years. The current projected budget calls for only $7.0M for the five year period. To improve the ranking 10 81 would require an expenditure of $38.93M over a five year period. The city currently receives $2. 7M per year in gas tax funds for street maintenance. However, more than 90% of these funds are placed into the operating budget of the Operations Division of Public Works Department To provide a preventative maintenance program for traffic signals and a higher level of service for maintenance of street lights would require an additional annual expenditure of $150,000. 11. Are any major roadway construction/upgrade or maintenance projects to be undertaken pursuant to the current i-year and 5-year CIP? Yes_X_ No . ~y"l:;ain. ~~ riD lic::t fn1" '"'T'T"\1~ ?'N"\it::t.....;.~ ,.rhi....h ir- h,Qi,....... "....,.,j-:tt..o..{ ~u~'"'-=~h. .~ MISCELLANEOUS 12. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes No_X Explain: However, San Diego County, in conjunction with District 11 Caltrans, is attempting to establish 'Cooperation Among Cities and the County to Create a Region-Wide Standard for Determining Traffic Impacts in Environmental Reports", 13. Do you have any other relevant infonnation to communicate to 1heGMOC? Yes No_X Explain: Not at this time. 14. Are there any other suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes_X_ No . Explain: Continue to support the timely construction of SR-125. Prepared By: Ralph R. Leyva Title: Senior Civil Engineer Date: November 23,1998 H:\HOOE\ENGl~.RRl) IT(.:>>%%rf~;:?~:~~:~:::::?:?7:Jp;:rff@'40T%8:;5:~::~::;:m3Wj7g:;f~#17%;~ff:<<df6~~1"%q4f7:f'~WZ174ff'f~df'm'I~7%:W :'~.,.;.:.:;.:.04;4";-/:':-::_"'-:':'-:-c-/,M/-';-,_-;7)j-Y:(:'Y/0:f:,:W:/.;//,.;~//,;$<:;-,'~';:'::/)/,u,.lj;;.,,/:f./:;?/0;>;"'/'M::/:x"0,ft~U:PVf4::'::~J.<~/;f/;'::;:%~1):}::*';?':0.!~1::<~~IG"i';%:'0:';';;':;';;;::'::::;':;;;::"<;/:11*1 6t.~ ;',,: ~: f;~{ r ~ !,;,~, f:? ".;t ~t (;"f=:;~,!;;; ;'rt: f~_ ',-l;;!:, ,<:fi (~'1:' t: n: *",,- {; :;:.f. .!;(-.:.-.;;"'~:{?:; }p*i<h\::N(;#N::f%f$rf!?hMMVW*~ ;.-.:_:__".'h/:/"_'/..",/_ ._-:.,--,......//."."-,:::-/_(.J./<<'/.",/~~%;t-y%/,,/,//..<!-4_'7:"'':{:/_''':'''/;'-''''/~///' '''':'-'''-''''/'H1b:;~m%'~-'fz'~~''--~fi:.:<.:._.:.:<<.>>-<,,__7;$%>Z%8:z":"/,:~:,,,:<-,<:,,,z.;'?~ ~;..;:{i;;s/trY;:}'i.:)':;;:?f~;j;/!;:?27;~J::~V::i:~:;j~{1?~~;~$?1jf!%t?:,~:~?j;:Wti/~7;{f;3F%$j%~f:'r:1f]";~&~~Mi#'.1G44i-:~Ii*?~ ~;->>;,y&b/;&;;;7/.'/.;;'X{;X:?"hW/q-/#/;..iV.1'/.W/;d->>Jiw/Q.z,-;.v.(---'-Vh.Y-ff.-0-R//.07~..0"//R6":';-:~7,'X';";~;k?.t.<<.*$.&M/k.<<u/k;(%&"~;:2{~;ZX>r;kf;;;iUlli'h::%%f.m Ftff*%;~p;nrmT7i%W.<4ffR~~#JTffiEW%~r€8g%f~gf&WW~~g&4WJmf1f$%%;W&rrn.,,~ f;:: :-:' :.> 1;:;; :'~ ~:::::-:-:;:.-::.:;1fi.%*W!{j::~M;;;.@jgH)t0+&f@ ;;0j@;;(;~~;H~lliftj*{f3wf~=<fg!.--$Pd~f:tMbd{*,d)#&i%:;~~)gfif~ lli...f/4/~h;;;k",..m,..,...~-,,,.,-.xM;%,,/,:;{;;-;;;~;y-~;z//u,.'.~;:;;h~g;;;,;i%za;;:r;,.;;g:L-'f,~ Z:-:&;~'j}/.';;;";;-//uZffdY,0@,z;~>'<Jd'.%$h'~h;.~~->>;;;;~:w,-,>>#;:;'W";-'N,$i"M';.;.;,;..,,;~ ~ THRESHOLD 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. The table below provides a summary of the Development Impact Fee (DIF) collections and expenditures during the reporting period. The annual DIF report is included in its entirety as Attachment I. 1. Please fill in the table below. NlERlM PRE-SR 125 Ie SIGNAL- I12DISFD 13DISFD ,922/AaB 1B4/SFD 56DISFD ,15DISFD Apr 93 After SR125 finalized In process Unscheduled Unscheduled FY99 FYDD Unscheduled In process Administration $79 91,81 105,298 Civic Cntr. Expansion $527 612.49 3.508.811 Police Facility $235 273,63 (1.683.313 Corp. Yard Relocation $515 595.58 3.612,505 Ubraries $544 634.701 275,212 Fire Suppression Sys. $141 79,89 441,302 Geographic Info. Sys. $49 56,94 (132.338 Main Frame Computer $23 26,731 {30.1OB T ele. Sys. Upgrade $32 37.191 (67,248 Records Mgmnt Sys. $5 5.811 15.49 (8.439 *Single-Family Detached (SFD) housing unit shown. Fee I18rieS by type of residential unit, and for commercial and industIial development - see I18riouS fee schedules included in Attachment 1. *.. Fee is $13.00 per traffic trip. Trip rates for various land uses are reflec:ted in Attachment 2. Please provide ~ narrative responses to the following: 2. Were anyDIF updates completed or are any DIF updates in process during the reporting period? If yes, please explain Yes --X- No Explain: An update of the Telegraph Canyon Drainage DIF was completed in April, 199B, resulting in an increase from $3,922 to $4,579 per acre. An update of the Telegraph Canyon Gravity Sewer DIF was completed in September, 199B, resufling in an increase from $184 to $219 per single family dwelling. DIF Updates for Transportation. Traffic Signal, Telegraph Canyon Pump Sewer, and Public Facilities are in process and expecledto be completed this fiscal year. (See Attachment 3 fora more detailed status of the Public Facilities D1F Update) 3. Has a standard procedure been adopted to evaluate the accuracy ofprojections, facility costs, and other assumptions, including a requirement for the 'inclusion of standard 5-year growth projections in each of the DIF updates? Yes No X Explain: No, a standard procedure per se has not been adopted to evaluate 1I1e accuracy of projections, facility costs, etc. However, it is 1I1e standard prac:lice during any review to revisit all projections and assumptions given 1I1e fact 11181 more current il.fulI llation is available. All DIF updates now are driven by a recently completed 32 year growth projeclion, which is segregated into five year increments. 4. In reference to operations and capital improvements, Is the City addressing the impacts of growUt? Yes X No Explain: The City's capital improvement needs 11181 are related to growth are analyzed and determined when the various Development Impact Fees are created. A capital improvement plan is devised in each DIF based on the capital improvement projects needed to provide the infrastructure necessary to retain servicesJfacilities at the level set by the applicable threshold. The costs for the needed projects are then determined and spread over the amount of planned development to set the individual DIF fees. The operational impacts of growth on the City, are analyzed by using a financial model to evaluate whether the projected revenue stream from the development (e.g~ sales tax, property tax, etc.) is sufficient to meet estimated operating expenditures for the development These fiscal impact analyses have been performed on developments such as Eastlake, Rancho del Rey and the Otay Ranch. In all cases the projected revenues were more than sufficient to meet projected operating expenses on an ongoing basis. This model will continue to be employed to review future development at the SPA level. As such, the operational impacts associated with growth should be sufficiently mitigated. MISCELLANEOUS 5. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes No X Explain: Not at this time. 6. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes No X Explain: Not at this time. 7. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC. Yes No X Explain: Not at this time. Prepared by Robert W. Powell TrtIe: Director of Finance Date: November 23, 1998 (H:Ishared\gmoc\question\98fiscal.q) THRF~IiOLD STANDARD Population ratio: SOD square feet (gross) of library facility adequately equipped and staffed per 1,000 population. 1. Please fill in the blanks on this table. FY 1995-9& 154.656 102,000 660 FY1996-97 156.041 102,000 654 FY 1997-98 163,417" 102,000 624 18 Month ,Projection 172.194- 102.000 589 112131199) 7 Year Projection 205.6SO- 122,000' 593 (2005) Buildout Projection 152,000" .567 (CIUa VISta General Plan) 268.000 .Planning Division EslimaIe (thru 6130198) -Plaming Department estimate based on developer's 12-18 month forecasl ~P1anning Department estimate based on SANDAG's modified Series 8 & City of Chula Vista Public Facilities DIF update forecasts. 1 Assumes construction of the first 30,000 square foot east side regional library and closure of the 10,000 square foot Easll..ake Ubrary, per the 1998 Ubrary Master Plan 'Assumes construction of the second 30,000 square foot east side regional library, per the 1998 Ubrary Master Plan Please provide brief narrative responses to the following: 2. Are libraries "adequately equipped"? Yes x No As of September 1998, the Ubrary owns 449.946 items (books, audio-visual materials, etc.). This translates into 2.8 items per capita, which is very ciose to the General Plan goal of 3 items per capita. explain: a. Have resources been provided to Improve the library technology i..fI_b ..cture for the Civic Center and EastLake Ubraries? Access 10 technology at both Civic Center and EastLake Ubraries has improved dramatically over the past year. Civic Center has recently added three computer worl<stations for children's educational software (thanks 10 a gift from the Friends of the Ubrary) and three fee-based worl<stations (similar 10 South Chula Vista) 10 access word processing and spreadsheets. EastLake High School added almost twenty workstations 10 the library this year providing more than adequate access 10 the Internet, educational software and office applications. b, Have resources been identified to upgrade the Ubraries Mintegrated local computer system" (Inlex)? The City's FY 1998-99 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) allocates $644,500 to upgrade the Ubrary's inlegratedlocal system. A requestfor proposal should be released tly1he first of1he year, with full implementation of anew online system ilxpected by the fall of 1999. 3. Are libraries -adequatelystalfed"? Yes x No .Explain: The number of budgeted positions for the Ubrary does provide for adequate stalling at this time. However, it does not allow for the expansion of hours at South Chula VISta Ubrary as frequently requested by the public (South ChuIa VISta is open 48 hours per week compared 10 64 hours per week at Civic CenterUbrary). Also, 1I1e strong regional economy, along with a decrease in flbrary -school graduates In California, has made it dillicultto fill permanent librarian posltions....and almost impossible 10 fill hourly librarian positions. GROW11fIMPACTS 4. Has growth during 1I1e reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain service levels? Yes No X explain: During this reporting period, growth has not yet negatively affected the ability of the Ubrary 10 maintain service levels. 