HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1992/06/09
I
#
'" declare under penalty of perjury that I am
employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
Office of the City Clerk and that I ;Josted
this Agen(a/Notice en tho ~lIetin Board at
the Publi ~ rvices Build in at~~ity Hall on
DATED, c) t:.."&- SIGNE ~,ll}" c, ' .. Council Chambers
Public Services Building
Tuesday, June 9, 1992
6:00 p.m.
ReS[Ular Meetinst of the City of Chula Vista City Council
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROIl. CALL:
Councilmembers Grasser Horton --' Malcolm --' Moore --' Rindone --' and
Mayor Nader _'
2. PLEDGE OF AlJ.EGIANCE TO TI-IE FLAG. SILENf PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MlNUTES: May 19, May 28, and June 1, 1992
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF TI-IE DAY: None
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 9)
The stJJjf ",commendolions regarding flu! foUowing items 1isted undo flu! Consent Colendor will be enacted by flu!
Council by one motion without discussion unless a Cowu:iJmember, a member of flu! public or City stJJjf requests
that flu! iJem be pulkdfor discussion. If you wish to speok 011 one oftlu!se items, please fill out a .Request to
Speak. Form' avaiJoble in flu! lobby and submit U to flu! City Clerk prior to flu! meeting. (Complete flu! green form
to speak. in favor of flu! stJJjf reconrmendiuion complete flu! pink form to speok in opposition to flu! stJJjf
recommendation.) Items pulkd from flu! Consent Colendor will be discussed after Action Items and Boards and
Commission RecornmendJzJions. Items pulled by flu! public will be flu! first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting Council consideration of converting the Royal Vista Hotel to a low cost
senior citizen housing project. Dick Kau, Dick Kau Land Company, 3404 Bonita Road, Suite
A, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
b. Letter of resignation from the International Friendship Commission - John D. Rittenhouse.
It is recommended that Mr. Rittenhouse's resignation be accepted with regret and a letter
of appreciation be sent.
c. Letter requesting change to proposed plan for the improvements of Broadway between "F"
to "I' Streets - Tom Davies, Broadway Business Association, 4501 Otay Valley Road, Chula
Vista, CA 91911.
6. RESOLUTION 16652 AU1HORIZING CONDITIONAL TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF RANCHO DEL
REY PARKWAY ON SEPTEMBER 19-20 FOR AN ORANGE CRATE DERBY.
The Bonita Orange Crate Derby Committee is requesting Council to
authorize a temporary street closure and grant permission to conduct an
Orange Crate Derby on Rancho Del Rey Parkway on Saturday and Sunday,
Agenda
-2-
June 9, 1992
September 19 and 20, 1992. Staff recommends approval of tbe resolution
subject to staff conditions. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
7.A RESOLUTION 16653 AMENDING THE U11IJ1YUNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROGRAM AND
REESTABUSHING THE PRIORl1Y USTING OF PROPOSED U11IJ1Y
UNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROJECIS - On 11/12/91, Council
accepted a report on tbe City's Utility Underground Conversion Program
and approved a revised list of proposed utility underground conversion
projects. Action will advance tbe priority of Otay Valley Road between
Oleander Avenue and Brandywine Avenue and extend its limits from
Oleander Avenue to Nirvana Avenue. Staff recommends approval of tbe
resolution. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 16654 CALlJNG A PUBUC HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER PUBUC
NECESSI1Y, HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE REQUIRES THE FORMATION
OF A UTIU1Y UNDERGROUNDING DISfRICT ALONG OTAY VAlLEY
ROAD FROM OLEANDER AVENUE TO NIRVANAAVENUE - On 6/3/92, tbe
Underground Utility Advisory Committee (UUAC) meeting was held to
consider tbe proposed boundary of an Underground Utility District for
conversion of existing overhead utilities along Otay Valley Road from
Oleander Avenue to Nirvana Avenue. The District is recommending tbis in
conjunction witb tbe OtayValley Road Street Improvement Project between
1-805 and Nirvana Avenue. Staff recommends approval of tbe resolution.
(Director of Public Works)
8. RESOLUTION 16655 APPROVING AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE LAND FROM OTAY RIO
BUSINESS PARK FOR A NEW CI1Y CORPORATION YARD AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS - One of tbe approved projects in tbe Public
Facilities DIF is tbe building of a new Corporation/Transit Yard. The
original plan was to site tbe Yard in Sunbow II. Recently, an alternate site
became available in tbe Otay Rio Business Park. Council approved tbe
purchase of tbis site, and staff has negotiated a purchase agreement witb
tbe owner. Staff recommends approval of tbe resolution. (Director of
Public Works) 4/5tb's vote required.
9. RESOLUTION 16656 APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH THE
CI1Y OF SAN DIEGO TO ESTABUSH A JOINT PLANNING PROCESS FOR
REVIEW OF THE FENTON WESTERN PROPERTIES PROJECT - The purpose
of tbe MOU is to provide a process whereby botb jurisdictions agree to
create and process a single master plan for tbe Fenton Western properties
in tbe Otay River Valley acceptable to botb jurisdictions. Staff recommends
approval of tbe resolution. (Director of Planning)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as puhlk hearings as required by Iilw. If you wish to speIlk
to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speok Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
Agenda
-3-
June 9, 1992
to the muting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendaIion; complete the pink form
to speak in opposilion to the staff recomnrendJJJion.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individuiJL
None scheduled.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an 0J1J10I'IU1Ii1. for the general pub/U; to address the City Cowu:il on any subject nuJtIeT within the Cowu:il's
jurisdil:tion that is !!Q! an item on this agenda. (State 1Ilw, however, generally prohibits the City Cowu:il from
taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Cowu:il on sudI a
subject, pkose complete the yeUow "Request to Speak Under Oral Comnwnialtions Form" avaiJobk in the lobby
and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, pkose give your 1IIJnIe and address
for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
ACI10N ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elU:it substontiaI discussions and deliberations by the
Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Cowu:il and staff
recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alJenuJtive. Those who wish to speak, pkase flU out
a "Request to Speak" form avaiJobk in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the muting. Pub/u;
commenlS are limited to five minutes.
10. REPORT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION PERMIT PROCESSING
STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS. In August 1991, the Chula Vista
Economic Development Commission CEDC) established a subcommittee to
develop recommendations to streamline the City's development review
process in order to create a user-friendly environment for business
development. The goal was to minimize costs and delays for business
applicants, thereby offering a positive incentive for job-creating and
revenue-generating commercial and industrial development in Chula Vista.
The EDC subcommittee met for seven months, and the report identifies
twenty-five recommendations which the EDC is requesting Council adopt.
The EDC recommends: 1) Council accept the report; 2) Council consider
staff comments relating to each EDC recommendation; and 3) Council
direct staff to return with an implementation program and schedule based
upon recommendations which Council wishes to pursue. (Director of
Community Development, Director of Planning, Director of Building and
Housing)
I1.A ORDINANCE 2517
AMENDING SECI10N 2.56 OF THE MUNleJPAL CODE RELATING TO
PURCHASES OF SUPPUES, SERVICES, AND EQillPMENT (first readinl!:) -
On 7/23/91, Council requested a report on the City's use of consultants
and service contracts. The report was discussed by Council on 10/18/91
at which time a City Council subcommittee was established to address the
issue of consultants and service agreements. The subcommittee has met
with staff and is proposing the approval of revisions to the Municipal Code,
establishment of a new Council policy, and some modifications in City
procedures for determining the need for consultants and consultant
Agenda
.4.
June 9,1992
monitoring and hiring practices. Staff recommends Council place
ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution. (Budget Manager)
B. RESOLUTION 16657 ADOPTING PROPOSED COUNCIL POllCY ON CONSULTANT AND OlHER
SERVICES
12. RESOLUTION 16658 APPROVING CONTRAcnJAL AGREEMENT wrrn LPA INC. FOR
ARCHITEcnJRAL SERVICES FOR THE SOUTIi CHULA VISTA UBRARY TO
BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE CORNER OF FOURTI-I AND ORANGE
AVENUES - The Library requests approval of the negotiated agreement with
LPA Inc. for the necessary architectural services for the new 35,000 sq. ft.
South Chula Vista Library. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Library Director)
13. RESOLUTION 16611 APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
SOUTHWESTERN COMMUNITY COll..EGE DISTRICf, AND THE CITY FOR
CONSTRUcnON, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE
SOUTHWESTERN COll..EGE TRANSIT CENTER - Council considered this
item at its 5/5/92 meeting and requested additional information on the
project. Staff recommends Council approve: 1) the resolution, and 2) the
Conceptual Site Plan Alternative 1 as shown in the Feasibiliry Study.
(Director of Public Works) Continued from the 5/5/92 meeting.
14. REPORT REGARDING THE REQUEST BY ROBERTO GRATlANNE, M.D., FOR AIJEN
AGREEMENT IN IJEU OF POSTING A CASH BOND FOR THE DEFERRAL
OF PUBIJC IMPROVEMENTS AT 360 "Ii" STREET . The owner of the
properry at 360 "H" Street is converting an existing single family dwelling
on the site to a medical office. The Ciry has required widening and
installing public improvements along the frontage of "H" Street. The owner
has applied for and was granted a deferral of this requirement with a
condition a cash bond be posted in the amount of $9,700. The owner has
requested that the City accept a lien on the properry instead of posting the
cash bond. As directed by Council at the 5/12/92 meeting, staff is
currently revising the policy regarding the handling and approval of lien
agreements. However, because this request was already in process before
the Council Referral, staff is submitting the request to Council for
consideration. Staff recommends Council accept the report and deny the
applicants request. (Director of Public Works)
15. REPORT REGARDING THE REQUEST BY VICfOR URANGA, M.D., AND GIL
TURULLOLS, M.D., FOR A IJEN AGREEMENT IN IJEU OF POSTING A
CASH BOND FOR THE DEFERRAL OF PUBIJC IMPROVEMENTS AT 374
"Ii" STREET. The owners of the properry at 374 "H" Street are demolishing
an existing building on the site and constructing a new medical office
building. The City has required widening and installing public
improvements along the frontage of "H" Street. The owners have applied
for and were granted a deferral of this requirement with a condition a cash
bond be posted in the amount of $20,500. The owners have requested that
the City accept a lien on the properry instead of posting the cash bond. As
Agenda
-5-
June 9, 1992
directed by Council at the 5/12/92 meeting, staff is currently revising the
policy regarding the handling and approval of lien agreements. However,
because this request was already in process before the Council Referral,
staff is submitting the request to Council for consideration. Staff
recommends Council accept the report and deny the applicants request.
(Director of Public Works)
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Coundl will COIISider items whU:h have been forwarded to them for COIISideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or CommiItus.
None submitted.
ITEMS PULLED FROM 1HE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Coundl will discuss items whU:h have been removed from the Consent Cl1Jendar. AgendJJ
items pulled at the request of the pub/U; will be considered prior to tJwse pulled by Cowu::iImembers Pub/u;
comments are 1imiJed to five minutes per individuaL
OlliER BUSINESS
16. CI'IY MANAGER'S REPORTfS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
17. MAYOR'S REPORTfS)
a. Selection process of architect for South Library.
18. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Rindone:
Appointtnent of Susan Herney to the Otay Ranch Interjurisdictional Task Force
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council budget
meetinglworksession at 4:00 p.m. and prior to the Regular Council meeting at 6:00 p.m. to discuss:
Acquisition of property - pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8:
Assessor's Number
622-030-16, 26, 27, and
622-041-17
622-030-09
622-030-22
Address
735 Second Avenue
Owner
lwashita, Kaoru & Lilly
1364 Broadway
76 Prospect Street
Hernandez, Mary & Raymond
Agenda
-6-
622-082-08,13, and
622-041-04
622-041-22, 23
622-030-10,23
622-030-15
622-041-20, 21, 22
622-030-11
622-030-25
P.O. Box 1831, San Diego
1330 Broadway
1366 Broadway
3414 Menard, Nat!. City
P.O. Box 2548, San Diego
2001 Clearwater Place
P.O. Box 2365
June 9, 1992
SDG&E
Williams, James & Sandra
Nicolas, Mora
Uribe, Daniel
Japanese Am. Citizen League
Green, Curtis
Jehovah's Wimesses
Instructions to negotiators regarding personnel pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6.
The meeting will adjourn to the Regular City Council Meeting on June 16, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers.
June 5, 1992
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council (\
Sid W. Morris, Assistant City Manager{j;i\
City Council Meeting of June 9, 1992
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting of Tuesday, June 9, 1992. Comments regarding the Written Communications
are as follows:
Sa. This is a letter from Dick Kau requesting Council consideration of
conversion of the Royal Vista Hotel to a senior citizen housing project.
Staff has several concerns over this proposal: (1) the need to evaluate
the amount of financial participation required by the City; (2) the need
to recover the City's outstanding T.O.T. debt from the acquisition; (3)
the possibility of using this site to mitigate the Midbayfront Project's
low-income housing obligation; and (4) the impact of the loss of the site
as a commercial opportunity. Although staff initially would indicate
support for this proposal, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE REFERRED TO STAFF
TO ANALYZE THE ELEMENTS INDICATED ABOVE.
5b. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT MR. RITTENHOUSE I S RESIGNATION FROM THE
INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET AND A LETTER
OF APPRECIATION BE SENT.
Sc. This is a letter from Mr. Tom Davies requesting a change to the proposed
plan for the improvements of Broadway between "F" and "I" Streets, by
including electric outlets on the street light standards. As Mr. Davies
indicated, since the bids have already been opened, it is too late to
include them in the original contract. However there is expected to be a
de lay in the actual start of construction in order to avoid the 1992
Christmas shopping season and, therefore, if it is appropriate, it can be
added later under a change order. However, there are certain impacts that
need to be addressed before the decision is made to add the outlets to the
lights. These include determining whether or not the lighting standard
included in the contract is capable of having the outlets added, the fact
that the lights are currently under a flat street light rate and would
need to be amended to a metered rate, and who would be responsible for the
additional energy costs. THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS ITEM BE
REFERRED TO STAFF FOR A REPORT AND, IF APPROPRIATE, A CHANGE ORDER TO THE
CONTRACT.
SWM:mab
trans
DICK KAU LAND COMPANY
3404 BONITA ROAD. STE. A
CHULA VISTA. CA 92010
(619) 427-3525
June 1, 1992
The Honorable Mayor
and
ci ty Counc i I
City of Chula vista
476 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor and ci ty Counc i I :
We hearby request that at the next Council Meeting, June~
1992, that the Council consider instructing Staff to look in
to the feasibi I ity of converting the Royal Vista Hotel to a
Low Cost Senior Citizen Housing Project.