5. Are current facilities able to serve forecasted growth for both 1I1e 12 to 18 month and 5 to 7 year time frame? Yes No X Explain: The current facifilies (102.000 square feet) will meet the Growth Management Threshold standard of SOD square feet of library per 1000 population until !he year 2005 (!he 7 year projeclion). At thaltime the gross square feet of library facilities per 1000 will fall 10 496 square feet '~&P~~"'.1~.!l~ff$f.~~.lft1ff:frj~rtrtf:lIfllt_'.m~f"~Jfffg~:~w~ r,../..,. ,'... ..~::.:f..wg;~d~~*:::~::::::::~:::~.ffi1t.W'A~L:::.x<:i?:h?~~~ifjf~X:::.N,,:.fZWtt.::~:-:.:.:.:::.:.:.::::,.:.::~:.:::.:.:.~:.:$-"r..~{t:.;.::::;i~::t:~~@WJ.::-~<<~::-~'~,{~,,:-:,x,x,:,~{,X',:{::::::':;~:::' 6. Will new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth? Yes x No The 1998 Ubrary Master Plan calls for the construction of a full service regional library (approximately 30,000 square feet) east of 1-805 as soon as possible. The plan recommends that this first branch should be buitt in the Rancho Del Rey area Also, the plan concludes that 1he EastLake Ubrary is inadequate due to poor visibility, inadequate parking, and inadequate public access due to the lack of daytime hours. Therefore, once a full service regional library is constructed, the plan recommends closing the EastLake Ubrary, In addition, population projections demonstrate that access 10 library services by east-side residenls is already marginal and will decrease even further as population in the eastern area of the City grows. By 2005, about half of the City's population will reside on the east side of 1-805. Therefore, from a practical geographic perspective, a 10,000 square foot joint-use facility at EastLake High School, with poor visibUity and poor access, will clearly not be sufficient 10 serve all these -residents . Finally, the Master Plan recorrunends that a second facility of similar size will be required east of 1-805 by 2015. Since the Dtay Ranch's Eastern Urban Center is intended 10 be a regional commercial and ~ntertainment district for the community, the plan recommends evaluating it first as a potential site for the final branch library. Explain: a. Are there sites availableior1he needed facilities? The 1998 Ubrary Master Plan recommends that the first regional library constructed east of 1-805 be located on City owned property at East H Street and Paseo Ranchero in Rancho Del Rey. A site for the fourth and final branch rJbrary has not been selected. b. How will these facllilies be funded? The 1998 Ubrary Master estimates that a 30,000 square foot library on City owned land will cost $9,450,000 (in 1998 dollars) 10 construc:l. The cost of1he opening day collection is estimated to be $2,476,000. The lolal cost is therefore estimated to be $12 million. Operating costs are estimated (in 1998 dollars) to be $12 million annually. This estimate would insure adequate staffing as called for by the GMOC threshold These estimates are consistent with the actual costs of constructing and operating the South Chula VISta Ubrary The projects are to be funded with Public Facility Development Impact Fees. However, should Proposition L, the one quarter of a cent sales tax measure for local libraries, pass on March 2, 1999, the City will use the sales tax money 10 fast track construction of the Rancho Del Rey Ubrary. Development Impact Fees will then be used to pay back the General Fund forthe construction, freeing General Fund monies for operation of the new branch. c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding? Yes, as indicated above in Question 6b. 7. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting the provision of library services? Yes No x explain: No other issues are foreseen at this time. MAlNTENANCElUPGRADE OF EQUIPMENT & COIl "CTI0NS B. Has adequate funding been identified and/or secun>d for necessaTy maintenance and/or upgrade of equlplllllnt and collections? Yes x No explain: The answer is actually "yes' and 'no'. EauiDment As indicated in Question 2b, $640,000 has been appropriated in the Clty's FY 1998-99 CIP for an upgrade of the Ubrary's local automated system. This will insure that Chula Vistans have a state of the art library automation system by fall 1999. CoI/ed/ons This summerthe governor signed a bill increasing the state's funding of the Public Ubrary Fund (PLF). When the CIty appropriates this increase, in January 1999, the Ubrary's book budget will see an $80,000 increase. This represents a 45% increase in the General Fund Ubrary materials budget This fiscal yearthe Ubrary plans . to use this extra money to "beef-up" the colleclions at Civic Center and Eastlake Ubraries. However, in FY 1999-2000, the City's General Fund will need to 'pick-up" an estimated $250,000 in ongoing malerials msIs at South ChuJa VIsla Ubrarywhich 1118 a.urenIly being paid for from the CIP. Next fiscal year, the library will use the increased PLF funding to Dlfset this cost, but we will still need $150,000-$170,000 in new .dollars to maintain the collections at that branch. In 1997, the Friends of the Ubrary and the Ubrary Department estabI'1Shed an endowment fund for books and other library materials at the San Diego (Comnwnlty) Foundation. Interest from the fund will be used to support the materials budget when the fund reaches $25Q,Ooo or in the year 2006 (which ever comes sooner). The endowment currenUy has about $60,000. The Ubrary is planning a major fund raising drive in 1999. If approved by twl>-thirds of the voters, the one quarter of a cent sales tax for libraries (on the March 2, 1999 ballot) will provide the Chula V1SIa Public Ubrary with an additional $21 million overthe five year life span of the sales tax. A considerabie amount of that money will be used for additional library materials. a. An> then> any major maintenance/upgrades to be undertaken over the 1~ and S-year time frarMs? . Yes X No explain: Should Proposition L pass, the Ubrary also intends to renovate and upgrade the Civic Center Ubrary. The questions below are follow-ups 10 Ihe GMOC's recommendations from last year. UBRARY MASTER PLAN UPDATE 9. Has the Ubrary Mester Plan been updated? Yes X No Explain: Yas, the Ubrary Master Plan was revised in 1998 with the assistance of the consultant firm of DMG/Maximus. Key recommendations from that report are outlined above. The City Council is being asked to accept the 1998 Ubrary Master Plan in mid-November. ~.i"'f~~fl:II~~" ":';>>~'. m.ft~\ilij\if*f.~ltlr.~'Jf.'i~tfi.;'~ ~x:::::.:::;:::,;:t::~:~"'.f~ff.ifnt:..::::~:::~wm:.:::;. .x: "..,~ ~::tf:~x:$'~~;::::~:~,::::{:~.:::.:.::~::;:w.:.:)i0.p'.J:::~:~~~fi0f.@:::::~~:::*Af.qJz' MISCELLANEOUS 1 D. Does the CUfT8nt threshold standard need any modification? Yes x No Explain: The Ubrary's Growth Management Threshold of: SOD square feet of library facility adequately and stalled per 1,000 population should be modified to: 600 square feet of library facility adequately and stalled per 1,000 population. This modification will make the GMOC threshold consistent with the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee standard for libraries (which is .6 square feet per capita) and with the space recommendation of the 1998 Ubrary Master Plan. 11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management OvllfSight Commission to recommend 10 the City Council? Yes No X Explain: None at this time. 12. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate to the GMOC? Yes X No Explain: Over the years, the Growth Management Oversight Commission has asked how new technology will impact library space needs in the future. The 1998 Ubrary Master Plan reviews this issue in detail. The consultants analyzed library usage of Siticon Valley city libraries from 1991-1996, These libraries were chosen for examination because they are Jocated in an area of high household income, high educational atlainment, and significant access to personal compuIers in the home, business, and educational environments. WIthin these communities, the data shows the public rlbraries continued to see increases in reference use (up 5.4% during the years studied) and in circulalion (up 9.6%). Even in Silicon Valley. people are still using their public library to meet their information needs. However, what patrons actually use in the library may be changing. The computer terminal or personal computer is rapidly becoming the search tool most used in libraries. Computers now provide access not only to the local catalog, but to thousands of databases, ful~text periodicals and newspapers, catalogs and indices from around the world....and of course....the Internet The resutt is that people are spending more time at the computer workstation while conducting their searches. This change means that more workstations are needed to accommodate the way people look for information. These workstations require space. On the other hand, some reductions in space are possible, especially in the reference areas where a set of encyclopedias can be reduced to a single CD-ROM. Also, most periodicals are no longer bound and sheived because they can be retrieved easily. quickly, and cheaply online. The Master Plan consuttants estimate that the number of volumes housed in a library might be reduced by five to eight percent due to this technological change. However, at the same time there is a need for increased space for computer workstations to access all this online information. This resutt of this dichotomy may actually be an increase in overall library space needs. Prepared by: David J. Palmer TItle: Ubrary and Recreation Director Date: October 23,1998 (lLlllII.....4..,.....G' ,R'lll ~) TI-J~"'!';HOLD: 1. Storm water flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. 