There are 80 rooms in the hote I, it is so lid re i nforced
concrete bui Iding that we feel would be very adequate for
senior housing, it is on the bus I ine, close to the Trolly
Stat ion, next door to a grocery store, all services necessary
for senior housing.
The hotel has been losing money for quite some time, and I am
sure you are all aware that the hotel is closed, it is in
Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. They have a substantial debt on the
hotel that obviously needs to be taken care of. Our client is
interested in retrofitting the hotel to senior housing. They
are doing one now in Long Beach. It would allow the City to
provide housing for seniors that would be be displaced by the
closure of some of the Broadway Trai ler Parks.
Please ask the Staff to proceed as early as possible to meet
wi th us to reach a conclusion.
Thank you for your best consideration.
~.
-- / ~-
Dick Kau
i'
"1- '
WRlnEN COMMUNICATIONS
~Jl ,{. /~-./; ,
j;:7 U /. . (7',
I
I
So.. - )
LAW OFFICES OF
John 'D. :Rittenhouse
701 B STREET. SUITE 1300
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101
TELEPHONE (619) 525-2055
FACSIMILE
(619) 231-2918
May 20, 1992
?R
The Honorable Tim Nader, Mayor
City of Chu1a Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chu1a Vista, CA 92010
Re: Resignation of John D. Rittenhouse
as International Friendship Commission Commissioner
Dear Mr. Mayor,
Please accept this as my letter of resignation effective May 20,
1992.
I am resigning my position as a commissioner on the International
Friendship Commission with a great deal of mixed emotions, and
after long soul searching.
I sincerely appreciate the opportunity I had to serve the
community of Chula vista, however, due to the time pressures of
my law practice I find it almost impossible to now attend the
meeting of the Commission at 4:00 p.m.
I would be interested in serving on another commission if the
opportunity arises and the time of the meetings is more conducive
to my schedule.
/- 9~ YOu~~,
/ :/;:;:~ f' R@~;:C;ji';~' . .
JDR:ljb
cc: Ms. Terry Thomas
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
cSb-1
../ CD\'J to
publIC \DO,
,2,
r--" 1\11::;"'1 I., ",.'-',',()C I ''\TTON
BR,()/\DWAY P.t'~"-tl'H'_'~:~":'; '-
rIAT]"
!'-':,:"l.V
! ~~_l:. j , ,
hFI~ .
cl:, in"!
?,WJi\j,W!\Y
i.,l J ~-o 1:'!' r,t I-'(' '-'
i 1: O'jli
j'(\t' ! 1.;.0-
:->1. r,'-:,,;:> t ;~;
j III [:'!" \ \' i-' n~ ,-,
,,1
,,'
\)H-:,'i';;?'~f.;r-) F
L(,
Th;.. 1'; ~
(-;')Ilf'
...j'
h,-> (' i t :~/ 1'1
~ i II 1 d \1 'I :--,\
T}-'j..,; p,t" \;:,(~1'v.;,-;.v p.,]
t )!1--" C"j j.y r f.or
'",., --'.'t-,',.:!I,
P,IJ :o:;i IH ~;::; :--~ h:-o; :~'--"-" ,,-
'11Il1H")Vemt'rJt h'~( t,'t un
~t-,':\fP' /",:'1; ,.;-f (-'i.] Y'
LTI;"'C
I:;,:,"' .c:;,-..,:,' j,"'j t.:
"
W>
I! i d
r j "
l\ '~,'
r,'
-: h
rir:
~'-;
i ur;::'":'..-
j ~(hi II j fit' lid ',nt!.
n h':" 1H!pl,~~m~nj,.c.,tj
Hr ":~jdv.I,~jY lji-"th:~~;-rl
nlf"'Il:!'t-' t' .)'
'i r: ('.(:oIn!ni t,
lie
:'-': ~
, ,;--< <) vi;:~ y
r () ',"
!.)-Ic'
,-, f
}
j"
f
,,; t, !'"ep~
1 n!}'
1 r i ~.:
1 ':-'~ [1); . r t i. ',I t i (~,'1)
prn j !;~,' t,
nil- m[.(:!)';c;
(;i'!'imi Li
'y.J ,~~ I." ","
" h1 f-~
"
,'-jI1:,,--rICi
l-.ne
!Jl""i-~ !', i ng:-:
I'
t-1'f-O
i--,(-'
t r,
V"."j (',C,-
(.1.1 )"
.,~ln ('>2 rrl:<
"n
r"c,n\ t'llo1l
1-,'"
i,(' Ill'" l_:ol":~nrl,:..d 1 In!.'!" .V"--'
-t.i !11f." j-()y' (-:h,4rIGe;~, ,
Al t1i()ugh th.'" l'r;.ptn''t' d' H""., wOld.,':'1 I j kp t,e)
) l.lrC,baf)] Y IJaS:-'i8\_ ."'t,";,II'
IH(-.nt.r::.; al,r,lru:::" Brn,~cl\'-I,~:Y hav~ 1: ) f:icia.l t,(l t,!tf'-', ("ilY "
j) j Wf"_, ret~J HI)],l] d l,~::, )t':~r)F' 1
1._-.'.~~n[)();-5e .'-j (:}1;'inel~:. I,', . r,f-' .c~'1.'~r~~l.I'iC~1-1 (lut-.L,~,t
.F'r"-'"O('j"'Fi~". 'I'll...; il'i(~T!)f;LOn_, '-- " I
t-'~l rn";~n--'han1 S (In. -, ,1 p ,,_Y 1 '.j'),;;, :<t' T'''''f':' ~,;i"!j
.J I i,l?,hi l~lnchi(,t):;.., ,"'I,l,'nt::' " ,
i'tf":"lr thl:J. t,,'p ',If ,-:'\ l '-'r-,-l(;..Lr,::;t-,i,:}n:~ .(~,u rl :'t,"',
l' t';,";'l'.'. I, '!.',-lltjfl,t:.~' "l~-,lr~.i'_n,i:: :'-';e"--I;~on:-'-_ ",~',
.'-'; 1 ,,\-J. ,-, t" f(-"~~"; - o. . - 1 l'1'~r( h:n' 'li!,:~
i) \. I."c'r (,(-"',-:";;< J'- 'f)' I n 't,-I'-~ Pi',;",
l~l!.rj ".,-!.m.:-i:< "r~ '. . , f ('U'~ l-lil'
)i"'1 n in ;-","1 ,n't j E1;t1-;: 1 ng;
i~"IY
.111.-j
!\'-J1
Ole
y'
"
t;,(-->,-,
'-'11:':-':
i"
,'i('
1.'-' V
;'.11'
lIt,
'."
U, ,t:'.
,tl''''
i 11'!p.~")'J(~~:nt
:,,:
'"
r,L'
''---';
, L
',:
"
I'
r'l
'\i
l',!i---I,::",
h~,.
!ldp,j
-~l t
':. r i ~.~
ih'
\..}':'
,'-1".1)
)d
,-,
, 'LlP
I',r'
';,Ji.J:'1Y
".i. r'
j !i."lu.!.o
~ 1 -1
n "'~w
1
,!:Lht
'lfl':'
,",I
"-'J_n':l:
Jt:'
'\'l--'i1li:"rti',
'1i-!W"'lY
\ j -1 r'
, r-I.':i ri '!';'~~ '1 t
Fl)'"U"I-c.,-.d
'I.;''' ( 1, ,v;~., j
hi
! '-'1 T.
it"",!'!",
'1";<'-0
i -J ;'~ .'_1 ,;-j
In _! (-!f~ l' fi~',
,OJ! ('fl[ r:; r'((
! i'''' c: f" f'
t.!J! :<
:,O:ir.iJ,,: V()I
I'""
T,
tl',[V' t',
'l"i]':L'""t
't ::lpr'l
\'Ii Li. !"'''''
;~',I1'! '
, t, ~ \
v
".,
'J ~,d
1;'
/t-'"I ""'Ie!"
''''-' '.." - ^
~~
'-':}<"l
Ddvl e::.-.
:cm;:Jn -
FF()Al'.i'..-J/~\,' F~,lr',THF'
A;:~;~:;f}c; I AT T IN
'[":!!n
WRn"i"Et~ COMMU.\1jCAl'IONS
TOM DAV!E9~-
45'11 OTlIV V:\'..LEY ROAD
CHUL/\ V:~jT!\ CA ~)1911
6c- f
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
6
Meeting Date 6-9-92
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution 1(,,(..'5:;1.... Authorizin9
closure of Rancho del Rey Parkway on
for an Orange Crate Derby
Director of Parks and Recreatio~
conditional temporary
September 19 and 20, 1992
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manage~
The Boni ta Orange Crate Derby Committee is request i ng Council to authori ze a
temporary street closure and grant permission to conduct an Orange Crate Derby
on Rancho del Rey Parkway on Saturday and Sunday, September 19 and 20, 1992.
(4/5ths Vote: Yes__No-x-)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the resolution, subject to
staff conditions, as stated in this report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Bonita Orange Crate Derby Committee (sponsor) is requesting permission to
conduct the Thirteenth Annual Orange Crate Derby on Saturday and Sunday,
September 19 and 20, 1992. The event would be conducted on Rancho del Rey
Parkway, between the west security gate of the Rancho del Rey development and
Avenida del Rey (see Attachment "A" for a map). The street would be closed to
traffic between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on both days. In addition, night-time
traffic on Saturday would be slightly impacted, since the sponsor would like
to leave some event equipment on one or both sides of the street overnight.
The sponsor expects that approximately 150 youngsters, ages 6 to 13 years old,
and 100 separate derby cars, would be involved in the double elimination
competition during the two-day event. The derby cars are built by famil ies,
according to specifications provided by the sponsor. Each car is equipped
with a steering wheel (steering capacity is 1 imited to avoid "over-steering"
by young drivers) and a friction-drag braking device. Each car is inspected
to verify that safety equipment is in working order and drivers are required
to wear helmets, long pants, and sturdy shoes.
The race course is approximately 1,000 feet in length, with no curves. The
cars are started from a ramp constructed of wood. The entire race course is
1 ined with hay bales on both sides, and the lanes are separated with traffic
safety cones (which act as "brakes" if a car crosses the center 1 ine). The
run-out area below the finish line is lined with traffic cones and hay bales.
Only two cars are on the race course at anyone time. Spectator areas are
designated and separated from the race course by hay bales and flag lines.
The sponsor has agreed to provide insurance, portable toilets, appropriate
trash containers and trash control; necessary traffic barricades, cones, and
~ -I
Page 2, Itl!lll 1.0
Meeting Date 6-9-92
directional signs; and overnight security (most cars will remain at the event
site overnight) at their own expense. The sponsor has contacted the Pol ice
Department and has been advised by the pol ice as to the appropriate barriers
and traffic regulators which are required for crowd and traffic control. The
sponsor is paying for all police services. The Environmental Review
Coordi nator has revi ewed the event request and has found that it is a Cl ass
4(e) exemption from CEQA requirements
This event was conducted at the proposed site last fall, with favorable
results. Residential development west of Avenida Del Rey is relatively
limited at the current time. All homeowners south and west of the race course
will have unlimited and unobstructed access to and from their homes during the
event, with the exception of the homes located in the Belmonte Estates, which
is located to the north of the course.
Residents in Belmonte Estates will have access to their homes as well.
However, they may experience momentary delays while the staging area for the
races is cleared to allow for safe vehicular crossing. The homeowners in this
area were notified in writing, on Saturday, May 30, 1992, by the event sponsor
of this possible delay during the event. McMillin Communities will be meeting
with these homeowners in the near future to work out any problems.
The sponsor, has notified in writing all other residents in the area regarding
the request for permission to conduct the event. This notification was
di stri buted by the sponsor on Saturday, May 30, 1992. Homeowners have been
invited to attend the council meeting to voice any concerns that they may have
regarding the event. In addition, City staff distributed a secondary notice
to all homeowners in the area on June 5, 1992, notifying them of the proposal
and of the Council meeting date and time.
McMill in Communities is a major sponsor of the event, and they fully endorse
the event at the proposed location.
It should be noted that the proposed site may not be suitable for this event
in future years, as development in the Rancho Del Rey area expands. The
recommendat i on for approval is based on exi st i ng condit ions. At the Council
meeting on 8-27-91 Council expressed concerns about this being a permanent and
suitable location. Alternate locations in the Rancho del Rey area were
evaluated, and this location was deemed to be most appropriate. The event was
staged at this location last year, and no problems were noted or reported.
If approval is granted for this event, it is recommended the sponsor be
subject to the following conditions:
1. The sponsor shall submi t proof of insurance in the form of a
cert i fi cate of insurance and pol icy endorsement for $1 mill ion,
naming the city as additional insured. The Risk Manager's Office
has reviewed this condition and concurs. The Risk Manager was
informed by the sponsor of additional safety standards that have
been instituted for this year's event.
~-~
Page 3, Item Y
Meeting Date 6-9-92
2. The sponsor shall execute the standard hold harmless agreement.
3. The sponsor shall provide all necessary supplies and services,
including portable toilets, trash receptacles, crowd control,
traffic control equipment, signage support police services and
other items as required, at their own expense.
4. Sponsor shall provide a $250 cash deposit for clean-up.
5. Sponsor shall post street closure signs in the immediate vicinity,
48 hours in advance.
6. All event participants shall be required to sign 1 iabil ity
waivers. These waivers must indicate that the City of Chula Vista
will be indemnified and held harmless.
7. The sponsor will be required to post signs and provide adequate
supervision to prevent participants and spectators from sitting on
retaining walls, and/or walking on or sitting in landscaped areas.
FISCAL IMPACT: None - the event sponsor shall pay all City service costs
associated with this event.
WPC 1742R
fo~3
r
!
\\\
!
!
j
.
----
..----
---
---=-~
1163E
,
.
N
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
~'
'#
.,
------
---
...............---
,
,
I
.
;
'W
~
l
I
.
.
,
~
,
~
\
.
l
!
t
1
!
t
r
,
.,
i
,
,
.;- .~:.:;.--_.~ ;;
L
RESOLUTION NO.
IlDlo SA-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING CONDITIONAL TEMPORARY
CLOSURE OF RANCHO DEL REY PARKWAY ON SEPTEMBER
19 AND 20, 1992 FOR AN ORANGE CRATE DERBY
WHEREAS, the Bonita Orange Crate Derby Committee is
. requesting Council to authorize a temporary street closure and
grant permission to conduct an orange Crate Derby on Rancho del Rey
Parkway on Saturday and Sunday, September 19 and 20. 1992.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby authorize temporary closure of
Rancho del Rey Parkway on September 19 and 20, 1992 for an Orange
Crate Derby subject to the following conditions:
1. The sponsor shall submit proof of insurance in the form of a
certificate of insurance and policy endorsement for $1
million, naming the city as additional insured. The Risk
Manager's office has review this condition and concurs.
2. The sponsor shall execute the standard hold harmless
agreement.
3. The sponsor shall provide all necessary supplies and services,
including portable toilets, trash receptacles, crowd control,
traffic control equipment, signage support police services and
other items as required, at their own expense.
4. Sponsor shall provide a $250 cash deposit for clean-up.
5. sponsor shall post street closure signs in the immediate
vicinity, 48 hours in advance.
6. All event participants shall be required to sign liability
waivers. These waivers must indicate that the city of Chula
vista will be indemnified and held harmless.
7. The sponsor will be required to post signs and provide
adequate supervision to prevent participants and spectators
from sitting on retaining walls, and/or walking on or sitting
in landscaped areas.
Approved as to form by
B=!-: ~~~
Attorney
Presented by
Jess A. Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
C:\rs\orange derby
&-5
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1
Meeting Date 6/9/92
ITEM TITLE: a) Resolution I~~$~ Amending the Utility Underground
Conversi on Program and reestabl i shi ng the pri ority 1 i st i ng of
proposed Utility Underground Conversion Projects
b) Resolution \ l.,b'S4 Declaring City's intention to
underground utilities along Otay Valley Road from Oleander
Avenue to Nirvana Avenue and setting a public hearing for the
formation of a Utility Undergrounding District along said
street section
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public worksl ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No~)
On November 12,1991, the City Council adopted Resolution 16415 accepting a
report on the City's Utility Underground Conversion Program and approving a
revised list of proposed utility underground conversion projects. The adopted
program shows Otay Valley Road between 01 eander Avenue and Brandywi ne Avenue
as #8 on the list. This resolution amends the program by upgrading the
priority of said street section to #4 and extending its limits from Oleander
Avenue to Nirvana Avenue.
On June 3, 1992, an Underground Util ity Advisory Committee (UUAC) meeting was
held in the Publ ic Services Building to consider the proposed boundary of an
Underground Utility District for conversion of existing overhead utilities
along Otay Valley Road from 01 eander Avenue to Ni rvana Avenue. The Di stri ct
is recommended at thi s time in conjunction with the Otay Valley Road Street
Improvement Project between I-80S and Nirvana Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the reso 1 ut ions as stated in the Item
Title above and set a public hearing to be held at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers of the Public Services Building on June 30, 1992, in accordance with
Section 15.32.130 of the Municipal Code. The hearing will be on the formation
of a Utility Underground District along Otay Valley Road from a point
approximately 100 feet east of Oleander Avenue to Nirvana Avenue.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Underground Utili ty Advi sory Commi ttee (UUAC) cons i st i ng of
representatives of SDG&E, Pacific Bell, Cox Cable TV, Chula Vista Cable, and
the City, agreed to propose to the City Council the formation of a Utility
Underground District for conversion of the overhead facilities along Otay
Valley Road within the limits mentioned above. The proposed utility
undergrounding district along Otay Valley Road is about 4,600 feet long
running from a point 100 feet east of Oleander to Nirvana Avenue. The
estimated cost for underground the utilities is $662,000. West of the
proposed district, undergrounding of overhead util ities is scheduled to be
l-\
Page 2, Item -,
Meeting Date 6/9/92
completed through Underground Utility District No. 120 on Otay Valley Road
extending from 500 feet east of Melrose Avenue to 100 feet east of Oleander
Avenue. Underground Utility District No. 120 was established by the City
Council on June 13, 1989, through the adoption of Resolution 14129. The
average daily traffic (ADT) count in this reach of Otay Valley Road is 15,170
vehicles per day. Staff recommends the formation of this conversion district
along Otay Valley Road because:
1. Otay Valley Road is a major thoroughfare serving a major industrial
and manufacturing base in south Chu1a Vista. Undergrounding of
utilities will contribute to the creation of an aesthetically
pleasing access to that area of the City.
2. The project is a continuation to Underground Utility District No.
120 which extends from 500 feet east of Melrose Avenue to a point
approximately 100 feet east of Oleander Avenue.
3. The project will be completed as part of an overall street
improvement project on Otay Vall ey Road that extends from 1-805 to
Nirvana.
4. The City will use SDG&E allocation funds based on the the Rule 20A
distribution formula to fund this project. This will help reduce
the assessment amount for the street improvement project and enab1 e
the City to utilize funds previously earmarked for the
undergrounding to be used to complete in a timely manner the
Assessment District project.
Section 15.32.130 of the Chu1a Vista Municipal Code requires the City Council
to set a public hearing to determine whether the public health, safety, and
general welfare requires the undergrounding of existing overhead util ities
within designated areas of the City and to give persons the opportunity to
speak in favor of or against the formation of a proposed district to
underground utilities. The purpose of forming the district is to require the
utility companies to underground all overhead lines and to remove all existing
wooden utility poles within the district. Section 15.32.140 of the City Code
requires the City Clerk to notify all affected persons and each utility
company of the time and place of the public hearing at least 15 days prior to
the date of the public hearing. Notice is to be given by mail to all property
owners and occupants of property located within the boundaries of the proposed
district. In this case, property owners will not be notified since the
di stri ct boundary fa 11 s on the right-of-way 1 i nes and a 11 property owners in
the area receive service from underground facilities. The City Clerk is
required by this section of the Code to publish the Resolution of Intention
setting the public hearing in the local newspaper no less than five days prior
to the date of the public hearing.
The City's adopted Utility Undergrounding Conversion Program shows Otay Valley
Road between 01 eander Avenue and Brandywi ne Avenue as #8 on the pri ori ty
list. Approval of this resolution will reestablish the priority list by
I .- :z.
Page 3, Itl!lll '1
Meeting Date 6/9/92
upgrading the rank of Otay Valley Road to #4 and extending its 1 imits in the
easterly direction to Nirvana Avenue. This project was ranked fourth because
the top three projects; "F" Street, Fourth Avenue, and "E" Street, were ahead
of Otay Valley Road in the process. The District has been approved by the
Underground Utility Advisory Committee (UUAC) at its meeting of June 3, 1992.
SDG&E has sufficient funds to cover the costs involved with the undergrounding.
A transparency showing the boundaries of the proposed district is available.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of pole removal and undergrounding of overhead
facil it i es along Otay Valley Road between 01 eander and Ni rvana Avenues as
outlined above is estimated to be $662,000. SDG&E's allocated funds (Rule
20-A) will cover the estimated cost of the project.
SMN:KV-078/AO-060
WPC 6007E
lJ3
"~::-:;J,.~rf1
. ........-...
I ~~"I...... =
~ ~N ~ =
'@",'5 I:
C!r .. w
III.: I"l : ~ _
"", !III....-Z
-- I = W
I--'~.: >
..: <c
l
:: "If
=0
::,.,.
:: ....
::
::
.
.
;
.
.
.
.
: =
: .
: S- /i.'Err
.
. :t=\~ ~
: -08 q)
: 01; _ c:)
~ -n. ()
~..s : >-~
.' <cr
p. 5w~;=
....i :..Jz...J
. <w
:...J 2:
a 5e(~'" @~o
=>u
.
.
.
.
~
~ .. >
: c(
i ~
-
~
. L&.
5 0
nm.
~z
~
, .
.
,.
Z!I
"
.
@~
,,~'f
->':'!
-,
, t ~
-.
J.:l ~.....:"
\ "
I . ~
I ~!
::;;! i
~~a
OS "'-:3(;
.2~
-
..
. ~~.. a
-, :I
-::-~
'-.
,.~...
.
101ll"
, U
c~.~
<< .... .
.
I-
:c
CJ
a:
=: 1
~
~
<
z
<
>
a:
Z
Ii
ZUl'''~.~w -
f,_J-.."".,._....'"
,..-.. )1.4..",1:
1I. lI." _
.
II
.
II
.
.
.
.
.
:
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
:>
:c(CJ
::.... z
i 0 i=
: eI)
><
w
'"
g'
3nN3^,v l::I30N'o'3l0
I'Y
I~
~ 't
.
"
~
';i
1;\8
\.::12
,
..
. ,."
"" .
r
.
~
.
:
.
!!'
u
~
~
:2
~
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
N
.....
.
o
z
.
e(
.
I-
o
-
a:
1-0
me(
-0
Co::
w
:)
z
w
>
c(
c(
z
c(
>
a:
-
z
o
I-
W
:)
Z
W
>
-c
a:
w
Q
Z
c(
W
..J
o
L&.
o
I-
eI)
-c
w
o
o
..
>-
0::
e(
0
z
~ N
0 - at
., ....
m a ...
N
....
I- .. 1ft
0 ><
- III
a: a ..
I- IIol
Eo
en :!
0 Q
. -
u
c
.
@~
e,,>-
!:::z~
m-..J
-Qe(
~z>
UJ::)
o~
a: I-
~o
a:
w
Q
Z
::)
>
I-
-
..J
-
I-
:)
RESOLUTION NO. lloloS.3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE UTILITY UNDERGROUND
CONVERSION PROGRAM AND REESTABLISHING THE
PRIORITY LISTING OF PROPOSED UTILITY
UNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROJECTS
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, on November 12, 1991 the City Council adopted
Resolution 16415 accepting a report on the Utility Underground
Conversion and approving a revised list of proposed utility
underground conversion projects; and
WHEREAS, the adopted program shows Otay Valley Road
between Oleander Avenue and Brandywine Avenue as #8 on the list;
and
WHEREAS, it is proposed to amend the program by upgrading
the priority of said street section to #4 and extending its limits
from Oleander Avenue to Nirvana Avenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby amend the utility Underground
Conversion Program by upgrading the priority listing of Otay Valley
Road from #8 to #4 and extending its limits from Oleander Avenue to
Nirvana Avenue.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
APlt r
Bruce M. Boogaard
Attorney
orm by
Presented by
C:\RS\OV #4 Priority
7A- )
)
RESOLUTION NO.~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER PUBLIC
NECESSITY, HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE REQUIRES THE FORMATION OF
AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT ALONG OTAY VALLEY ROAD FROM
OLEANDER AVENUE TO NIRVANA AVENUE
The city Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, Chapter 15. 32 of the Chula vista Municipal Code
establishes a procedure for the creation of underground utility
districts and requires as the initial step in such procedure the
holding of a public hearing to ascertain whether public necessity,
health, safety, or welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead
wires and associated overhead structures and the underground
installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric,
communication, or similar or associated service in any such
district, and
WHEREAS, on June 3, 1992, an Underground utility Advisory
Committee (UUAC) meeting was held in the Public Services Building
to consider the proposed boundary of an underground utility
district along Otay Valley Road from Oleander Avenue to Nirvana
Avenue, and
WHEREAS, it has been recommended that such an underground
utility district, hereinafter called "District", be formed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city Council of the city
of Chula vista as follows:
1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held
in the Council Chambers of the city of Chula vista at 276 Fourth
Avenue in said city on Tuesday, the 30th day of June, 1992, at the
hour of 6: 00 p.m., to ascertain whether the public necessity,
health, safety or welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead
wires and associated overhead structures and the underground
installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric,
communication, or similar associated service in the District
hereinabove described. At such hearing, all persons interested
shall be given an opportunity to be heard. Said hearing may be
continued from time to time as may be determined by the City
Council.
2. The city Clerk shall notify all affected property owners
as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and utilities
concerned of the time and place of such hearing by mailing a copy
of this resolution to such property owners and utilities concerned
1
lB-1
at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date thereof.
3 . The area
shown on Exhibit
reference.
proposed to be included in the District is as
A attached hereto and made a part hereof by
C:\RS\Inteot Underground Utilities
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
2
[~-2 /18-j
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ?
Meeting Date 6/9/92
ITEM TITLE: Resolution )~/,!) ~ Approving agreement to purchase land from Otay
Rio Business Park for a new City Corporation Yard and appropriating
funds.
SUBMITTED BY: Director Of Public Works #~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5ths Vote: Yes~No-->
One of the approved projects in the Public Facilities DIP is the building of a new Corporation
Yard. The original plan was to site the Yard in Sunbow II. Recently, however, an alternate
site (as shown on exhibit a) became available in the Otay Rio Business Park. City Council
authorized staff to begin negotiations on this site and return with a purchase agreement for
approval.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving the sales agreement to purchase a
30 acre site and appropriate the funds.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION: As mentioned above, the Public Facilities DIF provides for the building
of a new Corporation Yard. The Corporation Yard would contain the activities located at the
current site (Traffic Signal and Street Striping maintenance; Street, Street Tree, and Sewer
maintenance; Building maintenance; Communications; Parking Meter repair; Equipment
Maintenance; and Transit) plus Park Maintenance and the Animal Shelter. The yard is being
relocated for two major reasons: the current yard is too small now allowing no expansion for
future growth. Also, the geographic center of the City is somewhere east of 1-805, while the
current site is located at the northwest comer of the City. In May 1990, Council approved an
agreement with Sunbow that allowed the City to purchase a site in the 46 acre industrial park
in Sunbow II. This site was located east of 1-805, in Poggi Canyon, adjacent to the future
extension of Orange Ave. In order to be able to identify the actual dimensions of the
Corporation yard (both for the initial and final phases), in November 1990, City Council
approved an agreement with RNL/Interplan(RNL) for the provision of a master plan for the
new Corporation Yard. The siting work was completed in April 1991, with the final report
being finished in December 1991. In fact, staff was preparing to bring the final report to
Council for acceptance. Staff began negotiations with Sunbow for purchase of the site in
April 1991 upon completion of site layout work. Tentative agreement was reached between
Sunbow and staff, however, final negotiations and agreement were put on hold at the request
of Sunbow. With the negotiations deferred, it was projected that site development could not
begin until late 1994 or early 1995.
~~ \
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 6/9/92
At about the same time, some members of staff expressed concern with the fact that the
Sunbow site was located very near to the San Diego County landfill. Staff was concerned that
the State might, in the future, change the regulations dealing with construction near landfill
sites. In addition, the Sunbow site did not allow for future expansion in the event the Otay
Ranch was annexed to the City. Another concern was that the Animal Shelter would have
negative impacts on the residential units across the canyon.
Because of the above issues and the fact that the Sunbow site probably won't be ready until
1994 or 1995 at the earliest, the Director of Public Works suggested that staff look at the Otay
Rio Business Park as an alternate site. While the location isn't ideal (due to its location on the
southerly boundary of the City), it's only a mile and a half south of the Sunbow site. The
Otay Rio site has several advantages over the Sunbow site: it's ready to be developed now as
all public improvements to the site and utilities are in place; 49 acres of almost flat usable land
are available; and the cost is significantly lower (as noted in the chart below) than the Sunbow
site. Taking the above into consideration, staff requested and received from Council, approval
to negotiate purchase of a 30 acre site at Otay Rio. Staff has concluded negotiations with
Otay Rio and agreed on the attached sales agreement.