2. The GMOC shall annually review the performance of the 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. Have storm water flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at any time during this reporting period? Yes . No x Explain: 3. b. c. Where did this occur? N/A Why did it occur? N/A What has been,or is being done to correct the situation? N/A GROWTH IMPACTS 2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the current ability to maintain service levels? Yes No x Explain: 3. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18 month and 5 to 7 year time frame? Yes x No Explain: Current facilities are adequate for projected growth within the next 12 to 18 months. New facilities within the Telegraph Canyon basin should be completed within the next 5 to 7 years. Facilities in all other basins are adequate for the 5 to 7 years time frame. 4. Will any new facilities will be required to accommodate this forecasted growth? Yes x No Explain: The completion of the planned drainage improvement between First Avenue and Third Avenue to the Telegraph Canyon channel (Project No. DR-118) will adequately handle the projected growth. Also, the drainage studies of development draining into the Poggi drainage basin has indicated no appreciable increase in the overall runoff due to the construction of detention basins. A long range (longer than 10 years) project which may be needed is the construction of an additional conduit under Interstate 5 atthe westem end of the Telegraph Canyon channel. Future flow monitoring and drainage studies will determine the need for this facility. a. Are there sites available for the needed facilities? Yes b. How will these facilities be funded? The Development Impact Fee will be utilized for the channel improvements between First Avenue and Third Avenue. Funding forthe conduit under Interstate 5 has not been determined yet pending future studies. c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism{s) in place to provide this funding? Yes 5. 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? Yes x No Explain: The new policy imposed by the environmental agencies regulating wetlands has dramatically impacted the overall cost of maintaining the major storm drain facilities. Storm drain channels and detention basins tend to become environmentally sensitive, and require mitigation in order to clean and maintain. Natural channels are also difficult to maintain and/or meet all the regulatory agencies requirements. New drainage facilities are now being built with the environmental issues in mind. A Long term maintenance planning and the establishment of a funding mechanism to address these environmental issues must be addressed in the future. Environmental regulatory agencies also need to recognize that the primary function of a storm channel is to convey water safely and must be maintained in order to do so. PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATION 6. Has a list of unfunded drainage improvements needed in western Chula Vista been developed? If yes, Please provide a list of projects in order of importance. Yes x No Explain: Please see attached list a. Estimated cost of the above improvements. b. How the above improvements are likely to be funded. The improvement of the drainage facilities is most likely be funded from the Storm Drain Fee, or CDBG, or the Gas Tax fund. 7. Does Proposition 218 negatively impact the construction of needed drainage improvements in western Chula Vista? Yes x No Explain: Impact from Proposition 218 may effect the City's ability to increase the drainage fee which is collected City wide. Any changes to the existing fee may need to be voted on in a general election. MAINTENANCE 8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities? Yes x No Explain: The maintenance of drainage facilities is generally supported from the General Fund and to a lesser extent by Gas Tax and Storm Drain Fee funds. 9. Are there any major maintenance projects to be undertaken pursuant10 the current 1-year and 5-year CIP? If yes, Please provide a list of projects jn order of importance. Yes x No The following drainage projects are in the current 1-year and 5-year plan: , 1. Telegraph Canyon Drainage Basin 2. Drainage Basin east of Second Ave. north of H St 3. Reinstra Park Drainage Channel 4. Drainage Improvement- Tobias Dr. to Glenhaven Way 5. Storm Drain Replacement - Hilltop Dr JSDGE easement 6. Storm Drain Uning - Fifth Ave from Westby St to Telegraph Canyon Channel 7. Drainage Improvement- G St, Second Ave. west of Del Mar Av. 8. Emerson St west of Fourth Ave. 9. Hilltop Dr., I St to Whitney/Hilltop Dr. H St to Shasta 10. Emerson St, Elm Ave. To west of Third Ave. 11. Drainage improvements - North Broadway Basin 12. Judson Basin, Hilltop Dr. - Tobias Dr. 13. Oxford St., First Ave. to Second Ave. ,'.- MISCELLANEOUS 10. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes No x 11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the CitY Council? Yes No x 12. Do you have any other relevant information the Department desires to communicate to the GMOC. Yes No x Prepared by: Muna Cuthbert TrtIe: Civil Engineer Date: 10/22/98 H~DRAJN.Q TH~F~HOLD: 1. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. 2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan Sewer Authority with a 12 to 18 month t1evelopment forecast and request confirmation that the projection is within the City's purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth, or the City Engineering Department staff shall gather the necessary data. The information provided to the GMOC shall include the following: a. Amount of current eapacity now used or committed. b. Ability of affected facilities 10 absorb forecasted growth. . c. Evaiuationoffunding 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.PJease fill in the blanks on this table. Average 10.870 Row (MGD) Capacity 19.2 11.329 11.631 11.820 12.918 14.919 19.234 19.2 19.34 19.843* 19.843 19.843 19.843 *Inc:rease in capacity reflected in new agreement with City of San Diego Please provide brief narrative responses to the following: 2. Have sewage flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at any time during this reporting period? No GROWTH IMPACTS 3. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain service levels? No 4. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18 month and 5 to 7 year time frame? Current sewerage facilities should be able to handle the growth anticipated during the 12 to 18 month period. However, due to the development expected to occur in the eastern areas of Chula Vista in the next 5 to 7 year time frame (such as Otay Ranch and Rolling Hills Ranch), it is anticipated that several major trunk sewer lines will need to be constructed or upgraded during that time period. 5. What new facilities will be required to accommodate the forecast growth? The following new major sewer facilities may be required within the next 5 to 7 year time frame: A. Upgrade to the Telegraph Canyon Interceptor Sewer (estimated cost $1.740 million without pumped flows, $5.890 million with pumped flows) B. The Salt Creek Trunk Sewer upstream reach (estimated cost $9 million) C. The Poggi Canyon Interceptor Sewer (estimated cost $6.133 million) D. Salt Creek Trunk Sewer downstream reach parallel to the Otay River (estimated cost $11million) a. Are there sites available for the needed facilities? Yes b. How will these facilities be funded? Development Impact Fees (DIFs), which are paid by developers at the time when building permits are acquired. have been established to fund construction of the upstream reach of Salt Creek Sewer, improvements to the Telegraph Canyon sewer and the Poggi Canyon Sewer. Since the downstream reach of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer is a regional facility, funding for this portion will come from sewer capacity charges paid by developers c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding? Yes, see response to 5b above. 6. Has the City reached an agreement with the City of San Diego regarding the provision of adequate treatment capacity to meet the buildout needs of the City's General Plan? A new wastewater disposal agreement between the City of San Diego and Chula Vista was approved on April 21, 1998. This agreement increased the existing capacity allocated to Chula Vista to 19.843 Million Gallons per day (MGD). The increase in capacity is the result of expanded capacity in the Metro system. The new agreement which runs through 2050 would allocate new capacity in the Metro system proportionally to the participating agencies. Based on estimated population figures the City of Chula Vista has sufficient capacity for the projected build out of the City. PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATION 7. Have any of the projects on the list of unfunded sewer improvements needed in western Chula Vista been completed? The initial work for the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer has begun and authorization to solicit proposals for the initial environmental and Engineering work was approved by Council in September,199B. The Salt Creek Trunk Sewer includes projects listed previously as 58 and 50 (58 consists of the upstream portion through new developments and 50 consists of the downstream reach parallel to the Otay River). b. What is the estimated cost of the above improvements? The estimated cost for the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer is approximately $20 million, $9 million for the upstream reach (58) and $11 million for the downstream reach (50). c. How are fhe above improvements likely to be funded? The funding for the downstream portion of the project will be provided from the City's Trunk Sewer Capital.ReserveFund (sewer capacity fees). There is currently sufficient funds available for this portion of the project. The upstream portion will be funded through the current development impact fee for the developments within the Salt Creek sewer basin. A funding mechanism may be needed to provide capital for the initial construction of this portion of the project. 