COMPARISON OF COSTS FOR CORP YARD SITES
COST ITEM
LAND COST @ $4.50/SQ FT
LAND COST @ $1.80/SQ FT
METHANE GAS COLLECTION SYSTEM
SUNBOW \I
21 ACRES
$4,116,420
NA
$459,358
OTAY RIO
BUSINESS PRK
30 ACRES
NA
$2,350,000
NA
TOTAL
CITY OF SAN DIEGO ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT $0.3577/SQ FT
TOTAL.
OTA Y VALLEY RD ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT $0.50/SQ FT
$4,575,778
NA
$2,350,000
$467,460
$4,575,778
NA
. $2,817,460
$653,400
TOTAL
$4,575,778
$3,470,860
TOTAL COST PER SQ
TOTAL COST FOR 30 ACRES
$6,536,826
$3,470,860
Basically, the agreement provides for purchase of the 30 acre site for $2,350,000. The seller
had wanted a 30 day escrow, but 60 days seems a more reasonable time in order to provide for
~~2.
Page 3, Item_
Meeting Date 6/9/92
the required soils investigation for hazardous material. In any event, escrow will close when
all the required conditions are met. In addition to the sales price, staff is requesting that
Council appropriate the funds required for the City's share of the Otay Valley Road
Assessment District (at $0.50/sq ft), the City of San Diego's Facility Benefit Assessment
District (FHA) at $0.3577/sq ft(a requirement of the annexation from the City of San Diego),
and $25,000 for any required environmental studies. TorStan is in the process of doing the
initial environmental survey at the price agreed on in their contract with the Redevelopment
Agency, about $4,000. If this initial survey discloses a need to do so, ground water test wells
will be sunk. TorStan has indicated that if such wells are required, $25,000 should be
sufficient.
As mentioned previously, the Corporation Yard Master Plan for the Sunbow site is already
completed. Because it may be to the City's advantage to build some parts of the facility before
the main construction is completed (such as Transit Operations or the Animal Shelter), staff
believes it is important to get RNL to prepare a new Master Plan for the Otay Rio site. Staff
suggests using RNL since they prepared the initial Master Plan; their price was fair for the
Master Plan; and their use negates the necessity for an RFP and selection process. This is
important if the Animal Shelter is to be relocated as quickly as possible. Accordingly, staff is
requesting Council's approval to negotiate an amendment to the current agreement with RNL
to update the Master Plan for the new site. When agreement on price and the tasks to be
performed has been reached, staff will return to Council for approval of the agreement and
appropriation of the funds.
FISCAL IMPACT: The total amount for appropriation is $3,495,860. This represents
$2,350,000 for the cost of the land, $467,460 for the City of San Diego FHA, $653,400 for
the Otay Valley Road Assessment District, and $25,000 for environmental studies. The funds
have been included by Transit staff in their FY1992-93 budget submittal. When final
construction is completed, it is expected that Transit's share will be about 20% (or
$4,498,000) of the total cost. It is being recommended that all of these land acquisition funds
be taken from Transit, rather than just Transit's share, to preclude any possibility that
unallocated Transit funds might be used for transit projects in other parts of the county or
state. When the project is completed, a final accounting will ensure that each funding source
is charged or credited with an appropriate amount.
DCB:dcb
~.~
-oz:uI}
(/'
a
C':
~
::a:
'i
~
~
;;;,
~
~
<
ll..
00
00
~,
Z
100--4
00
~
~
o
100--4
~
~
<
&-4.
o
~
..
..
""'Ila
~
-
ct:
NI - - --I
I-
~ ~ I u-i
co o ~
~ ...:l ell I I
:c - --I I_-
x "l:I ~
UJ :ll ~ 1 I --
___I 1
o 0 : '---1 1
~
'0\ g ~
- __I I
~p.. 11'"---
4 ~\ ' ,'1
,.' ",-I.........
1 ! ~ : \)-1 ..
\oJ
.....
, \ l-
I i ~.. I -
I-
~
-
0
~ C'l
. 0)
Z ::II "
0
. C':I
~ ......
....
~wlf ..
Gl
...
'"
0
_~:"'!C_:-__'.."_"-"':
SAN DIEGO CO _
DETAIL
N
.........
-
C'l
M
II)
w
..-.........._.. I"..... I
---'~i
~':: ~l
[r- ".....1 ........1 I \ I
"-If'" ........1 I \ I
~ I ", .......... I t--l",
~ ~I > )------1:::)..1" /. I "
---~ tr-- ;Q~~~----,~~ -'-::=-~:pi-t-+~:----
, \I ~l' ,.......'.,.-- j. I'
,..,.., ~ I 1 _/ \~. ,
'-oJ) I \:;" ~ I / ) L_ I I"
: : 'l; 1...., I f-1. ---~ "
1...:) .-' \. '-.-: I I I '
...... ~-. I I
~/ 'C:::) I / I I
~: I I,' I
I I I'
t't:::
", I I
'I
I
I
I
,
\
I
I
~:
I
!
I ,
r--1
I "
I ( !o
I : ii
I: I
.._--------~
u.
~
...
""'\,
,
,
\ '\
,
I
,
I
I
I
I
M
" ~
~ ~l ;.... I
_ O~'-..! c:j: -.-.-.'0 Cl
': /. ~ ~--u_L~
I I I ("/-__'. >- \
J : "....1 ",---' t ....>'-....) <( \
f'j.... 4--.< ~-- I....' ,
f, - ,..1'=, ,c~.:'- -\:.1- - -- - --(f) - \ ------
I I-- I" /~--"--(.I) ,
, , t-)>I.:>C'..) __' 1 "
I I L.. ' ( ,
".Z..... -.--.... \
'" '--- , \
,Ll ", r1 ".,,-----rOh----__.::\
I \ r-; ~~~ ___J I I------r \
~ 1f I, h-,:.----... I
'... ._oJ \ t s 1 I l t1 -......._J__..'"
~-- \ L.s...A I -- ..I
,,'" , I /"'.... J
,. ,I -...:;.-,,'1""\- I / I
, \ XJ~.wA-,. __......_,,/ / \
I .~. l \ \.;\ ;"',
i 3~ -)r"~" '\ I t::r" ,/ (~ 1,/ i
tl '~ ... ..-' /-
~ -_' .~. -7 -r-- -~- -. - -~--~l- _4_
'i: . I
.. .___"-, i_
..\., ":r ....
-',
.
,-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I j
1----'
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
,.
.-----"
.
,
,,----
(
\
.~lf~jl!~;fflt~i
"!ull"ij,ill
t!HH~ r...t...t.1
:~f~:r!'lt~f:l::o\'-:IH.
tI to ~
'lh... ~ tH. . t
J'':. ct.'..t~"t.t:'!
-It"!"' ",,1;
.L ,n";;"'l"
(
,
~
o
II)
IiEf"\ #r::;
i<-e.....,i .l."'C c.-q-qa.
RESOLUTION NO. 16655
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE
LAND FROM OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK FOR A NEW
CITY CORPORATION YARD, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
TO EXECUTE SAME, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS
THEREFOR
WHEREAS, one of the approved projects in the Public
Facilities DIF is the building of a new corporation Yard which
would contain the activities located at the current site plus Park
Maintenance and the Animal Shelter; and
WHEREAS, in May, 1990, Council approved an agreement with
Sunbow that allowed the City of purchase a site in the 46-acre
industrial park in Sunbow; and
WHEREAS, in November, 1990, council approved an agreement
with RNL/Interplan for the provision of a master plan for the new
corporation Yard; and
WHEREAS, recently, however, an alternate site became
available in the otay Rio Business Park and the city Council
conceptually approved the purchase of this site and staff has
negotiated a purchase agreement with the owner.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the Agreement between
the city of Chula vista and otay Rio Business Park for Sale of
Property, a copy of which is on file in the office of the city
Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the city of Chula vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
appropriate $3,495,860 from the unappropriated balance of Fund &e+
iQ! Fund and transfer said funds as follows: $2,350,000 to Account
89l 89l9404-4040-GG131-5561; $1,120,860 to Account 89t 89t9:iQ!;:
.4.Q!Q-GG131-5202 and $25,000 to Account 89 t 89 t9404-4040-GG131-5201.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:lnlCity Cup Yard
APL~O
Bruce M. Boogaard
Attorney
~ty
Presented by
by
c;'-~
AJT/AGMT-OTAY
Agreement Between the
City of Chula Vista
and
Otay Rio Business Park
for
Sale of Property
This Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Real Property
("Agreement") between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered
municipal corporation ("City") and Otay Rio Business Park, a
California joint venture ("Otay Rio") consisting of Amalgamated
Citrus Growers, Inc. and the Chillingworth corporation, dated
June 3, 1992 (the "Effective Date"), is made with reference to
the following facts:
Whereas, City needs to acquire 30 net usable acres of land
in order to perform the municipal purpose of having a facility
from which it may conduct its various public works functions; and
Whereas, Otay Rio is the owner of a 50 acre site referred
to on the Otay Rio Tentative Map, Chula Vista Tract No. 87-6
("Tentative Map") as Unit II; and
Whereas, the real property which is the subject matter of
this Agreement (the "Property") is demonstrated without legal
precision on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is
incorporated herein by reference; and
Whereas, City has made a good faith offer in exercise of
its powers of eminent domain to acquire the Property which Otay
Rio has accepted, which agreement is memorialized in this
document;
Now, therefore, the parties hereto, in consideration of the
mutual promises, conditions and covenants herein contained, do
hereby agree, in exercise of City's powers of eminent domain, as
follows:
1. Warranties and Representations.
1.1 Reliance on Warranties and Representations.
Otay Rio makes the following representations and
warranties as to the Property for inducing City to enter into
this Agreement and which City has materially relied upon.
1.2 Ownership and Authority.
Otay Rio is the sole owner of the Property, and has
the right, power and authority to sell, convey and transfer the
-1-
~-l
-----
"<- ~ \:l.?''::= S
Property to City as provided herein and to perform Otay Rio I s
obligations under this Agreement.
1.3 Rights of Possession.
As of the Close of Escrow, no person shall have any
right to possession of the Property other than Otay Rio.
1.4 Mechanic's Liens.
Otay Rio has received no written notice, demand,
claim, summons, complaint, judgment, writ or order claiming,
imposing or executing upon a mechanic's or materialman's lien
against the Property which has not been satisfied by Otay Rio as
of the Close of Escrow.
1.5 Litigation.
Otay Rio has received no written notice, demand,
claim, complaint or other court or arbitration tribunal process,
in connection with a currently pending or, to its knowledge,
threatened, action, suit or other court or arbitration proceeding
by a person involving the Property, including but not limited to
judicial municipal, or administrative proceedings in eminent
domain (other than as contemplated by City), unlawful detainer,
collections, alleged health and safety or zoning violations, or
personal injuries or property damages alleged to have occurred on
the Property or by reason of the condition or use of the
Property.
1.6 Regulatory Proceedings.
Otay Rio has received no written (i) inquiry or
notice of a currently pending investigation by any local, state
or Federal administrative agency or governmental body concerning
a violation of law or alleged violation of law by Otay Rio with
respect to the Property, or (ii ) notice, order, complaint or
other process of a local, state or Federal administrative agency
or governmental body in connection with a currently pending
proceeding by that agency or body concerning a violation of law
or alleged violation of law by Otay Rio with respect to the
Property which materially interferes with City's title, occupancy
or use of the Property.
1.7 Notice of Violations.
Otay Rio has received no written notice or order from
any court, administrative agency or governmental body or from any
insurer of Otay Rio of violation of any zoning, building code,
fire code, health code, air or water pollution or hazardous waste
laws, ordinance, rules or regulations (local, state or Federal)
regarding the Property. Otay Rio represents and warrants that
(i) Otay Rio has not, and Otay Rio has no actual or constructive
-2-
;&-S?
knowledge that during its ownership of the Property there has
been, released on or beneath the Property any Hazardous Materials
(as defined in Section 4.1.1.1); (ii) Otay Rio has no actual or
constructive knowledge of any envirorunenta1 condition or
Hazardous Material on the property which would be in violation of
any applicable federal, state or local law, ordinance or
regulation relating to Hazardous Materials (as defined in Section
4.1.1.1); and (iii) during the period of Otay Rio's ownership of
the Property there has not been any litigation or goverrunental or
administrative proceedings brought against the Property nor any
settlement reached with any party or parties alleging the
presence, release, or threatened release of any Hazardous
Materials (as defined in Section 4.1.1.1) from or under the
Property.
1.8 Transfer of Assets.
The Property to be conveyed to City hereunder does
not constitute substantially all of the assets of Otay Rio
located in the State of California.
1. 9 FIRPTA.
Otay Rio is not a "foreign person" within the meaning
of Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue code.
1.10 Title.
Title to the Property shall be conveyed by Otay Rio
to City in fee simple absolute, subject only to (i) all matters
shown on the Preliminary Report for the Property prepared by
First American Ti tle Insurance Company (the "preliminary
Report"), a copy of which shall be delivered to City within ten
(10) days after execution and delivery of a copy of this
Agreement by City to Otay Rio, which are not disapproved by City
within thirty (30) days after receipt of the Preliminary Report
by the City Manager of the City of Chula Vista (the "City
Manager"), (ii) any exceptions resulting from this Agreement, and
(iii) current real property taxes and all current installments of
unpaid general and special bonds, taxes and assessments
(collectively, "Permitted Exceptions").
1.11 Encumbrances.
The title to the Property is not encumbered by any
outstanding assessments, liens, except ordinary annual property
taxes which are not yet in default and except as otherwise may be
set forth in the Preliminary Report.
-3-
<g-q
2. Purchase and Sale.
On the terms and conditions herein contained, and for the
Purchase pri.ce herei.nbe1ow stated, Ci.ty sha11 buy the Property
from Otay Ri.o and Otay Ri.o sha11 se11 the Property to Ci.ty.
2.1 Purchase Price.
On the conditions hereinafter provided, City shall
pay to Otay Rio Two Million Three Hundred Fifty Thousand and
00/100 Dollars ($2,350,000.00) ("purchase Price") payable on the
Close of Escrow (as defined below). The Purchase Price shall
include all studi.es and reports, including, but not limited to
soils, environmental assessments, and engineeri.ng plans and
specifi.cati.ons, that have been completed by Otay Rio with respect
to the Property. The Purchase Price is based on the Property
comprising thirty (30) acres and to the extent the Property
contains more or less than thirty (30) acres, as reflected on the
ALTA Survey referred to in Section 7.4, then the Purchase Price
shall be increased if the property consists of more than thirty
(30) acres or decreased if less than thirty (30) acres, in either
case on a per square foot basis and based on a cost of Seventy-
Eight Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Three Dollars Thirty-Three
Cents ($78,333.33) per acre.
2.1.1 "Close of Escrow" means the date the Grant
Deed is recorded after compliance with all the conditions of this
Agreement and the conditions of escrow instructions, which date
shall be no later than July 31, 1992. If the Close of Escrow has
not occurred by July 31, 1992, then this Agreement shall
automatically terminate (except with respect to City's
obligations under Secti.on 5 hereof) and neither party shall have
any further obligation to the other.
2.2 Limitation of Liability
If City closes escrow (as evidenced by City's
acquisi tion of the Property), then (i) City shall have thereby
automatically assumed the risk with respect to any matters
affecting the Property as to which the City had actual knowledge
(as defined below) as of the Closing Date (as defined below),
whether such actual knowledge was gained on or prior to the
Effective Date and including without limitation any such actual
knowledge of Hazardous Material on or about the Property, and
(ii) Otay Rio shall have no liability with respect to the matters
Ci ty has actual knowledge of under the immediately preceding
clause (i) , notwi thstanding anything to the contrary set forth
herei.n, includi.ng without limitation the representati.ons and
warranties of Otay Rio set forth in Section 1 hereof.
For purposes of this Section 2.2, "actual knowledge"
shall mean any written document made available to the City
Manager, the Ci. ty' s Public Works Director, Deputy Public Works
-4-
}?-)o
Director/Operations, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer
or the Ci ty I s Building Services Superintendent, whether such
wri tten documents are provided by or on behalf of Otay Rio or
whether obtained by City through City's due diligence review of
the Property or otherwise.
3. Duty to Open Escrow.
3.1 The parties shall open escrow without the Conditions
of Closing (as defined below) being met, and subject only to
satisfaction of the following conditions:
3.1.1
Execution of this Agreement by both parties.
3.2 The parties agree to execute escrow instructions
consistent with the terms of this Agreement and such escrow
instructions shall not supersede the rights, duties and
privileges of the parties established by this Agreement, and
shall not terminate any rights and duties remaining executory
upon the Close of Escrow. Such escrow instructions, unless they
specifically provide that they are amendatory to this Agreement,
shall be corrected to reflect any inconsistencies between it and
this Agreement.
4. Duty to Close Escrow.
The parties shall use diligence and good faith to close
escrow (the "Closing Date") on or before seventy (70) days after
the opening of escrow (" AntiCipated Closing Date"), but subj ect
to the occurrence of the following conditions ("Conditions of
Closing") each of which shall be construed, not only as a
Condi tion of Closing, but also as a duty of the assigned or
responsible party to use good faith to bring to a conclusion.
City shall have a feasibility period ending sixty (60) days
after the Effective Date to satisfy itself concerning the matters
set forth in Section 4.1 below. If City has not approved such
matters in writing within such sixty (60) day period by written
notice to Otay Rio, then this Agreement shall be terminated
automatically and neither party shall have any obligation to the
other.
4.1 Conditions Precedent to the Obligations of City.
The duty of City to close escrow under this Agreement
is subject, at City's option, to the fulfillment of each of the
following conditions:
4.1.1
Environmental Contamination Survey.
City determines, in good faith, using reason-
able indui\ltry standards, that the Property does not contain
-5-
f-h
"Hazardous Material" as defined in Section 4.1.1.1. Ci ty 's
determination under this Section 4.1.1 shall not impair any
warranties provided herein by Otay Rio except to the extent that
City has "actual knowledge" (as defined in Section 2.2). If City
has any such actual knowledge of facts or circumstances contrary
to the representations and warranties of Otay Rio set forth
herein, then Otay Rio shall not be liable with respect to the
breach of any representation or warranty of Otay Rio to the
extent of such actual knowledge of the City.
4.1.1.1
Definition of "Hazardous Material".
"Hazardous Material" means any
hazardous or toxic substance, material or waste which is or
becomes regulated by any local governmental authority, the State
or the United States Government. The term "Hazardous Material"
includes, without limitation, any material or substance which is
(1) designated as a "hazardous substance" pursuant to ~ 311 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. ~ 1251 et seq.
(33 U.S.C. ~ 1321), (2) defined as a "hazardous waste" pursuant
to ~ 1004 of the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
42 U.S.C. ~ 6091 et seq. (42 U.S.C. ~ 6903), (3) defined as a
"hazardous substance" pursuant to ~ 101 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. g 9601 et seq.: (4) petroleum and petroleum
by-products: and (5) asbestos.
4.1.1.2
City to Conduct Environmental
Survey.
In order to avail itself of the
benefit of this condition precedent, City shall have the option,
upon opening of escrow, to have the Property examined by an
expert to determine the existence of Hazardous Material on the
Property. City shall promptly deliver a copy of any such
environmental report or study to Otay Rio.
4.1.2
Completion of Environmental Remediation.
As to any complaint which City may have as to
the environmental contamination of the Property, City may, at its
sole discretion, request Otay Rio to environmentally remediate
the Property to a level deemed satisfactory to City, not
unreasonably set. If Otay Rio agrees to do so, in Otay Rio's
sole and absolute discretion, said remediation shall be completed
at the sole cost and expense of Otay Rio, and shall be subject to
inspection and approval by City in consultation with any
Authority City deems appropriate. If Otay Rio does not agree to
such remediation, City shall have the option to terminate this
Agreement by written notice to Otay Rio within thirty (30) days
after Otay Rio notifies City in writing that Otay Rio will not
undertake such remediation.
-6-
91- It.
4.1.3
Governmental Approvals.
Ci ty shall be satisfied, based on a reason-
able evidentiary basis, that any- and al.l. permits, l.icenses and
other approvals of and by l.ooa1, state and Federal governmental.
authorities, departments, agencies, bureaus or commissions
required to buy and use the property for the purposes herein
contempl.ated have been issued or granted to City or wil.l. be
issued or granted to City. This shall. include, but not be
limited to, compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act and the California Subdivision Map Act. City agrees to
cooperate with Otay Rio in connection with the subdivision of the
Property, wi th the parties intending to comply with Section
66428(a)(2) of the California Government Code which exempts land
conveyed to or from a governmental agency from the requirements
of such Act.
4.1.4
Contract Compliance.
Otay Rio shall have performed and complied
with each and every covenant, agreement and condition required by
this Agreement to be performed or complied with by Otay Rio prior
to Closing, and each and every representation and warranty of
Otay Rio made in this Agreement shall be true and accurate as of
the date made and as of the Closing Date.
4.1.5
Useab1e Area.
City shall have determined that the Property
has sufficient area to construct an enclosed corporation yard
compound of 30 acres, including internal roadways.
4.2 Conditions Precedent to the Obligations of Otay Rio.
Al.1 obligations of Otay Rio under this Agreement are
subject to the fulfillment of each of the following conditions:
4.2.1
Payment of Purchase Price.
Ci ty shall have deposited into escrow the
Purchase Price twenty-four (24) hours prior to the Close of
Escrow.
5. City's Entry and Inspections.
Ci ty shall have the right of entry and inspection of the
Property and the area which is the subject matter of the Tenta-
tive Map during escrow. City shall provide Otay Rio or cause
Otay Rio to be provided with forty-eight (48) hours notice of
City's intent or of the intent of City's agents, consultants or
contractors to enter upon the Property. Any entry by City or by
Ci ty' s agents, consul tants or contractors shall not interfere
-7-
8-/3
wi th Otay Rio's use of the Property or with Otay Rio's per-
formance of its obligations under this Agreement. Ci ty shall
repair any damage to the Property resulting from such entry and
inspection. incl.uding, without l.imiting the general.ity of the
foregoing, in the event City or City's representatives bore or
dig on the Property, the dirt which is removed or displaced shall
be replaced from where it is taken and recompacted comparable to
other portions of the Property wi thin ten (l.0) days after such
boring or digging. City shall be responsible for any liabil.ity,
costs, claims, damage or injury caused by such entry and shall
keep the Property free of any and all liens arising therefrom.
City shall indemnify and hold Otay Rio harml.ess against such lia-
bility, costs, claims, demands, damage or injury. The provisions
of this Section shall survive the Close of Escrow and the
termination of this Agreement, as applicable.
6. Duties After Close of Escrow.
6.l. Contamination Indemnity.
6.1.1 The term "pre-Closing Contamination" shall
mean the existence of Hazardous Materials or toxic substances, or
wastes, including asbestos, at, on or beneath the Property,
including ground water, prior to the Closing Date.
6.1.2 Subject to the provisions of Section 2.3
hereof, Otay Rio hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold City
harmless from all losses, damages, costs and expenses, including
without limitation actual legal fees and disbursements incurred
by Ci ty which arose or resulted from acts, occurrences, or
matters of Otay Rio that took place prior to the Close of
Escrow. Such indemnification shall also include all costs of
assessment, containment and remediation of any and all damages,
cost and expenses for bodily injury (including death) and
property damage related to or arising out of such Pre-Closing
Contamination by Otay Rio. Otay Rio's indemnity shall be subject
to City conducting a Phase I Environmental Assessment of the
Property (and such additional environmental assessments or
studies, if any, as City may determine in its sole discretion)
and Otay Rio shall not be responsible for, nor shall City be
indemnified for, any information set forth in such study or
studies. Otay Rio shall not indemnify City as to a loss caused
by the type and concentrations of Hazardous Materials disclosed
in any environmental contamination survey performed by City or to
the extent City otherwise has "actual knowledge" (as defined in
Section 2.2) of any such Hazardous Material on or prior to the
Closing Date. If no such study is conducted by City, this
indemnity shall continue in force without modification except to
the extent City otherwise has "actual knowledge" (as defined in
Section 2.2) as of the Closing Date of Hazardous Materials on or
about the property.
-8-
%-/1-1
6.1.3 Nothing in this section shall be construed to
waive or limit any rights and causes of action which City may
have against Otay Rio for Pre-Closing Contamination under
Federal, state or local law, regulation, rule or ordinance or
under common law.
6. 1.4 Otay Rio shall not be liable for environ-
mental contamination of the Property to the extent Otay Rio can
demonstrate such contamination was caused by City or, subsequent
to the Closing Date, by any third party; City acknowledging that
City has the opportunity to conduct environmental studies of the
Property.
6.1.5 For a period of five (5) year after the
Closing Date, City shall have the right, at City's expense, to
stub-in utility connections to serve the Property to utilities,
if any, located on property owned by Otay Rio contiguous to the
Property.
7. Escrow
7.1 Escrow Holder.
The escrow required by this Agreement shall be at
First American Title Insurance Company ("Escrow Holder"), 411 Ivy
Street, San Diego, California 92101.
7.2 priority of Agreements.
In the event of any conflict between the provisions
of the escrow instructions and this Agreement, the provisions of
this Agreement shall control.
7.3 Title Policy.
7.3.1
Preliminary Title Report.
Otay Rio shall, wi thin ten ( 10) days after
the opening of escrow, deliver to City the preliminary Report.
7.3.2
Title Insurance.
Otay Rio shall, upon close of escrow, and at
its own expense, to the extent set forth in Section 7.6 below,
deliver to City an ALTA owner's title policy of title insurance
insuring City in the amount of the Purchase Price that City is
the fee owner of the Property free and clear of all liens and
encumbrances, except for the Permitted Exceptions.
-9-
9- /~
7.4 Deed.
At Closing, fee simple title shall be conveyed to
City by use of a standard form Grant Deed subject only to the
Permitted Exceptions. Prior to the Closing Date, the surveyor
preparing the ALTA Survey of the Property shall prepare a legal
description of the Property to be approved and initialled by Otay
Rio and City and then attached to this Agreement as Exhibit "B".
7.5 Parties' Responsibilities.
The parties shall execute and deliver their respec-
tive instruments to the Escrow Holder and perform their respec-
tive acts sufficiently in advance of the Closing Date to enable
Escrow Holder to effect the payment of the Purchase Price to Otay
Rio and record the Grant Deed on the Closing Date.
7.6 Costs and Fees.
OtaY Rio shall pay: (i) that portion of the title
insurance costs for the Owner's ALTA coverage title policy equal
to the cost of a standard CLTA title policy; (ii) one-half of the
fees of the Escrow Holder; (iii) the documentary transfer taxes;
(iv) the actual cost of the ALTA survey (and Otay Rio shall have
the right to approve the contract for such survey) ; and (v)
property taxes prorated at the Close of Escrow. Ci ty shall
pay: (i) one-half of the fees of Escrow Holder; (ii) all
recording fees if any are determined to be due after certifica-
tion that the sale is to a public entity; and (iii) the balance
of the cost of the ALTA title policy. All other costs related to
the transaction except as otherwise provided, shall be paid by
Otay Rio or City or both in the manner consistent with common
practice in San Diego County. Each of the parties shall bear the
costs of the services of their respective attorneys. If the
Escrow is terminated for any reason, all escrow costs and title
charges incurred in connection with this transaction shall in
such event be paid by the parties hereto in accordance with the
provisions hereof, except that any party in default hereunder
shall be liable to the innocent party for its share of said costs
and charges.
8. Survival.
8.1 Survival After Closing.
The executory provisions of this Agreement shall
survive the Closing and the delivery of instruments of convey-
ance. The representations and warranties of Otay Rio shall
survive the Close of Escrow until the earliest to occur of the
date (i) ten (10) years after the Closing Date, (ii) the date
Ci ty completes construction of the improvements contemplated as
of the date hereof to be constructed by or on behalf of City on
the Property, or (iii ) City transfers the property to a third
-10-
p-/(;
party. Otay Rio's obligations under this Agreement shall run
only in favor of City and may not be assigned nor transferred nor
sha11 there be any third party beneficiaries to this Agreement.
9. Broker's Commissions.
Otay Rio and City both warrant that neither has engaged the
services of a broker, finder, real estate agent, or any other
person who would be entitled to a commission upon the sale of the
Property ("Broker"). Each party agrees to indemnify and hold
each other harmless from and against ..a1l liability, claims,
demands, damages, or costs of any kind arising from or connected
with any brokers' fees or commissions or charge claimed to be due
arising from the conduct of the other, respective1y, in retaining
the services of such Broker with respect to this transaction.
Otay Rio shall pay any real estate commission or brokerage fee
due any such Broker arising from this sale transaction pursuant
to any brokerage agreement entered into between Otay Rio and such
Broker.