8. Will Proposition 218 impact construction of needed sewer improvements in western Chula VISta? No MAINTENANCE 9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities? The City allocates approximately $300,000 each year for the repair andl or reconstruction of sewer mains at various locations as part of the Sewer Rehabilitation Program. This program is funded through a charge of $0.70 per month per single family home which is billed with the sewer service charges. The remainder of operation and maintenance costs, including salary and equipment costs, are paid from the sewer service charges assessed to residents or property owners connected to the sewer. 10. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the current 1-year and 5-year CIP? The Sewer Rehabilitation Program indicated above is an annual program included in the current CIP. f~'1!%t.;\!"~......~;:J.m~;.r ....... ................ .."'._.~"".WL w~.w."."~;.;;;%"II'%".C7$2%;;.If,f,'.'%W*l@;;,."liW)!. ''''.;'4' ,:([iff&!-". fjl!r'f-''''dm.. Wi .;.: '~;Serg0.,:~~ ,~~~.;;W"@Y~ " At..MIJI,....ww. MISCELLANEOUS 11. Does the current Sewer Threshold Standard need any modification? No 12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Not at this time. 13. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC? All issues are addressed above. Prepared by: Dennis Davies TrIIe: Civil Engineer Date: 10/22/98 I<\StWIEIl\GMOC~WPO ( _;~,:"f =;.: I;s:'! ~~~.Ii ."~1 :j i j - ~~t>!ir~; 7 ']:}:!l~).7t?r:r;~tjJ'9 ~~~Ifi-; fJ ,1:) c)7IJ~~,-r~?E)~\/ ..!~,;. r'/l~~,7r{)J~-f~\1.!iE:'_~,,~~~',~. r"., "/1 :,~i ~~:~~ji ----- . --~._.__._-~.- ..-------.- _~..-;i 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 eontinuing 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 eommitted. 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. 4% otal (MG) 7.705. 8.574. 1000/. - -_.-. -. __-.v - - _. --. - ~ , ;- p - 'j '." .;-. , -::- ;" ~ ' ,. ~. - - - ---- - - ~ - - . - - . . The reason ior 1he supply i10w capacity reduction of 2.6 MOO in 1997 was that a temporary connection 10 SDCWA Pipeline No.3 was TElrnoved from service when SDCWA Pipeline No.4 was constructed and placed into operation. Please provide brief responses to the following questions. GROWTH IMPACTS 2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the current ability to maintain service levels? Yes No x Explain: Through the process described below, Otay Water District (OWD) has anticipated growth, effectively managed the addition of new facilities and maintained service levels. . The projected water demand in Chula Vista is expected to continue to increase at a moderate rate (approximately 3% per year, long term) with new meter sets averaging about 1.500 per year for the next five years. The current short-term growth rate within the City of Chula Vista is expected to be 4.5% per year. The meter sales, between July 1997 and June 1998 (FY 97-98) were 910, versus the prior 12 months' sales of 1,029 and current meter sales are running ahead of the projected 1,400 for FY 98-99, at a rate that may reach 1,600 for the year. The OWO Board of Directors adopted a Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) which uses the population growth projections from SANDAG's most recent forecast, designated as the Interim Series 8 Regional Growth Forecast, Water and Sewer Agencies and input from the City of Chula Vista and developers. It has incorporated ......'IGMOC 1i98 n. .._.. 1-1S-99.doc - - --. - - - ~ - ~ - - - --- --- - - -- ~ - - ::-. ',': ,~~~ ~ -....... ':-,' ~ .: . - - - - the concepts of water storage and supply from neighboring water agencies to meet operational and emergency water supply. owe worked closely with the City of Chula Vista staff in finalizing the WRMP and incorporated the Otay Ranch development activities. The process of planning followed by the owe is to use the Master Plan as a guide and to revisit each year the best altematives for providing a reliable water supply. The Master Plan is also revised every five years through an in-depth review. OWD is in the initial stage of preparing a new master plan with completion planned in two years. Although SANDAG's forecast is for a ti% growth rate, OWD continues to project a 3% long-term growth .rate based on the historical trends and ongoing communication with developers. 3. Docum!nt facilities have the :ability to absorb forecasted!jrowth for both the 12 to 18 month time frames? Yes x No Explain: Reaional Water Suoplv The short term and long term water supply is expected to meet the projected water demand in Chula VISta without any restrictions for the following reasons. The above normal rain and snow Califomia received last year, in conjunction with the most recent precipitation events in the State, have resulted in many reservoirs, both State-wide and local reservoirs, to be at normal levels. Therefore, the water outlook for the next 12-18 months is that there will be no restriction on the water supply. The long-range prognosis is also very favorable in that the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) adopted and has proceeded to implement an lntegrated Resources Plan, which includes six implementation policies. These policies are as follows: . Reliability: Agencies will have full capability to meet full service demands at retail lev- els at all times. . Balance: Maintaining a resource mix, which balances investments and additional improved imported supply capability in local resource development and conservation. . Competitiveness: Provide affordable water service and maintain competitiveness by assuring that the effective rate for MWD will be less than $500 per acre-foot in the year 2005. A.."GUOC 1998 01 __... 1-,5-99.ooc ~ - -------- --.-.- ~ , :- ~ ,. ,- - :- . ~ J , . '-_ - - ~ -- . Eastside Reservoir: Commitment to complete the 800,000 acre-feet Eastside Reservoir Project with water deliveries to storage commencing in the year 2000. . Colorado River AQueduct: Assure that the Colorado River Aqueduct will be operated at capacity for the benefit of all member agencies. . Adaotabilitv: Resource development and 1inancial strategy to provide acceptable water quality and 1inancial security. Local Water Supplv As part of OWD's long term plans to assure the reliability of water supply, we are developing an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). The OWD's IRP has established a goal of obtaining 40% of its water supply locally when San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) aqueducts are out of service and 70% from local reservoir storage when SDCWA aqueducts are available to replenish the local reservoirs. The IRP considers development of wells, recharge, desalination, local treatment plants, local storage, recycled water, raw water and conservation. The District purchased a well from McMillin Companies, with a known production level of 315 gpm. The water from this well requires extensive treatment, but results in a ten-yearretum of $12 million dollars. This benetitis primarily achieved by avoiding construction of covered reservoirs. This will be the 1irst well the District will integrate into its water system. The overall outlook for water supply in the State, County and City of Chula Vista for the next 12-18 months is excellent. The long-term picture is also very positive and capable of supporting Chula Vista's long term growth. This outlook has been achieved through the cooperative efforts of all agencies involved in providing water to Chula VISta and particularly the coordination efforts of Chula VISta, Otay Water District, Sweetwater Authority and the City of San Diego. The OWD is actively developing local water through the sharing of treatment plant and storage capacity with other local agencies such as Sweetwater Authority, Helix Water District and the City of San Diego. MWD, SDCWA and OWD are addressing the availability of water in an emergency. OWD's need for a ten-day water supply during a SDCWA shutdown has been fully addressed in OWD's Water Resources Master Plan. The OWD is currently able to meet this requiremerrt through its own storage and existing interconnections with other agencies. MWD, SDCWA and OWD all have programs to continue to meet or exceed the emergency water needs qf the region into the foreseeable future. The OWD executed a 50-year renewable agreement with the City of San Diego to provide 10 MGD of immediate capacity and an additional 1 0 MGD capacity in the Mure from the Lower Otay Reservoir Water Treatment Plant. A...'\GMOC,_,.., .";'L 1-15-99.dClc --- - :; ~ r ., _ ,;,:'. : :- : It ,: 1,~ . - - - - ~ - -- - - - - The OWO, in concert with the City of Chula Vista, continues to expand the use of recycled water. Chula Vista and OWO are both evaluating opportunities to create more recycled water and the City of San Diego has begun construction of its South Bay Treatment Plant planned for completion in the year 2001. Recycled water from this facility will be available for distribution by OWO. The District continues to encourage water conservation through a school education program and penalties on excessive use of water for irrigation. The education program includes school site garden grants, treatment plant tours and classroom programs for elementary schools, as well as science fair participation ior elementary and junior high school levels. There is water quality testing certification availability for the senior high levels and a video lending library for all school grade levels. The OWO school education program has been enthusiastically received by the school community and many schools in Chula Vista are currently participating. 4. Will any new facilities be :required to accommodate the forecast growth for the 12-18.monthtimeframe? Yes X No;forthe5-7year time frame? Yes X No Explain: 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? The OWO WRMP defines and desCribes the new water facilities that are required to a=mrnodate the forecasted growth within the OWO. 