10. General.
10.1
Governing Law.
This Agreement and the performance of the transac-
tions contemplated hereby shall be governed by and construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
10.2
Entire Agreement.
This Agreement and the Exhibits hereto and the
agreements referred to herein set forth the entire agreement and
understanding of the parties in respect of the transactions
contemplated hereby and supersede all prior agreements, arrange-
ments and understandings relating to the subject matter hereof.
No representation, promise, inducement or statement of intention
has been made by City or Otay Rio which is not embodied in this
Agreement or in the documents referred to herein, and neither
Ci ty nor Otay Rio shall be bound by or liable for any alleged
representation, promise, inducement or statement of intention not
so set forth.
10.3
Benefits of Agreement.
All of the terms, covenants, representations,
warranties and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding
upon, and inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by, the
parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, but
this Agreement and the rights and obligations hereunder shall not
be assigned or duties delegated, except as provided in this
Agreement.
-11-
~-/7
10.4
Modifications.
This Agreement may be amended, modified, superseded
or cancelled, and any of the terms, covenants, representations,
warranties or conditions hereof may be waived, only by a written
instrument executed by City and Otay Rio or in the case of a
waiver, by or on behalf of the party or parties waiving compli-
ance. The failure of any party at any time or times to require
performance of any provision hereof shall in no manner affect the
right at a later time to enforce the same. No waiver by any
party of any condition, or of any breach of any term, covenant,
representation or warranty contained in this Agreement, in any
one or more instances, shall be deemed to be or construed as a
further or continuing waiver of any such condition or breach or a
waiver of any other condition or of any breach of any other term,
covenant, representation or warranty.
10.5
Headings.
The article and section headings contained in this
Agreement are for convenience of reference only, and shall not in
any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.
10.6
Notices.
All notices, requests, demands and other communica-
tions required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be deemed
to have been duly given if in writing and delivered personally,
given by prepaid telegram, or mailed first-class, postage
prepaid, registered or certified mail, as follows:
If to Otay Rio:
Otay Rio Business Park
c/o Los Alisos Development Corporation
19800 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 820
Irvine, California 92715
Attn: F. Jack Liebau
If to City:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California
Attn: City Manager
10.7
Attorneys' Fees.
In the event of any dispute arising out of the terms
of this Agreement or action to enforce the Agreement's terms, the
prevailing party in any action shall be entitled to reasonable
attorneys' fees in addition to any other remedies provided for by
law.
-12-
9-lf
10.8
Execution.
This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in two
or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original,
but all of which together shall constitute one and the same
instrument.
10.9
Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence in this Agreement as to all
dates and time periods set forth herein.
10.10 Further Assurance.
Otay Rio and City each agree to do such further acts
and things and to execute and deliver such additional agreements
and instruments as the other may reasonably require to consum-
mate, evidence or confirm the sale or any other agreement con-
tained herein in the manner contemplated hereby.
10.11 Otay Valley Road Assessment District.
City hereby acknowledges that the Property is within
the proposed Assessment District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road)
("Assessment District 90-2") proposed to be formed by the City of
Chula Vista and City further acknowledges receipt of a copy of
that certain Notice to Property Owners delivered under letter of
Donna Snider, Civil Engineer, dated April 29, 1992 concerning
Assessment District 90-2. To the extent applicable to
governmental property owners, City further acknowledges that a
special tax will be included in City's annual tax bill for the
repayment of bonded indebtedness incurred by Assessment District
90-2, all as more speCifically set forth in the Notice. City
shall not take any actions challenging the legality of Assessment
District 90-2, the issuance of additional bonds by Assessment
District 90-2 or the imposition of the special tax by Assessment
District 90-2. City acknowledges that Assessment District 90-2
may sell additional bonds in the future and City will cooperate
with any such bond sales. City shall, upon the request of Otay
Rio, execute and deliver further documents in order to confirm
City's acknowledgement of Assessment District 90-2. City hereby
waives the right to protest formation of Assessment District 90-2
and the right to protest formation of a Facilities Benefit
Assessment District for facilities impacted by development of the
Property, all as contemplated by Resolution No. 13173 of the City
Council of the City. City acknowledges that it has read and is
familiar with such Resolution and that it agrees, as owner of the
Property, to be bound by the terms thereof.
-13-
9-/q
10.12 Joint Grading Agreement.
City and Otay Rio agree to negotiate in good faith
in connection with a mutually satisfactory joint grading plan for
the mass grading of the Property and the balance of the real
property of Phase 2 of Otay Rio Business Park, with the
understanding that a joint project for the mass grading of such
property will be mutually beneficial to City and Otay Rio with
respect to cost and removal of soil. In connection with such
mass grading, City and Otay Rio acknowledge and agree that dirt
may be moved between the Property and contiguous property of
Phase 2.
10.13 Development.
In connection wi th Ci ty' s development of the
Property, City agrees to comply with the development restrictions
and conditions set forth in conditions of approval nos. 31 and 34
(including without limitation, landscaping and set backs, fencing
and certain other design requirements) of Resolution No. 13173 of
the City Council of the City of Chula Vista.
10.14 Utility Corridor.
Ci ty agrees to grant Otay Rio or the appropriate
utility authority(ies) or agency(ies) an easement for a corridor
("Utility Corridor") as required in the Tentative Subdivision Map
for Otay Rio Business Park, Tract 87-6, and Resolution No. 13173
of the City of Chula Vista. The Utility Corridor shall only
include water, sewer, and storm lines and drains. City shall
have the reasonable right to approve and/or establish the
location of said Utility Corridor on the Property. The plans and
specifications for the Utility Corridor shall be submitted to the
Ci ty for approval at least (30) thirty working days prior to
construction. Otay Rio shall be responsible for all costs for
construction of the Utility Corridor. City shall have the right
to require the relocation of this easement at City's expense.
Otay Rio shall indemnify and hold harmless City from
any and all liability, claims, costs (including reasonable
attorneys' fees), damages, and property damages arising from the
entry (including any surveys), and construction of the Utility
Corridor. Otay Rio shall also provide commercial general
liabili ty and property damage insurance in the amount of one
million dollars ( $1 million) naming the City as an additional
insured in connection wi th construction of the Utili ty
Corridor. A certificate of said insurance must be filed with the
City's City Clerk, 276 Fourth Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91910 prior
to commencement of any surveys or construction.
-14-
,f - Zo
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this
instrument on the date first above written.
Dated:
June
-'
1992
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
ruce M. Boogaard,
City Attorney
OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
By: AMALGAMATED CITRUS
GROWERS, INC.
By' ---'!J:l:::ISl""=
Its:
ATTEST:
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
Exhibit A: Map
Exhibit B: Legal Description (to be attached when approved by
City and Otay Rio)
-15-
<8- - 7-1
.. .J' _." ,'a, .I..... ~>J
A ->"', .." . .'\lV
............... ....~... ' ot.. ...
-:c.'-3J:}
... .~-I'
. 6"'-
tJll".,.I....
~ I
~~
l si us
E
a
;;;
.
","...
>>
.
I' I ---1
. , I
- --: :----
---::----11
I'
_ __I t
I r---
J I .
I "
"..''1-< ..............,
, '.
, . \
, \
,
o
>0"0
....-
.- ...
:s..
...0
::lU
z
EXHIBIT "A", <ir-2:L
~
~
<
p...
en
00
~,<
Z'
t-4
00
~
~
o
~
~
:>-t
<
E-I
o
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 6- 6-92 ; 15:42 ;
6196915540"
425 6164;11 2
Sweetwater Union High School District
ADMINISTRATION CENTER
1180 Fifth A..nu.
Chula VI,'a, California '1'1 '.2_
(018) 081.01lOO
~~.
.~
Dlvlllon of Planning and F.ctlll...
June 8,1992
Mr. John Goss
City Manager
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Goes:
Several years ago the City of Chula Vista and the Sweetwater Union High SchoOl District
were proceeding towards a cooperative agreement that would have jointly relocated the
corporate yards of the City and the DletriCll as well 88 the Dlstr1cl's central office. This
agreement was never consummated as originally anticipated due to philosophical
differences that arose between the former District Superintendent and the City of Chula
Vista's City Manager and Mayor.
Recently, both parties have again begun to pursue our former cooperative statue with the
initiation of the Youth Center located on the Campus of Chula Vista High School, Joint use
of the EastLake Park, and the Eastlake High School Library. It would only seem
appropriate at this time that the City and the District again review the options which were
previously discussed regarding the centralizing of corporate facilities. The mutual
benefits to a Joint use facility have long been advocated by several membel$ of the
Council, the Board of Trustees as well as staff from both public entities. Before Council
considers a firm direction on the future of the City's corporate yard, consideration to a joint
corporate yard proposal and Its potential benefits to both agencies should again be
explorecllpursued.
Any consideration to this concept would receive an immediate response from the
Sweetwater Union High School District and would only prove to benefit all of the taxpayel$
serviced by both public entitles.
Sincerely, ~
?/~?
Andrew B. Campbell
Director of Planning & Facilities
ABC:mr
c: Mr. Lippitt
1
.- --'---'-"--"r-.'--"
:if / 2J
, .
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 6- 6-82 ; 15:41 ;
6186815540"
425 6164;# 1
SWEETWATER VNJON HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
0"
ADMJNJS11IA'J1ON CENTER
1110.... uu\VENUE
CII\JJ.A Yl8TA, CAL1FORNlAr. tiel I
"It) .1.....
'All ... ...
-
.~LI _........... ..........lIM
FACSpmJl'TRANSMISSION
DATE: r~/q~,!t
NUMBER OF PMBS ~
INCLUDING COVEIlSBEET
TO: ~11~ ~~Aru
COMPANY: Q.~( p ~J' 11.. tkiz ,
DEPARTMENT:
t.f:z. 5 ..
FAX NO: ~ -&;1/14.
BE: fJtvr.d...-~-6. ~"
OPERATOR: ~~~~P1u r
~~~
"
.--.- ..- ___n i-I ...... .-- ..
g~c27
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
IteAl~
Meeting Date 6-9-92
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION J~~~ Approving the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the City of Chula Vista and City
of San Diego to establish a joint planning process for review
of the Fenton-Western pr~rties project.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning# ~ (I?J~L.'
REVIEWED BY: City Managei? (4/5ths Vote: Yes__No-A-)
The Fenton-Western properties are located within the Otay River Valley between
I-80S and 1-5. The 400 total acres are scattered throughout the valley in
several large parcels. The current boundary between the Cities of Chula Vista
and San Diego runs through the Otay River Valley, and spl its the
Fenton-Western propert i es between the two juri sdi ct ions (pl ease see attached
exhibit).
The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to provide a process
whereby both jurisdictions agree to share personnel, costs and ideas with a
goal of jointly forming and creating necessary documents and plans for the
Fenton-Western properties acceptable to both jurisdictions. While both
jurisdictions would retain their independent governmental authority to review
the project, both juri sdi ct ions woul d vol untarily enter into thi s Memorandum
of Understanding and agree to cooperate to form a joint planning approach in
an attempt to develop a single master plan for the Fenton-Western properties.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing
staff to enter into the proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between
the City of Chula Vista and the City of San Diego establ ishing a joint
planning process for review of the Fenton-Western Properties project.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The master plan for the Fenton-Western properties would provide for a single,
uni fi ed proposal for development and preservat i on of lands withi n the study
area. It is agreed that the inter-jurisdictional approach outlined in the
Memorandum of Understanding is advantageous because:
A. The Fenton-Western Properties ownership overlaps both jurisdictional
boundaries.
B. The project area is located within the focused planning area of the
proposed Otay Valley Regional Park, a joint planning effort involving
the County of San Diego and the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego.
C. Based upon the results of thi s p lanni ng process, both Fenton-Western
Properties and the two jurisdictions have agreed to study potential
adjustments to the jurisdictional corporate boundaries.
C\ - \
Page 2, Item 1
Meeting Date 6-9-92
D. Proposals for development of such a large area will generate a great
number of complex social, economic, environmental, and other issues.
E. Proposal review will require the application of a significant amount of
staff resources.
Therefore, the joint planning approach, r~flected in this Memorandum of
Understandi ng has been developed to address the above issues. It is the
intent of both juri sdi ct ions, through thi s Memorandum of Understandi ng, to
work together to achieve concurrence, at the staff level, on specific plans
and all actions to be taken concerning the future development of this
project. This work effort would be overseen by an "executive management team"
consisting of the Deputy City Managers, Planning Directors, Parks and
Recreation Directors, and Public Works Directors of both cities.
This work will be governed by a comprehensive work program acceptable to both
jurisdictions. The work program will include the definition of a project
study area, establ i shment of pl anni ng and engi neeri ng standards, and
definition of planning terminology. The work program will describe the
planning context, including land use, transportation, circulation, and any
other components deemed necessary to be addressed.
The work program will be prepared following approval of this Memorandum of
Understanding, and would require approval by the signatories of this
Memorandum of Understanding. However, the work program may not be immediately
implemented. Fenton-Western properties has indicated that the current
recession has reduced sales of construction materials to an extent that the
company does not have the financial means to fund a comprehensive full-scale
work program at thi s time. Representatives from Fenton-Western properties
have indicated that they may be able to fund a smaller, phased work program
which looks at increments of their Otay River Valley property in a logical and
coordinated manner. Approval of this Memorandum of Understanding will also
provide the framework for instituting a more comprehensive work program if and
when the Fenton-Western Properties is financially able to fund such a program.
The City of San Diego approved this Memorandum of Understanding on April 21,
1992. The attached letter to the City Manager from the Deputy City Manager of
San Diego clarifies two points within the Memorandum of Understanding to our
satisfaction.
FISCAL IMPACT: None; the cost of providing staff resources shall be borne
by the owner and shall be recovered from advance deposits made by the owner.
WPC 9932P
o.~2.
~---'
'___\~/~"..\, \'c~ _,~i_!:-:-,C :I.'
?.J . _, ',\~' jf,,,~ Fe ...
" \ ':>'\ 'i,,'" t "' ''"' =' -1- .
tL.";l i c~,...'" JS\.\\:::;.". r-~'"' W,r::4 '~. -~r'~~1 I'
_ <~..r ,V' ~~" "zJr~-- '
,.,::~;~ //_'.'.r\\v;~'>"!.~1..-;;~,;\'tK .-' Ir--- - I ~..-
'" 'c:J'~ ";,,~,~,>:--::~'J';;'- ,'\ - -+--___"'____'1 -
.',."... ,~:-~rc- - __ ' , ,\ I
;:-'l'f~,~;.::J'~:;-e ,~-;:,,=: _ i k lZJi
, ,~, ~':;__ ,1- \ -"," '. ~"
,1)_ )'b,,)td. "i, \ \ (-~P: ~ J ' ;;':- P'
~' ' ./' .~, /__ ~, . '" '._" " "'S.~ (
,/ ,,,__' "." , oJC' C" C '. [,y \'1\ '
.~~ ,_, '>'; ,,' _,~ ~f ~ _ ,'hI' 1<1'.1 . ~; L
\ "~~,~ \ "____ <,_~ ~I ~A _ ,"'__ 'OiI_ -~
- -,- - - - - - -'
~ ~;, ~--;,;';\'__ ,,\ c:;:! ll:! _~: ~_ ~~,~.t:;'1:;_r.q!