'As major development plans are formulated and proceed through the City of Chula Vista approval process, the OWO requires the developer to prepare a Subarea Master Plan (SAMP) for the specific deveiopment project. This SAMP is a document, which 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. Those facilities identified as OWO Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects are funded by the OWD through collection of water meter capacity fees established to fund the WRMP facilities. All other required water facilities are funded by the developer for service to their project. Examples of this process are the planned Otay Ranch SPA One, Eastlake Trails, Salt Creek Ranch and Sunbow II development projects. The SAMP establishes typical major water transmission main facilities generally aligned within the roadway alignments of the developments. A significant A."\GMOC 19913 no .~.. 1.1s.-99.doc - ~ - j. ---- :;- -. - -. ---.,.-.- ;., '. .:;~" , ..: ... ~ . storage facility is the planned 8.0 MG 711 Reservoir project to be located within the OWO Use Area property. The reservoir is planned to be in operation within 24 months. The developers entered into an agreement with OWO that insures a water meter capacity fee income stream to construct the needed reservoir. Another major capital investment effort currently under construction is the .Central Area/Otay Mesa Intertie System. These improvements will allow for water delivery from the Lower Otay Water Treatment Plant into OWO's Central Area/Otay Mesa Systems. This system will be operational within two years. 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: Two potential areas that could affec:tgrowth are the Arizona Water Banking and the Bay-Delta. The State of Arizona has implemented a Water Bank to store much of their unused allotment (260,000 acre-feet) of Colorado .River water in aquifers. This action limits California utilizing Arizona's unused allotment and MWD will have to find alternative sources. The MWO believes that Arizona's Water Bank will not have an immediate impact .on Californians for at least two or three years. --..: The Bay-Delta issue on the other hand is headed towards a solution. California and federal cooperation formalized a CaIFed Bay-Delta Program with signing of a Framewor1< Agreement The Framewor1< Agreement projected that the state and federal agencies would wor1< together in the following areas of Bay-Delta Estuary Management . Water quality standards formulation, . Coordination of State Water Project and Central Valley Project operations with regulatory requirements and · Long-term solutions to problems in the Bay-Delta Estuary. State - federal process is to develop long-term solutions to problems in the Bay-Delta Estuary related to fish and wildlife, water supply reliability, natural disasters and water supply. The intent is to develop a comprehensive and balanced plan, which addresses all of the resource problems. A positive component is the recent agreement between Imperial Irrigation District (110) and SDCWA to provide 200,000 AF/year at 20,000 AF/year increments over ten years to San Diego County. This agreement assures San Diego a reliable water supply. A:\GWOC 1_ n. ~_... 1-1S.99.doc - - -- - - - . - ; -, , . :. ~ ''': -" - . - - - - . -- - MAINTENANCE 6. Is adequate funding secured andlor identified for maintenance of existing facilities? Yes X No Explain: The OWO has an established renewal and replacement fund within the Operating Budget. There is adequate funding secured and identified for maintenance of existing facilities. 7. Are there any new major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the current 1-year and !).year CIP? Yes X No ... , Explain: The following list is the major mainteQancelupgrade CIP projects within the current 5-year CIP; CIP Number Trtle 038 PL - J.D. 3 UpgradelReplacements 12-inch 043 Cathodic Protection Program (Annual) 059 Jamacha Road Flume Connection with Helix Water District 072 PL - Dictionary Hill Improvements 077 Reservoir Interior and Exterior Paintina Program (Annual) 083 PS - Roll Pump Stations Replacement 098 Res. - I.D. 1 (1004-2) 1.5 MG and Disinfection Facility 101 Service Replacement Program (Annual) 102 Valve Replacement Proaram (Annual) 149 Res. - PatziQ UninQ and Covering I 172 PS - 9-3 Rehabilitation I 226 PS-Buena Vista Upgrades 250 Telemetering System Installation 304 Seismic Upgrade of District Facilities W270 District Facilities Pavement Proaram (Annual) A."IGMOC 19980- "_0; 1-15-99.doc - - - - - --- - - - , .::- I " '~~ . -:- ~ < - - ~ _ ; , . - -- - ~ - RECYCLED WATER 8. Please updateffill in the table below. The reduction in demand for recycled water was a direct result of the significant rainfall received in 1998, which impacted irrigation demand sales. .9. Please !live 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 ofwater c. Wllling customers d. Distribution lines e.. Other The total dissolved salt content, typically ranging between 900 and 1,000 TOS of the water supply, is the primary factor potentially impacting the cost of recyded water production to meet regulatory requirements on limitations of salt loading within reuse areas. Currently, salination levels are well below regulatory levels and do not impact water quality requirements, nor increase the cost for the production of salt removal. The landscape planting materials, however, need to be selected to ensure that those that are highly sensitive to salt levels are not integrated into the landscape planting scheme. The OWO currently markets recyded water at 85% of the potable water rate. This pricing level has increased user willingness and acceptance of the OWO mandatory recyded water use ordinance. The OWO receives little customer resistance to use recycled water. When resistance is encountered, it is typically due to concerns of increased capital cost to install the necessary distribution pipelines to the reuse ,,:\GIAOC'B5JB no __... 1-15-9Sl..doc - -. -. - -- - - - . . - - - :-:-' r ; '/\ ~ .;; ~ :. ~ , . t: ~ . -- areas. The transmission mains, storage and pumping capital facilities are funded by OWO through collection of the water meter capacity fees. 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 10 accommodate the continuing growth ofihe 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 City of Chula Vista continue to support and encourage 1heuse of recycled water. Also, to encourage the joint use of City and OWO facilities for mutual benefit. To encourage the City of San Diego Wastewater Department to expand the South Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant to 15 MGD immediately, in response to the growing demand for recycled water in the South Bay region. 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, OWD continues to actively pursue the development of recycled water facilities within new development projects. The OWO is fully supportive of the construction of an advanced wastewater treatment plant in the Otay River Valley, which would provide recycled water for newly built distribution facilities. The City of San Diego is constructing the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant. The ...."'\GMOC 1998 r.. R_~ 1-15-99..doc - - - - - - , . ~ ; :; ... "'..... ~... j , . ., current projected date of implementation is around the year 2001. The City has identified the OWO as a potential market for recycled water from the South Bay Plant. OWD has expressed our interest in receiving recycled water from this plant and related joint use of storage and pipeline facilities that benefit the City and OWO. The South Bay Business Plan is now complete and OWO and the City are negotiating an agreement to receive up to 6 MGD from the South Bay plant. The OWO study of the wastewater and water reciamation program evaluated future expansion of the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF). Future expansion of this facility will be driven by the market for recycled water and the availability of wastewater to treat. The County of San Diego and OWO will be discussing treatment of Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow at the RWCWRF. As additional recycled water demand is needed beyond current treatment capacity, the RWCWRF may be sxpand,ed. The future recycled water supply for new markets is well positioned to meet the increasing demands. These sfforts have been dosely coordinated with the City of Chula Vista. Sweetwater Authority and 1heCity of San Diego recycling plans for 1he Otay River Valley plant and the South Bay plant. OWO is currently designing and starting to construct ,several projects that will increase the use of recycled water. One consists of the recent completion of the lining and covering of a recycled water storage pond that improves the recycled water quality and quantity. A planned pipeline in Telegraph Canyon Road will allow for extension of several pipelines to open up new areas for use of :rec;yCled water. Otay is also working closely with the City of San Diego on obtainingrecycied water from the South Bay Treatment Plant. We are also evaluating the potential use of raw, water in the recyCled system. The OWO continues discussions with U.S. Generating for a raw/recycled water tismand. The planned electrical generating facility is to be located on Otay Mesa. The facility of 6,000 gpm is planned to be in operation in 2002. The OWO also continues discussions with the County of San Diego regarding recycled water use within the jail site for selected internal uses. Water Conservation The OWO 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 a=unts dedicated solely to the irrigation of landscaping. A study suggested that if other 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 through its school programs, which include several schools in Chula Vista and many others throughout ...."\GIIOC 1988 n. .-:....1-1~99.doc . ~ -~ -.~ -~~ - - - - - - ; . . . II 1.\ ~ ~ ~ : .: -" I . : ~ _ . - ~ -.- the District. The District is also currently working with Helix Water District and CuyamacaCollege in the design and construction of an "Educational Conservation Garden: The garden is planned to be completed in the spring. Interaoencv Coooeration Representatives from Sweetwater Authority, Chula Vista City Council and OWD have continued to meet (Chula Vista Interagency meetings) during the past year to address issues of joint concem, as well as keep the City informed regarding state- wide water issues which may impact development within Chula Vista. These coordination meetings include: Sweetwater Authority/Otay Water District Board MembeT5 and Chula Vista representatives. Quarterly meetings of SWA and OWD Chief Engineers and Chula Vista Director of Public Works are also held. Joint use, cooperation arrangements or mutual benefit efforts consist of the following: . Telegraph Canyon Road pavement replacement/renewal. . Use Area Golf Course project . Central Area Radio Antennae project . Veterans Home fee financing. . GIS data sharing. . SWAlOWD jOint use of storage treatment iacilities. . Construction of recycled reservoirs under Eastlake park, a planned community. Hiohliohts of Otav Water District's Operation The following are a few highlights of the 1997-1998 a=mplishments by OWD. 1. No water rate increases associated with OWD operations. 2. No capacity fee increases. 3. $14.7 million in capital improvements designed and/or constructed. 4. Installed and inspected approximately 103,665 feet of pipelines. 5. Developers installed approximately $10.4 million in pipelines. 6. Delivered approximately 22,873 acre-feet of water. 7. Delivered approximately 773 acre-feet of recycled water. 8. During the period between July 1997 to June 1998, Otay sold 910 meters. A..'\GMOC 1Bge no __.. 1-15--99.ooc - - - ~ . - ~. , " .' '; ~ _.: ~ ' - - - - 9. Negotiated agreement with City of San Diego for 10 MGD of local treatment capacity, with option for an additional 1 0 MGD in the future. In summary, the water supply outlook is excellent and the City of Chula Vista's long term growth will be assured of a reliable water supply. Potential interruptions to the water supply have been addressed by OWO, SDCWA and MWD through the long term emergency water supply development of the SDCWA's Emergency Storage Project (90 days), the MWO Eastside Reservoir (six months) and OWO's ten-day storage/supply plan. The continued close coordination efforts with Chula Vista and the other agencies have brought forth significant enhancements for the effective utilization of the region's water supply to the benefit of all citizens. The OWO will attend the January 28, 1999 meeting and make a brief presentation as requested. We will need an overhead projector for our presentation. Prepared by: Title: Date: ~ i ~"\GUOC 1998 n. ~_... 1.1S-99.1icx: -, THRF~HOLD 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 pen;pectives. b.Amountof current capacity. iincludin,g storage capacity, now used or t::ommitted. c. Ability of affected facilities 10 absorb forecast growth. d. Evaluationoffundin,g and site availability for projected new facirlties. e. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC. 1. Please fill in the tables .below. Deal Imported otal 16,499 100 ,900 100 100 100 Nates: 1)Use of local vs. Imported water sources is highly dependent on weather c:ondilions and therefo", unp",dictable. 2)Table values a", for all of Sweetwater Authority which includes 8 portion of Chul8 Vista, the unincorpaorated are8 of Bonita- Sunnyside and all of National City. nd - (Purchased by onsumers) upply Capacity (1,3) ge Capacity - Treated liter rage Capacity - Raw liter Nolss: 1 )Supply capacity is from pipeline 4 aqueduct (40mgd), wells (2mgd), and treatment plant (30 mgd). DemineraJizsljon Iplant capacity(4mgd) will be Bvailable FY1999;Demineralization /I plant.capacity (Bmgd) should be available by FY2005 2)lncludes new 2MG Star McMillin tank. 3)7 reatment plant supply is only avaialble when Sweetwater reservoir is above minimum pool. Please proliide 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: Sweetwater Authority's service area is for all practical purposes completely built-out. 3. Do current facilities have the ability to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18 month time frame? Yes _X No Explain: Forecasted growth within Sweetwater Authority is minimal and existing system allows for absorbing forecasted growth for both the 12 and 18 month time frames and 5 to 7 year periods. 4. Will any new facilities will be required to accommodate the forecast growth for the 12-18 month time frame? Yes No X_ ; for the 5-7 year time frame? Yes No X Explain: The facilties that are planned for Sweetwater Authority are not to meet future growth. Their purpose is to increase the reliabilty of the system and reduce the dependence of imported to meet demands. 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: Not as it applies to Sweetwater Authority's service area. MAINTENANCE 6. Is adequate funding secured andloridentifiedfor maintenance of existing facilities? Yes_X No Explain: Sweetwater's policy is for maintenance projects of existing facilities is to 'pay as you go' with major funding coming from ratepayers. 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: Upgrading the reliabilty of our water system from the supply and distribution perspective with the folloWing projects: 1. Demin 2. Metallic main Replacement 3. Pump Replacement Program 4. Cathodic Protection Program 5. Master Plan Main Replacement Program 8. Does the District have any plans to produce or distribute reclaimed water? Yes No_X Explain: There is a conceptual informal investigation to determine the feasabilty of a reclaimed water distribution System No definite plans or Board action has been taken to implement a production or distribution system. -. ..~~~~~~~~::#.rl'IMII~'II}I'II..:~~~:llrtl[lf.I' MISCELLANEOUS 9. Does the current threshold standard need any modification? Yes No X Explain: None that can be identified at this time. 10. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council? Yes X No Explain: Make all developers aware, special/ythe ones contemplating work in olders areas of Chula Vista, that projer:ts may require significant water system infrastructure improvements to meet current fire department standards. , c ~~ 11. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate 10 the City and the GMOC? Yes No X Explain: Prepared by: Title: Date: Hector M. Martinez PrinciDal Enaineer 118199 APPENDIX B Growth Forecasts CITY OF CHULA VISTA 1998 ANNUAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CYCLE 12- TO 18-MONTH AND 5- TO 7-YEAR GROWTH FORECAST INFORMATION As required by the Chula Vista Growth Management Program, the City Planning Department is providing growth-forecast information for the 12- to 1 8-month and 5- to 7- year periods commencing from July 1, 1998. Additional information Telating to development and growth forecasting is being forwarded as outlined below. Providing this information to City departments, and outside districts and agencies, will allow them to analyze the impacts that forecasted growth may have on their ability to maintain compliance with the City's facility and service Threshold Standards, and enable them to report those impacts (if any) to the Chula Vista Growth Management Oversight Commission. The attached materials regarding growth forecast and Telatedinformation are as iollows: FIGURE 1: Historic Housing and Population Growth Shows the annual housing unit and population growth in Chula Vista since 1980. The 1998 iiguresTeflect housing activity from January through July 1998. Please note "that significant annexations .of vacant, developable land have occurred during "this time frame, as well as the inhabited Montgomery annexation in 1986. FIGURE 2: Major Projects Map Depicts the location of major residential projects in the City. The numeric and alphabetic reference numbers on the map also appear on Figure 3's forecast table. FIGURE 3: Current 12- to 18-Month Residential Forecasts Two tables are provided, one for each of the two major water districts serving the City. In large part, the Otay Water District encompasses the City's developing eastern area, while Sweetwater Authority serves the older, built-up western area. Project entries are keyed to the "Major Projects Map." The forecast figures reflect input provided by each of the respective project developers. For the eastern Chula Vista area (Otay Water District). the projections forecast 4,197 dwelling units to be permitted for construction (issued). and 3,453 dwelling units to be completed for occupancy (finaled) over the 18-month period irom July 1, 1998 to December 31, 1999. Western area forecasts are for 22 units of infill residential to be issued and finaled during the same time frame. As discussed in the following section (Figure 4). actual residential activity in eastern Chula Vista tends to be somewhat less than these collective developer forecasts. Applying the percentages from past comparisons of forecast-ta-actual activity B-1 results in projections for approximately 2,728 dwelling units for issues, and 2,935 dwelling units for finals for the 18-month period. While more conservative than the developer's figures, these numbers still reflect a fairly aggressive construction volume. FIGURES 4A, 48: Previous Period's (July 1, 1997 to December 31,19981 Forecast and Comparisons to actual Development Generally speaking, developer's forecasts during the recession years trailing 1991 have been overly optimistic; actual development averaged between 40% to 60% of projections. For the last 2 years, however, forecast accuracy has been improving, with this last year's (July 1, 1997 to June 30, 1998) activity reaching 64% of projected permit issues, and 87% of projected finals (Figure 4AI. These rates were applied to developer projections on .Figure 3, with the comparative results shown under Figure 3's discussion. Figure 4B graphs forecast to actual activity for units finaled and issued, -respectively. FIGURE 5: FIVe-Year Phased. and Buildout Residential forecasts for Master PJanned Projects ~ ?," ~ '", This table shows projected housing unit completions in 5-year increments for each of "the major projects in eastem Chula Vista, along with associated annual averages. It .is likely that tl1e average, annual projections for the 1997-2000 increment will not be fully realized. Residual 