~ ... ,\ =.'=',,_) <C',' ~ -; - :, r
" 0' -~-,-,.- -
~ ...." (' \ -...... 1t >' z .1
~,\ Z !:II' ".' \...\~\I_SJ." ; ~ ~ ~: _'1 G', '=~'.I
" I,' 0 \~.\ I. '.,:J'II ~,: <C o_~ , - .
, , W ,- 1---' - "-
,_~ W ~ ,C-,- '\ >. .3'<- 1-- -
\ .' ~., / ", '\ _II ~' ilib-- - I,
''''_ w...l A'~~i'~ 0 ,~I
;.f; ; ~ '~'1--'{{~: ~_ ~L' f , ,', .~~b:.~'jl~G.
_ . is 0- yi-_ ,I -, . ., 1 XlF'"l"',-
-<'0 " , ' ~ ~ 'f.""
. ,-e ~ w' . "T ;-' 'l - 7:"\.::' ,
" ~ C/)I- I-:Z: . n: it .,': f.'I' d n,'l..Wn'.".rll- 's' '.;'.:
../---... ' '" : ;.~ ,j" l' r l' : ,I I' . .' .
~', ffi C ",._ ....'1 i ~ -,c",~4 'CD [ '-i ;iJ,
o ~ \ :1 if"JD' ILl ,'.' ~.
z'" . .~ j .' .' H;L ..'. 'I' i.j '~'." ~ G=J'" :
~ ~\ i JJ[T[~;! r .
o !!2c::.:'::>'-;':':"~ !U~1-' "-[-:,,;.. U'-
. L> " >. II " '1 'l'i {. i c, L.
____ ,,~ ,,~/, ~c'C '.'d ,I
!i! ~ ,;;,J . i,[" r ' .
'" 0 \\\" -j ~~'i'''--\" . [
a: u. ,. ...J. : 1'1' ,..~'I\'?,i.
o 0 ~" :i:~;?f ' ,I!'I II" ,:,;;;e
~ ~'r,'5,.,Pj.li / ~.._ 1~?L~t
:::E _ .\>/.:> L !
o .:::"/.....~.,.;. ~
,., w,~:..
:z: '. ' - ~
, I- '~/~C:'
'. ", ~0''':'-'':C/'':~ "
_ /;;:::, -' '\L
_ /c- ro, r
ir:.f',\ . l " '..
,'.-, \. /~
,9~\\ \,Y": I
.,\",,,,-\ ,\\ ..~
_.::;~.~~:\\\~; \ ~5~~,::":!;'lrll'
_';"~'''~/__ ,/..' .1'
. .::;,~~:,:' .~?":,. -" . j!" .~!
~::: .Jf.'..'\''Ii:
__' . v:-JL-
," ....... II . ~,-' lln"
".---.;.>.
\ \\
-,>:.',
.-- ,
\<~\
,.;.,(
\~ .
.
\~
,
ci
(J
$
a:
I!!
<
::l!
z
o
I-
Z
W
lL
,
), \.
: ~ -
ci
:i
>
lD
C
~
;;:
o
II)
w
~
II:
w
Q.
o
a:
0.
t
...I~
rTf"
",'--
='-C-' l
l
:
.
.
. -----
l-~-- i i
\..... lor
;,
~
~...;.--_.-
./'
........------.~ I
\cq~3
<(
t-
-
a1
-
:E:
><
W
,
RESOLUTION NO. !lIler;1:.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO TO ESTABLISH A JOINT
PLANNING PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF THE
FENTON-WESTERN PROPERTIES PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Fenton-Western Properties Company is prepari ng plans
for development of approximately 400 acres within the Otay River Valley; and
WHEREAS, the area owned by Fenton-Western Properties Company within
the Otay River Valley is divided between the municipal jurisdictions of Chula
Vista and San Diego; and
WHEREAS, the joint planning process as outlined in the Memorandum of
Understanding is advantageous because:
A. the Fenton-Western Properties ownership overlaps both
jurisdictional boundaries.
B. the project area is located within the focused planning area of
the proposed Otay Valley Regional Park, a joint planning effort
involving the County of San Diego and the Cities of Chula Vista
and San Di ego.
C. based upon the results of this planning process, both
Fenton-Western Properties and the two jurisdictions have agreed
to study potential adjustments to the juri sdi ct i ona 1 corporate
boundaries.
D. Proposals for development of such a large area will generate a
great number of complex social, economic, environmental, and
other issues.
E. Proposal review will require the application of a significant
amount of staff resources.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
That the City of Chula Vista hereby authorizes staff to enter into a
non-binding and revocable Memorandum of Understanding with the City of San
Di ego establ i shi ng a joi nt p 1 anni ng process for revi ew of t Fenton-Western
properties project.
SUBMITTED BY:
i.ROV AS ~ F
(BRUCE M. BOOGAARD
CITY ATTORNEY
ROBERT A. LEITER
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
WPC 0330p
q- Lk
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND CITY OF SAN DIEGO
TO ESTABLISH A JOINT PLANNING PROCESS
FOR THE PROCESSING OF THE FENTON-WESTERN PROPERTIES PROJECT
I. INTRODUCTION
The Fenton-Western Properties company (Owner) is preparing plans
for development of their properties within the south San Diego Bay
and otay Valley area. Two jurisdictions with final land use
authority include the city of Chula Vista and City of San Diego.
Both jurisdictions have chosen to be actively involved with the
preparation of the necessary plans and documents and with the
final approval of the entitlements listed below.
The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to provide a
process whereby both jurisdictions agree to share personnel, costs
and ideas with a goal of jointly forming and creating necessary
documents and plans for the project acceptable to both
jurisdictions. While both jurisdictions intend to retain their
independent governmental authority to review the project, both
jurisdictions have voluntarily entered into this Memorandum of
Understanding and have agreed to cooperate to form a joint
planning approach in an attempt to develop a single master plan.
The master plan shall consist of all graphic plans, figures, and
text necessary to adequately describe specific development
proposals. The master plan shall be prepared by the Owner, based
on recommendations of the joint staff. It is agreed that such an
approach is advantageous because:
A. The project size and scope are very large.
B. The Fenton-Western Properties ownership overlaps both
jurisdictional boundaries.
C. The project area is located within the Focused Planning Area of
the proposed otay Valley Regional Park, a joint planning effort
involving the county of San Diego, and the cities of Chula
Vista and San Diego.
D. Both Fenton-Western Properties, and the two jurisdictions have
agreed to study potential adjustments to the jurisdictional
corporate boundaries.
E. Proposals for development of such a large area will generate a
great number of complex social, economic, environmental, and
other issues.
F. proposal review will require the application of a significant
amount of staff resources.
q~s
Page 2
G. Clear definition of responsibility, and designation of staff
contacts, is needed for the convenience of interested citizens,
organizations, responsible agencies and the Owner.
Therefore, the joint planning approach, reflected in this
Memorandum of Understanding, has been developed to address the
above issues. It is the intent of both jurisdictions, through
this Memorandum of Understanding, to work together, diligently, to
achieve concurrence on specific plans and all actions to be taken
~~"~~Tning th~ future nev~lnpment of this project.
The City Managers and Planning Directors of both jurisdictions
have agreed that this cooperative approach would best serve the
citizens, organizations, agencies and the various groups who may
have interest in this project.
II. THE JOINT PLANNING APPROACH
A. Authorized Work
This includes all work related to the following: General Plan
Amendments (GPA's) for both cities; amendment of the Montgomery
Specific Plan (Chula vista); amendment and/or update of the otay
Mesa-Nestor Community Plan (San Diego); and development of the
Otay Valley Regional Park Concept Plan and subsequent Master Plan.
Preparation of an EIR(S) and all necessary environmental
documentation is included in the authorized work. Consideration
and preparation of development agreements shall be included in the
authorized work.
Staff and Executive Management Team recommendations for plan
amendments, and entitlements including, but not limited to,
subdivision maps, development permits and development agreements,
shall be consistent with the jointly developed master plan, and
shall be processed by each city, individually.
This Memorandum of Understanding shall remain in effect for the
time necessary to complete the above-listed scope of work or until
three years from its execution, whichever first occurs. By mutual
agreement in writing approved by the signatories, this Memorandum
of Understanding can be extended for one additional year. This
Memorandum of Understanding is limited to the above-listed
authorized work and no other work shall be undertaken pursuant to
this Memorandum of Understanding unless authorized by both
jurisdictions.
B. Work Proqram
This work will be governed by a comprehensive work program
acceptable to both jurisdictions. The work program shall include
definition of a project study area, establishment of planning and
engineering standards, and definition of planning terminology.
The work program shall adequately describe the planning context,
including land use, transportation, circulation, and any other
q-~
Page 3
components deemed necessary to be addressed. The work program
shall be prepared following approval of this Memorandum of
Understanding, and shall be approved by the signatories of this
Memorandum of Understanding.
~ Aaencv ResDonsibilitv
The city of San Diego shall be responsible for project management
of the authorized work described in paragraph IIA above, except
that the city of Chula vista is hereby designated the Lead Agency
for environmental review (see paragraph lID below). Both agencies
shall be responsible for complete professional review. Both
agencies shall confer with each other and shall be responsible for
jointly preparing one set of recommendations.
Project management, consisting of primary contact between the
Owner, interested citizens, responsible agencies and
organizations, and the two cities, shall include the following:
1. Intake and distribution of plan submittals, including plan
revisions; and,
2. Scheduling of meetings between the Owner and the two cities,
and meetings of staff from the two cities, including
preparation of agendas for these meetings; and,
3. Transmittal of joint staff recommendations to the Owner, and
the Executive Management Team.
Project management does not include collection of fees and cost
accounting for both cities. Each agency shall be individually
responsible for cost accounting and fee recovery.
The otay valley Regional Park joint planning effort, including the
Policy Committee, citizens Advisory committee, and joint staff,
shall be kept informed of all recommendations and decisions
arising from this agreement that affect the proposed regional
park. The County of San Diego, in particular, due to the fact
that it is not a party to this Memorandum of Understanding, shall
be kept informed. The city of San Diego, as project manager,
shall be responsible for informing the County and other members of
the otay Valley Regional Park planning effort.
D. Environmental Review
1. The city of Chula vista is hereby designated as the Lead
Agency for the environmental review of the proposed project. The
city of Chula vista shall be responsible for coordinating all of
this work with the city of San Diego, and any other responsible
agency or any other agency with Jurisdiction by Law.
This position is agreed to by the cities of San Diego and
Chula vista in accordance with Sec. 15051(d) of the CEQA
guidelines as authorized by sections 21083 and 21165 of the Public
q~
Page 4
Resources code.
2. The city of Chula vista will retain, in accordance with its
procedures, an independent environmental consultant for the
preparation of all environmental documents for this project. The
City of San Diego, as a responsible agency, shall have, full
participation in the selection of the environmental consultant,
including, but not limited to the following: Preparation and
review of the Request For Proposals (RFP); review of proposals;
interview of candidates; and final selection of the consultant.
3. The processing of all environmental documents shall be in
accordance with the Public Resources Code (CEQA), the CEQA
guidelines and the procedures and administrative guidelines of the
cities of Chula vista and San Diego. All environmental documents
shall be prepared in accordance with a format agreed upon by both
cities, and all significance criteria shall meet the most
restrictive standard applicable. The city of San Diego and the
city of Chula vista shall jointly participate during the scoping
process, notice of preparation period, review of all check print
draft Environmental Impact Reports (EIR), determination of
significance and thresholds, and preparation of the Final EIR and
other required documents.
E. staff and Consultant Resources
The attached organization chart illustrates the staff assignments
and consultant resources currently expected to be committed to
this project.
The cost of providing staff and consultant resources shall be
borne by the Owner and shall be recovered from advance deposits
made by the Owner.
F. Executive Manaqement Team
An Executive Management Team representing both Cities shall be
comprised as set forth in Attachment 2. This team shall be
responsible for approval of the Work Program, providing policy
direction to staff, and resolving conflicts (see III, below).
The organization chart (Attachment 2) illustrates the management
personnel currently expected to be committed to this project.
777. CONFLICT RESOLUTION
The Conflict Resolution process provides for appropriate levels of
staff, consultant and/or Executive Management Team resolution of
City/City disagreements on planning matters.
Following a staff determination that a consensus cannot be
achieved on planning matters, the, respective jurisdictions shall
solicit the input of the Executive Management Team. The joint
staff shall submit the staff's position of both jurisdictions to
the Executive Management Team. The decision of the Executive
q~
Page 5
Management Team shall be final.
In the event the members of the Executive Management Team cannot
achieve consensus the respective jurisdictions shall solicit the
input of their governing body'- Each jurisdiction shall submit the
staff's position of both jurisdictions to the governing body. The
decision of the governing body of each jurisdiction shall be final
as to ,that party's staff.
Disagreements on environm8nt~1 process, significance, or
thresholds that cannot be resolved at the staff level will be
resolved by the Deputy Director of the Development and
Environmental planning Division of the city of San Diego planning
Department and the Assistant Director of the Current planning
Division of the city of Chula vista planning Department. The
decision of these representatives shall be final.
IV. NOTICE
written notice shall be given to the Owner, all members of the
Executive Management Team, and staff project managers from each
city when either city's Planning Commission, City council, or city
council subcommittee places an item on their respective agendas
pertaining to this project. Notice shall be received a minimum of
ten (10) days prior to the hearing or meeting date.
V. AMENDMENTS
This Memorandum of Understanding may be amended by mutual
agreement of the two cities.
VI. INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS
Each jurisdiction shall be responsible for its own acts performed
pursuant to this Memorandum of Understanding. Each shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other against any third
party claims arising out of that juriSdiction's conduct pursuant
to this Memorandum of Understanding. Nothing in this Memorandum
of Understanding shall be construed to create liability for either
entity where it would otherwise not exist, nor to remove any
otherwise applicable immunity.
VII. MEMORANDUM ADMINISTRATOR
The Director of Planning for each jurisdiction shall be the
administrator of this Memorandum of Understanding.