'units would then be added 10 the next increment (years 2000-2005), TlIising the annual average to slightly more than 2,000 units per year. ,f FIGURE 6A.. 6B. 6C: SANDAG Series 8 Regional Growth Forecasts - Profile Tables, and Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Map ~ Two sets of figures reflecting population, housing, and employment growth are provided, along with a map. Figure 6A presents Citywide forecasts based on the current City boundary which includes the Otay Ranch annexation area west of the Otay Reservoirs. Figure 6B presents forecast information for the current Sphere of Influence boundary, which encompasses land beyond the City limits, including the existing unincorporated Sweetwater/Bonita community, and the proposed San Miguel ranch and Bonita Meadows master planned project areas. Figure 6C is a map depicting both the current City and Sphere boundaries. Figure 7: Commercial/lndustrialllnstitutional Project Status Table This information profiles the current regulatory processing and construction status of active non-residential projects within the City. It is not intended as a forecast for any particular timetable. For comparison, 1,194,666 square feet of non-residential development was constructed in the City during Fiscal Year 1997-1998. B-2 FIGURE 1 , HISTORIC HOUSING AND POPULATION GROWTH CITY OF CHULA VISTA 1980 407 374 84,364 1981 195 496 86,597 1982 232 129 88,023 1983 479 279 89,370 1984 1,200 521 91,166 1985 1,048 1,552 (1) 116,325 1986 2,076 1,120 120,285 1987 1,168 2,490 124,253 1988 1,413 829 128,028 1989 1,680 1,321 134,337 - 1990 664 1,552 (2) 135,163 , 138,262 1991 747 701 141,015 1992 560 725 144,466 1993 435 462 146,525 1994 700 936 149,791 1995 833 718 153,164 1996 914 820 156,148 1997 1028 955 162,047 1998 (4)566 571 (3)163,686 (1) "","~.lI&li Annexation (2)'1l!lO Census Population (3) Plaming _ Estimate [ThnJ 7130198) - ReiedI; ODF ~ revised population figure6. ,'.. ....... ,-- .,''''''''''''-'' ,.,-.............,..",..._____."..,,~.tJo:_c.:p.........I!"'. ,,~ .,__,..... B-3 N ~ .... ::l t:.:i .... ,- .... A. c::c :E ' ~ co - - en ... l- e.,) LLI " " c .., -, 0 ?l a: ;- A. r:-' z :;;- ...., .... - "6! ~~ ~ a: ~\I~~>t ~ Q '" I!!. ., .., ~l e~~ ;0 - cz: :E .. J:- .i; ,.: U~ ..; z ~ :s ~ " c.. E <~ - c ~ ~ ~ E -:": c: e:.= f' ...~~ ~ a. i:c .._ .c:c ~'fi~ -~ ~:~: ~=~:-~~; g:=~ .=~=c-~_=~. ~==~~;--~~.~~~:~~.= ~..::.~~~u~:~~g=.~: =..~~e"'-.A~C==-aa.- >-._ m~>-E ~~_~ .~_ ~~~~~~~~~_E_U.O=~.= a~wwwww_~=~Q~E~>>=~ c: ... .. ~ =[1 ~ eI) l- e:,:, 11.1 .., C = =- = C .., -=: :iE :u.. C .... eI) - ...I CJ_.....______c_..~ .....................""""<_0=_ CJ c - . ;; - - c ; a:-.a::::' =~.. :,i.;:= = .i~! ;-===0 ~ ~ = =~~ ~~o_~ ~. . ;;..JCCl.c"_..a=u_=_ ;: = c__E~~_~c~=~ ....:K _.o.."1I:Io'C ....-_.c ___==~:~~_=~~~~C~~: ~:c=x:c_~.~c~~.~c=_ ~~~~~~~C=~&=~~SC~~~ c_-...&......._-.-.__ -~~~--~-~---------- g , ~ ~ . . ii i - '" -' '" -' < ~ < < ;., '"' ... N '" :> ;;! :> N ~ .... 0 ... .... ... = = Z ~ :;;! Z " 0 .... N :; :; 0 N ~ ~ ... Co -' ..J ~ < ~ < ~ Z ~ Z ~ i: ~ i: ~ '" W Co '" if ::E w ~ '"' :5 w '" C> ::: '" ,. '" ::> ..J ::> ::> '" :; "' ~ !!J !!J b'.l I- C> ;;. t,) - :::: l- e: ;:;l t,) CIl - C> l7.l - 0; - .. .... g: .. <' Q .. ..J - U ~ U ~ < b'.l CIl .. '" ~ z ll: e '" ~ z - '" ~ i: I:! '" ~ i: - 0 '" 0 '" Q Q u.. ~ .... ~ w :!!: " - ~ z .~ - ~ z >- "E .. :; "E .. :; . ~ ~ .D ::l .D ~ ". E ;.. ". E ;.. c:I 0 " .. '" 1IJ " .. '" u u OJ .. < ~ OJ .. < C> -- ::> C ::> ::> Q ::> IX: z w Z "' ~ 0 :!:; ::> 0 :!:; ::> "" ~ '" "' CIl ~ '" "' .= '" !!J .= '" !!J l:... CIl C '" C '" 0 S ~ ~ C> 0 >. ~ 0 >. ..:l <;[ ~ :; ~ :; "" '" ..., CIl '" ..., .... ~ S ~ ;;. ::> N 0 N "" :x: ~ <;[ ~ ~ Q t,) ..J ::l ..J ~ < ~ < ~ Z ~ Z ~ i: ::z: ~ Ii: ~ t,) '" W C> '" ~ ::E w '-' '"' 3 w '" ~ ;.. w ;.. w ::> ..J ::> ::> "' :; '" !!J !!J :!!: ~ e 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ i ~ ~ i ... ::, ... ~ c.. c.. :ii < < 0 :; :; ~ ~ z < FIGURE 3 . ~ w i'( 5 i c :I " . U) ! e -' = <"': 1-:;; 0= I- -' i . ~:I ! ~ il i .1 . .' . , I ~ - ! - . en : . !~ I- - . w w en z z " ~ oCt ~ ~I i ~ o+- ~ wffi " o::::s H o~ ~I~ l- s u..uj u I- >... 2 w'" l- I-' -0'" U UJ Z__-; 2 I C ::l <" ::>" l- I a:: ; C) +-... UJ S W S () . 0 zc:;; I- -0... >- ~ en+-- < ::llll~ I- OZ" 0 w 0'" ~ w i :I:!!! ;= II: . UJ . en< ::l~ 00 J1 _ t) > d w 0:: r = . - . a.. '" '" w w .. !II .. w w u u w l!i Q ~d ~ ~ =: : ~ . s I ~I I 'I " .' " ~I '~ I I FIGURE 4A . I I I i I , , Issued Building Permits Comparison Forecast to Actual Units ,- 2:100+ 2700 : . 2500 f Forecast...- T 2300 T . I 2100, .:l1900 + ...... .. .., .... ..,...., r:: _ :' 1700+ o _ ci 1500..L.... z I 13001,)279 I 1100+ 900 1..,.._, .1 _ I 700,'--833---..-- 500 i Actual'" I- I I i I -n!l3 i I I i _I '___Huh' __,_____ _, HH ___..:' ~ .4llD4 _-,,---------,- --1-ll2B- "--'-;....---'------- 914 __huh' --- ,--- ,--- 736 Ph"~ --- -, Jan.-Dee. '95 .1an. -Dee. '96 Jan.-DoL '97 Jan.-Dee. '98 ~ <? .0 n> Jan,-Dee. '99 - "JC..ual" figure for Jan.-,Dee. '99 is based upon " projected avernge of 92 units -per month. Finaled Building Permits Comparison Forecast to Actual Units -- ---"--1383- I 2900----------- ___Ph"~ + 2700,' . - ..- -. .., 25oof--i I i Forecast ...- 2300,--: 21oot-------------. ~1900 I------------- ':; 1700 1---- ~ 1500f- 1300 t 1209- HOOT ---'- 900, '___nom T . 700T-- - 718 500 I Jan.-Dee. '95 , Actual ... !-- i' , - 1;>07- , Jan.-Dee. '96 -~--. .- 955 ..- 963 -------------- .~--- 642 , , Jan.-Dee. '97 , ~ Jan.-Dee. '98 '? Jan.-Dee. '99 . ____-8;>0_,__. . "A:tual" figure for Jan.-Dee. '99 is based upon ~ poojected average of BO units per month. '"' co - en I- z w :E w IX: o Z IX: ~ w >- an - 10 """ Ow NI- 0< _0 co!5 0)1l.. 0)- ",,"0 . 0 W en+: I-::J ens <(~ 00 w- -~ ....;m O~0 1L A. I- <0 -JI-W ~0..., _>0 I- 5 a:: z ~:; W::J:W Coz -1l..z f/)05 W>A. IX: !:: a:: ~ :-:l!! I-CDen (1,)0< -W:lE > ir< _ WI- .... 0en -J 0> ;:)<5 ~~b O<::J: u.. 0 0 OOz !!!a:: ~1l..W -I- 00 -0< O:lEw O'J.,.C?~ :%');,a);c~ 1'--- ~o >:a6;~C\I:i"";.':::~;~~'~U):~'~~::~i.;o: .. ,M:N,;::Q)~_"':O' ---v .cc:.:,....,~-"CJ)1".:Nr1''U)_"'V N:t-.' (D---'~CD,,::Q , ,t').=:~:. :~~~c-_ m ~fW,>O~~';~':~~~"]'@~~i1~~~' ~:;,~ -.;'~;. .._,;.,,.:t.,.:::;-:~'~.;~::;, - -. f€i_.ff{~:U~~'''~~~;:.:-:'' . _~.f'l')CJ)(g CDCCQ)~~_ CCNt') CDCD N"":"": "':N" '" - _ 0 " N .0 o ~ A. ~Du)C":)N coco,....U')O) "tONCOCOO N''''-- ....: ~ ... ..; _ l"') CD 0 Il)~NCD ID~_ CD u) 0 N .., 0 o CD." CD '" '" ..; ~ .... il~~~; '" ... '":. - ... . CD ..; ... ~ ... '" 0 .....'" LO~c:t:)('l') ... 1'- ... ~ .... ... '" .., CD ~ . 0 "'~ O)cooo CD CD ~ 0 ... .... ~ ..... ",0 10 CD..... ...~~~ ~ "'~ .... CD ... ... N ~ ..; 0 ... 0.... .... - 00 .... .. NN '0 CDO "'0 ~N 0>...0 "''''0 ..."'''' "'''' ..... '" '" ~ <'> '" '" CD ... "!. ~ ..... ~ . CD . <D ... .... CD "? "? ... 1D ~ 0 .... .... "!. - oe=.c~ ~~U.21 ..li:lE a::a::a::~ CiQi-. .!! 00...1:-= ::s--~ OO.E'~~CD ..I:..I:""~O uullll:;c.aE CCC.C= caaJaI_::JO a:: a:: 0>ena:: :;: " l: .. a:: ... . . ~ CJ - "ii ~ c.CJ ..I- ~o If) . U)- :i ~ "D"'C : .-OC- _fO..!! Ol-~....l> CDG... ~~~~.a:: ca.... ....l..J..J....l....l ----- m.... ca IV CD: . .- wwwww ..I: " l: .. a:: FI GURE 5 en en ..J ....l ~ ~ o 0 .... .... m m ~ ~ en en !::: _ .. t- Z ." e z ~ ~:~::l W ->.,::I: ~ "I""'''I'''''J! CD 0 . < <....=z.. ..J A. c.w .. < ~ .... en en...> a:: 0 U) .c..cu~>"i <UU~.!!......CD Wl:C-O...."" .. ..:. .... ~ a::a:: .O.J! >- >.~ = --= ccauz: ... --':::J 0 OOm1l.. m . >. C .. c. E o o "CI C .. ....l l: o .. - .. ~ en !:: z ::l ..J ~ o I- w C!) ~ W ~ ..J < ~ z z < .; g .., '" '" ~ .!.! :; .g '5 .., .) 1ii ~ .. ~ ~ ~~ {g ~ " .E .. .::: a: 'i i!!-e ~ :s .. - Cl .l! ;: l3 .. ,,:!! .. .. .. e .. .::: .., " .. " -m ~ oS ~ ;!j (5 0; J!! o << . : SERIES 8 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST '990- 20'5 j't. \ ) "'_/ ..-.~ " tZ:-;-;"fJ-~I.~I-:~~"';"J-~'~~_ - ';"'- .,~~';::" .~-=-/. -:., ~- - - .. - -", ,~ -- ~ The 20ro and 200S residential forecasts are consistent with adopted land use policies. The 2015 forecast may exceed 1he capacity &pecified in or implied by 1990-2015 199D-2015 current oeneral and CD lans. Change Avg. Annual 1990 2000 200S 2015 Absolute Percent % Chanoe "TOTAL J>OI>ULATlON 148,431 198,322 231,ll37 2S2,316 113;11l1S 76.7% 2.3"'" -Household 146;5l16 196.561 229.100 """mil 113,432 77A% 2.3% Group Quarters 1,835 1.761 1.937 2,288 453 24.7"'" 0.9% TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 54;r;f1 66.182 77,145 B9,6112 35,2li5 64.9"'" 2.ll"'" SirOe FamilY 31.D53 38.658 45.828 5D,Bll5 19.752 63.6% 2.lI"'" ~Family 18,966 23,202 26,994 34,643 15.677 82.7% 2.4% MrlbiIe Homes 3.759 3.763 3.763 3.594 -165 -4A% ~.2"'" Dlher Units 559 559 560 560 1 .D.2"'" 1l.Il"'" OCCUPEDHOUSINGUNITS 5Z, 153 64,617 75,491 87,868 35,715 68.5"'" 2.1.'" VACANCY RATE 4.ll"'" 2.4% 2.1% 1.9"'" .,2,.1% ~.9"'" -2.9"'" PERSONS PER HOUSEHOl..D .2..81 3..04 3.D3 :2.96 ll..15 5.:3% 0.2"'" "TOTALEllPJ..OYJIENT 52,ll21 5i,D14 fl3,6lI6 75,439 23,418 <45Jl% 1.5% CiviISn 52.D21 56,D14 S3,586 75,439 .23,418 45.D% 1.5"'" AgrialIIure.& Minin>I 285 .269 271 :269 -16 -5.S% ~k ConsIIUcIiDn 1,558 1;574 2.22S .2,ll15 1,357 117_1% 2.5% MarailacIurin9 10,283 1l1;57D 11.254 11.243 960 B.3"k OA% '1lIIISp~ t:ommun...J.lJtiI. 1,670 2,222 2.659 :3,581 1,911 .'14A% 3.1% VIr I IP ,nule 2.,4l2 2,752 3.263 3,lI36 1,364 ;;5.2""- 1Jl% fle!aiITnule 12,403 12.528 14,617 18.218 5.915 4JI% 1.5".4 Fill., Ins.. Real EslaIe 2,500 3,D30 35Jl 4.870 2,370 BUl% 2.7%. Ser..~ 12.B6D 15,105 16,539 19,638 6;778 52.:7% 1.:7% .Gt...-w...,n:dJt 7.99D 7,964 11;350 10,869 2,879 36.11""- 1.2% U..a.......d MDitaJY 0 D 0 D D - - 7DTAL..ACRES 39,B7!l 39,879 39,B7!l 39,B79 0 DJI'%. D.D% ~'t"1 ,~.Acres 15,654 18,195 21,428 24,.4112 8,7Jf1 ~ 1.B% lJIwDenslty Single FamilY 14 82 396 651 Sl -t552..1% 16.6% SilgehmllY 8,666 10.295 12,442 13;752 5.lIB6 58..7% 1.9% .MIJIipIe Family 1.25D 1,615 2.,022 2,617 1,366 11l!l.3% 3Jl% Mcbietlomes 399 399 399 391 -8 -13% .{l.1% 0Iher HesidenIiaJ 11 11 11 11 0 DJI'% 0.0% IndusIriaVTCUlWholesaJe 1,173 1.278 1,411 1.593 42D 35.8""- 1.2% RelaI 1.341 1,401 1,506 1,664 324 24.1% lUl% 0IIice 55 64 71 106 51 93.1% 2.7% Schools 721 797 B23 859 138 192% 0.7% .AgricuIIure & Exlraclive 374 374 374 374 0 D.D% DJI'% ParIes 1.272 1.272 1.272 1.272 0 DJI'% D.D% fkads&~ 3BD 6D8 702 1,112 732 1B2J1% .4.4% Vacent De\. I!lopPhle Acres 10.= 7,682 4,450 1,476 -8,7/fT -85.6% ' -7.5% Low DensIty Single Family 664 595 2BD 25 -638 -1l6.2% -12.2% Sirge Family 5.287 3.657 1,501 1 -5.2B6 -100.0% -29.3% MuIIiple Family 1,459 1,094 694 282 -1.178 -<<1..7% ~ InduslriaIfTCUlWholesale 796 693 561 380 -416 -52.3% -2.9% RelaiI 407 34B 245 100 -308 -755% -5.5% 0IIice 95 B6 79 44 -51 ~ ~ Schools 781 70S 679 643 -138 -17-7% -D.8% AgricuIlure & Exlraclive 0 0 0 0 0 - - flDads & fTBeways 733 505 411 1 -732 -lI!l.!I% -24.3% Conslnlined Acres 14,DD2 14,DD2 14,Dll2 14,lll12 0 DJI'% DJI'% GROSS EIIP1.DYIIENT DENSITY 14.2 14.3 152 16.4 2.2 15.6% II.E% GROSS'RESIDENllAL. DENSITY 5.3 5.3 5.1 5.1 ~1 .,2,.1% ~1% ,,'~ " J ~ I t. SANDAGfSOURCEPOINT 401 B SlREET, SUITE BOO, SAN DIEGO CA 92101 Soun:e: Series B Regional Growth Forecast (Interim Forecast, 5/95), SANDAG (619) 595-5300 09/14198 / ~ z ~ ;:: ~ ~>- 0<= w< ffi~ ==> <..0 """ \ J L~ /-1___ 1_-, ~-I r1 '--.. I .-'." -. . a.. c:c :E LU U Z LU =- .... II. Z W t:: >- wt:: - =e:: ...0 >- <I):Z: t:: Ll- e::"" c ....0 "" Q <1)= :z: >w "" CU 0 .....:z: '" LU ",,'" >- -=> +- -..... E a: u.... =% '" ..,- .., LU ..,.... ... ~O ~ :c c ~ 0 z: a.. 1.U 0 ~ en 1.U -' .... z w S~ ~~~~~ (5~ ~ ~'1J ~Ii 5:$ g ui ::> z z- u~ :S ... ')"1 t Ll I -......, - L-~-l \ \ ........, - /\ / , , ::; '" :> <: ~ 2>- 0<= ~< 00 z >-0 =0 /.- ij / . -\~// . .-,- 1.... .-.-'r' ...' " \ \ ......, 'I i II r:J u ~ :3 - =- o - r-. '" ~ ii <~~ a:~ O~ z s. ~ .,; !>J. '0 ~ Q. -'" FIGURE 7 COMMERCIAL I INDUSTRIAL I INSTITUTIONAL ACTIVITY JUNE 30,1998 .f< . i; B735 0lIice B.-.g lI738 RotaU 9742 BlIIper King 9805 Dental 0lIice 9806 0Ifice B . 9807 Movie Theabe Complex 9822 Pep B AulD S_ 9822 Rsslaunmt 9822 Rotall IlB23 Coors A...,A~U...." IIB32 RetaIl 1550 East H Stnlet 899 East H Stnlet BBB Telegraph BB5 Canaries Court lD25T.....Del 1000 T..... Del Roy 1016T.....DeIRoy lD20T.....De1 Roy 2050 l/a/Isy Road <15 North Broadway 3.600 3.201 81.570 3.600 3.201 5.178 19.140 55.750 18;560 2.250 18.000 47.236 10.000 244,485 SIRJs 1 . f Road 5.178 19.140 j j I i " ;':: E."' i J 55.750 18;560 2.250 1.BllO 47.238 10,000 SulHalaJ .~ llll351c......_..i.IBuiIding h396Third-.., 1 7.000 I . SulHDtal ~I" 7.000 ,.;:~. 9716 Chun:h 23510layLakesRoad 9824 LDS Chun:h 790 _Del Roy 9B36 ConstnIction oIIices Cornmsrcial Coach 7llllI92 W Il637 s..w. Center 700 0xI0rtl Stnlet !.". 983B Fore S_ #4 & Train' 9845 r.......... odI 0lIice 9B48 _ 9849 IndustriaJ B 850 Paa.:l Rard..u 14151Ulgeback Road 2371_ 1150 Blvd. 12.890 18.7<15 2,100 7.400 5.740 8.900 ~i... ". 33.561 12,890 18.7<15 2.100 7.400 5.740 8.!lOO 33.561 30.000 106,446 I '" :~ ~ 30.000 SulHDtal Total Squanl Footage: 357,931 H:IHClMEIPLANNINGIEIGMClCll8IFonlcaslPIPELN.WBI 03-Ma.-ll9 B-12 1. ROLL CALL "I declare under ~~!l~~erjury that' arr employe:! by tl:e Ci:j of Ch'J:? VIsta m the Office of the Ci',y (;I~c:\ ~nj t<13t I posted 6:00 p.m. th' Agenda/Notice on the Bulletin Board at IS ," ~~' alt-on the Public erv cas Bwldmg .t; ......--...." DATED. J:;;Z ~ SlGNED~.[~ ~~ /' Council members Davis, Moot, Padilla, Salas, and Mayor Horton March 29, 1999 CALL TO ORDER Growth Management Oversight Commissioners Dull, Fisher, Gray, Hyde, Munoz, Perez, Tarantino, Thomas, and Chair Hubbard, Planning Commissioners Castaneda, Hall, O'Neill, Ray, Tarantino, Thomas, and Chair Willett. 2. APPRO V AL OF MINUTES for Growth Management Oversight Commission meeting of March 4, 1999 (GMOC Members only) BUSINESS 3. PUBLIC HEARING ON PCM-98-38, REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 1998 ANNUAL REPORT On March 4, 1999, the GMOC tinalized its 1998 Annual Report to the City Council regarding compliance with the City's eleven Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards. The report focuses on the period from July I, 1997 through June 30, 1998, although issues identified in the second half of 1998 and early 1999 are also included where pertinent. A summary of the GMOC's recommendations and stairs proposed implementation actions is included. The report discusses each threshold in terms of threshold compliance, key issues, and corresponding recommendations. The workshop will give the GMOC an opportunity to discuss their findings and recommendations with the Planning Commission and City Council. Staff recommendation: A That the Planning Commission accept the 1998 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations as presented therein, adopt a motion recommending that Council do the same; and B. That the City Council (a) Accept the GMOC's 1998 Annual Report and recommendations contained therein; and (b) Direct staff to undertake actions necessary to implement those recommendations as presented in "1998 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed Implementing Actions Summary." ORAL COMMUNICA nONS ADJOURNMENT The City Council will adjourn to the regular City Council meeting on April 13, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The Planning Commission will adjourn to the regular Planning Commission meeting on April 14,1999 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers NOTICE OF A SPECIAL JOINT PUBLIC MEETINGfWORKSHOP OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC MEETINGfWORKSHOP WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION (GMOC) of the City of Chula Vista, California for the purpose of the City Council's and Planning Commission's review and consideration of the GMOC's 1998 Annual Report and recommendations on compliance with the City's Quality of Life Threshold Standards (threshold standards). The report reflects the outcome of analysis of information presented by various City departments and external agencies regarding the impacts of growth on each of the 11 facility and service topics covered by the threshold standards. The report serves to identifY whether or not the City is in compliance with each of the threshold standards, and makes related recommendations to the City Council on any actions believed necessary to remedy identified deficiencies and/or to ensure continuing compliance. The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the report is exempt from environmental review under Section 15262 of the State CEQA Guidelines as a feasibility and planning study. Copies of the GMOC's 1998 Annual Report are on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Any petitions to be submitted to the City Council must be received in the office of the City Clerk on or prior to the meeting date specified in this notice. If you wish to challenge the City's action on the report and its recommendations in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public meeting described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at or prior to said public meeting. SAID PUBLIC MEETING/WORKSHOP WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND GMOC on Monday, March 29,1999 at 6:00 PM in the Council Conference Room, City Hall Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear. DATED: March 10. 1999 CASE #: PCM-98-38 COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests individuals who require special accommodation to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service request such accommodation at leastforty-eight hours in advance for meetings andfive days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact the City Clerk for specific information at (619) 691-5041 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) (619) 585-5655. California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired. (h: \home\planning\edalia\gmoc98\report\ workshop. not) c_!A::;J Ice CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SUBMITTAL FORM (one form per item) (To be submitted at least by Thursday noon, 12 days prior to Council meeting) ) '1 ..~,~.~ "-- .... I:J-/,IJ o"V. , r(r :) '1 Date of Council Meeting:03/79/99 Submitted by: Edalia Olivo-Gomez Dept: Planning and Building Ext: 7::pS 7 PLACE UNDER (check one): Special Orders of the Day 0 Consent Calendar 0 Bds & Comm Rec. 0 City Manager's Report 0 Public Hearings k8J Action Items 0 Mayor's Report 0 Council Comments 0 TITLE (same as A-113 - will be used for aQenda as well as resoluiton!ordinance title) o ORDINANCE o RESOLUTION o REPORT ~ PUBLIC HEARING PCM-98-38, Review and consideration of the Growth Management Oversight Commission's (GMOC) 1998 Annual Report SUMMARY: On March 4, 1999, the GMOC finalized its 1998 Annual Report to the City Council regarding compliance with the City's eleven Quality-of-life Threshold Standards. The Report focuses on the period from July 1, 1997 through June 30, 1998, although issues identified in the second half of 1998 and early 1999 are also included where pertinent. A summary of the GMOC's recommendations and staff's proposed implementation actions is in Attachment A. The Report discusses each threshold in terms of threshold compliance, key issues, and corresponding recommendations (Attachment B). The workshop will give the GMOC an opportunity to discuss the Commission's findings and recommendations with the Planning Commission and City Council. RECOMMENDATION: 1) That the Planning Commission accept the 1998 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations as presented therein. 2) That the City Council: a) Accept the GMOC's 1998 Annual Report and recommendations contained therein; and b) Direct staff to undertake actions necessary to implement those recommendations as presented in Attachment A - "1998 GMOC Recommendations! Proposed Implementing Actions Summary". February 8, 1999 MEMO TO: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Patty Wesp 3P~ SCHEDULE OF JOINT MEETING & INTERVIEWS FROM: After polling all Councilmembers, I would like to confirm the following dates and times: Wednesday - February 24 - 6:00 p.m. Planning Commission Interviews Monday - March 29 - 6:00 p.m. Joint Planning/GMOC meeting Both of these meetings will take place in the Council Conference Room. Thank you. cc: City Manager City Clerk Director of Planning