VIII. TERMINATION
This agreement may be terminated by either party upon sixty (60)
days written notice. Upon termination each party shall bear its
proportionate share of costs incurred or obligated, subject to
reimbursement by owner in accordance with section lIE.
C\ -~
Page 6
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula vista
Severo Esquivel
Deputy city Manager
city of San Diego
Date:
Date:
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
city of Chula vista
Ernest Freeman
Planning Director
city of San Diego
Date:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
John W. Witt, City Attorney
By: John K. Riess
Deputy City Attorney
city of San Diego
Bruce M. Boogaard
city Attorney
city of Chula vista
Date:
Date:
Attachments:
1. Organizational Chart
2. Executive Management Team
q_/o
Chula Vista! San Diego Memorandum of Understanding
Organizational Chart
EXECUTIVE
MANAGEMENT
TEAM
(Attachment 2)
,~HULA VISTA ~
~AN DIEGO ~~
P1anninc Director
Ernest Freeman
Planning Uireetor
Robert Leiter
Principal/Advanced Planning
Gordon Howard
Deputy DirectorlLonc Range Planning
Mary Lee Balko
PrincipallLong Rance Planning
Mike Stang
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT MANAGER
To Be Detennined
Senior Planner/Long Range Planning
Howard Greenstein
DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES
DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES
Planning Director
Robert Leiter
Planning Deparbnent
LRP/Resource Management: Miriam Kirshner
OCAlUrban Design: Lesley Henegar
DEP/Permlts: Karen Lynch-Ashcraft
DEP/Landscape: Tom Murphy
Parks and Recreation Director
Jess Valenzuela
Public Works Director
John Lippitt
Engineering Deparbnent
Transportation Planning: Walt Huffman
Development Services: Jeff Strohminger
Facilities Financing: Charlene Gabriel
Engineering Design: Frank Belock. Jr.
Water Utilities Deparbnent
Engineering: Leonard Wilson
Park and Recreation
Open Space: Don Prisby
DEP/Environmental Analysis
Joan Harper
Environmental Planner
To Be Determined
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT
lI17IS12(MM)
g-ll/q.,2.
ATTACHMENT 1
Attachment 2
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT TEAM
CHULA VISTA
SAN DIEGO
Deputy city Manager:
George Krempl
Deputy city Manager:
Severo Esquivel
Planning Director:
Robert Leiter
Planning Director:
Ernest Freeman
Parks & Recreation Director:
Jess Valenzuela
Parks & Recreation Director:
George Loveland
Public Works Director:
John Lippitt
Engineering & Development
Director:
M. victor Rollinger
Note:
Team members shall be department directors, or their
appointed representatives.
q-/L
THE CITY OF
SAN DIEGO
CITY ADMINISTRATION BlJIll)JNG . 202 C STREET . SAN DIEGO, CI1l1FORNJA. 92101
OFFICE OF THE
CllY MANAGER
(619) 236-6363
April 8, 1992
The Honorable John GOBS
City Manager
The City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN
CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO, RE: FENTON-WESTERN
PROPERTIES.
Dear John:
This letter responds to your questions about the
proposed MOU and attempts to clarify its intent.
The city of San Diego wishes to assure you of the
following:
1. Even though the City of San Diego will be the lead
administrator responsible for project management
and the City of Chula vista will be the Lead Agency
for environmental review, both cities will be equal
in the decision-making process for the development
of a master plan.
2. The responsibilities of the Executive Management
Team will be not only to resolve conflicts but to
oversee the master planning of the project and
development process (see attached MOU, section
II.F) .
The San Diego City Council unanimously approved adoption
of the MOU on March 16, 1992; and, we look forward to
its adoption by the Chula vista 'city Council and to
working with you to create the master plan.
~ Ptm.don Recyc*lPaper
C{~ 13
'1:~~~~r--..
,~. ~
,.., . ox.
~ ~ ~
DIVERSITY
MINGS US All TOGETHER
The Honorable John Goss
April 8, 1992
Page 2
Please contact Howard Greenstein (533-4530) if you have
any questions or wish any additional information.
sincerely,
.' . e ;7 . /J
. .;c- ~...~~,.., . y
.,/ ~...~...>;--
;
SEVERO ESQUIVEL
Deputy City Manager
The city of San Diego
SE:HG:rw
Attachment: Memorandum of Understanding Between the
city Of Chula vista and the city of San
Diego to Establish a Joint Planning Process
for the Processing of the Fenton-Western
Properties Project.
cc: Chula vista
George Krempl, Deputy city Manager
Robert Leiter, Planning Director
Jess Valenzuela, Parks and Recreation Director
John Lippitt, Public Works Director
Gordon Howard, Principal Planner
Frank J. Herrera-A, Associate Planner
San Dieqo
George Loveland, Park and Recreation Director
M. V. Rollinger, Engineering and Development Director
Mike Stepner, City Architect
Mary Lee Balko, Deputy Planning Director
Linda Johnson, Principal Planner
Mike Stang, Principal Planner
Howard Greenstein, Senior Planner
Cl-ILf
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / ()
Meeting Date 06/09/92
ITEM TITLE:
REPORT
Permit Processing
SUBMITTED BY:
Economic Development Commission
Streamlining Recommendations
C . DID' G-_~.
ommumty eve opment lrector
Director of Planning .& 91 -(v., ~ 1-
Director of Building and Housin~~V
City Manager #
(4/5ths Vote: Yes
No X)
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
In August 1991 the Chula Vista Economic Development Commission (EDe) established a
subcommittee to develop recommendations to streamline the City's development review process
in order to create a user-friendly environment for business development. The goal was to
minimize costs and delays for business applicants, thereby offering a positive incentive for job-
creating and revenue-generating commercial and industrial development in Chula Vista. The
EDC Subcommittee recruited outside (non-EDe) business and development related resource
members having experience with development processing both in Chula Vista and in other cities
and interviewed former and current project applicants. The subcommittee met for seven months.
The result is presented in the attached report identifying 25 recommendations which the
Economic Development Commission is requesting Council to adopt (Attachment A).
RECOMMENDATION: (1) That Council accept the EDC's report identifying development
review streamlining recommendations; (2) that Council consider staff comments relating to each
EDC recommendation (as shown in Table 1); and (3) that Council direct staff to return with an
implementation program and schedule based upon recommendations which Council wishes to
pursue.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS:
Economic Development Commission: The attached Economic Development Commission
recommendations were approved by the EDC on May 6, 1992 for submission to Council (see
minutes, Attachment B).
Development-related Advisory Groups: Included among the EDC's recommendations are
actions which would impact advisory commissions and committees involved in the development
review process, either by narrowing their responsibilities or by phasing the group out entirely.
These groups include:
1. Design Review Committee
2. Montgomery Planning Commission
/ () -I
Page 2, Item ) ()
Meeting Date 06/09/92
3. Resource Conservation Committee
4. Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee
5. Southwest Project Area Committee
6. Town Centre Project Area Committee
7. Planning Commission
In order to obtain input from these groups regarding the EDC recommendations, EDC Chairman
Penny Allen, Subcommittee Chairman Patty Davis and Commissioner Don Read invited the
seven Advisory Group Chairmen, and one additional representative from each, to a meeting on
April 13, 1992. At that meeting, Ms. Allen invited the Chairmen to place the EDC's
recommendations on their next respective agendas for discussion and comment. The minutes
of each of the seven groups' meetings (excluding the Southwest Project Area Committee which
did not have a quorum) are attached (see Attachments C through H). A follow-up meeting was
then held with EDC Commissioners Allen, Davis and Read and the same advisory group
representatives, on May 5, 1992 to review the groups' feedback. The minutes of both the
initial April 13 meeting and follow-up May 5 meetings are attached (see Attachments I and J).
Some common comments made by the advisory groups include:
1. The recommendations regarding land use approvals and design review are good
ones, especially as relates to updating/clarifying guidelines, providing for
administrative review, and providing user friendly manuals and brochures.
2. Too much emphasis was placed upon the design review process and the Planning
Department, neglecting other areas of development review and other city
departmental procedures.
3. Project Area Committees should not be dissolved as they serve a vital role in
communicating grass roots concerns and providing feedback to Council.
4. Council should improve the review system and procedures but not eliminate
advisory bodies.
5. Advisory groups are not holding up projects.
6. There is a need to clarify committee roles and processing procedures; and a
recognition of the cost to the city of extensive staff support for these committees.
DISCUSSION:
· CITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION GOALS/PROJECT
HISTORY
The City Council's adopted Economic Development Plan contains the following Mission
Statement: "To enhance the quality of life in Chula Vista through the promotion of a strong
local economy offering employment and business opponunities, and a healthy diversified tax base
f{) - 2. .
Page 3, Item) iJ
Meeting Date 06/09/92
vital to supponing City services." Goal IV of this Plan calls for the City to "Develop a
proactive business assistance program to encourage business retention, growth and expansion,"
and specifically calls for the Council to "Assess permit processing policies and identify
streamlining reconnnendations . . . ."
The Economic Development Commission's Mission Statement calls for the EDC to assume the
following roles: "(1) serving as a local business networking and fact finding resource group,
(2) monitoring and evaluating programs and issues having a potential local economic impact and
formulating recommendations to Council, and (3) advocating policies which create a positive
business environment." Within this context, the EDC selected "streamlining the City's permit
process" as its second priority, a priority that was endorsed by the Council at the Joint
Council/EDC meeting on August 28, 1991.
As a result of both Council and Commission prioritization of the need to make the development
review/permit process more user-friendly, the EDC formed a PERMIT PROCESS
STREAMLINING SUBCOMMITTEE, " chaired by Ms. Patty Davis and Mr. Pete Gerber, and
including EDC Commissioner Penny Allen. The Subcommittee recruited outside expertise via
"resource people" from local business; active residential, commercial and industrial development
firms; architectural firms; and from Crossroads, a community-based, environmentally-oriented
group (see Attachment K, Subcommittee membership list). Staff support was provided by the
Planning Department, Building & Housing Department and Community Development
Department, with Deputy City Manager George Krempl acting as management liaison.
The Subcommittee's first meeting was held in September 1991. In November 1991, the Mayor's
proposed Local Business Task Force was merged with the EDC's Subcommittee, adding
additional local business representation. In addition to input from subcommittee members
themselves, interviews were conducted with former city applicants to identify common concerns.
The Subcommittee developed the following general objectives:
· Reduce costly time delays for project applicants seeking approvals;
· Eliminate duplication of effort at both staff and review body levels;
· Define and/or clarify development guidelines and/or evaluation criteria, and
minimize discretionary actions;
· Encourage a courteous user-friendly environment within all development-
related departments; and
· Provide for defined, cousistent and expedited timeframes and procedures to
the maximum extent possible.
!~ -3
Page 4, Item ) IJ
Meeting Date 06/09/92
To address these objectives, the Subcommittee divided into three "working groups": (1) Design
Review, (2) Advisory Bodies and Development Review Procedures, and (3) Customer Service
(Working Groups membership, Attachment L). The three groups met bimonthly through March
1992 to develop specific streamlining recommendations to present to the EDC at large and
ultimately to Council. The EDC adopted recommendations (Attachment A) on May 6, 1992.
· EDC RECOMMENDATIONS/STAFF COMMENTS
As indicated previously, the EDC Subcommittee received staff support from the Community
Development Department, the Planning Department and the Building & Housing Department and
from Deputy City Manager George Krempl. The Community Development Department and
Planning Department staffed two of the working groups: 1) Design Review and 2) Advisory
Bodies/Development Review Procedures. The Building & Housing Department staffed the
Customer Service working group. Staff provided information regarding existing systems and
procedures as well as related legal requirements, and in some cases identified recommendation
options per the Subcommittee's request.
The EDC's recommendations (Attachment A) are broken into four areas: (I) Discretionary
Land Use Pennits and Approvals; (2) Design Review & Sign Review; (3) Boards, Commissions
& Committees; and (4) Customer Service. The following general staff observations are
submitted to Council for consideration in their review of the EDC's recommendations:
· Need to Streamline the Review Process
Staff supports the general goals and objectives of the EDC's
recommendations. Studies such as that recently released by the Council
on California Competitiveness (chaired by Peter Ueberroth) have
highlighted the alarming rise in complexity of regulatory requirements,
layers of bureaucracy and costs of doing business in California, and the
critical need to streamline the review process at the local, regional, and
state levels. California jurisdictions at all levels are beginning to see this
as a priority in order to retain existing businesses as well as to attract new
ones.
. Report Limitations
Both staff and several reviewing Advisory Groups have noted that the
report tends to focus on Design Review and the Planning Department's
role in the overall development review process to the virtual exclusion of
other review procedures and departments. For example, subdivision and
building permit processing are not discussed. However, while these
procedures could receive further evaluation they have been addressed
through previous efforts and seem to be operating satisfactorily.
/D-,/
Page 5, Item ) 0
Meeting Date 06/09/92
. Implementation Issues
It should be noted that the recommendations represent a very ambitious
program of policy/program development and implementation with related
staffing and cost impacts to the City (as summarized in Tables 2 and 3).
Staff is requesting that due to the extensive nature of the
recommendations, Council direct preparation of a work program and
implementation schedule to be brought back for Council review.
The EDC's recommendations and related discussions as contained in the EDC's report are
provided below with corresponding staff comments:
I. DISCRETIONARY LAND USE PERMITS AND APPROVALS
1. CHANGE CERTAIN CONDITIONAL USES TO PERMITTED USES
EDC Discussion: Certain uses which currently require a conditional use permit
could be allowed "by right," subject to meeting all other Zoning Ordinance
requirements, and/or other specific performance standards which the City could
apply administratively.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation.
2. ALWW CERTAIN CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO BE ISSUED
ADMINISTRATIVELY
EDC Discussion: Certain uses which currently require a conditional use permit
could be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator, and a CUP could be issued
administratively, subject to appeal to the Planning Commission and/or City
Council. This approach would be most appropriate for such uses where the CUP
is used primarily to apply specific conditions to a use to ensure compatibility with
surrounding uses, rather than where a use mayor may not be acceptable
depending on specific circumstances.
In cases where a written or oral protest is registered with the Zoning
Administrator regarding a proposed administrative CUP, and the concern cannot
be resolved through conditions of approval which are acceptable to both the
applicant and the party filing the protest, then the matter shall be referred to the
Planning Commission. The costs of referring the matter to the Planning
Commission shall be borne by the applicant. However, staff shall attempt to
minimize these costs, and shall schedule such matters before the Planning
Commission at the earliest possible date.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation.
1t2-5
Page 6, Item ! 0
Meeting Date 06/09/92
3. ALWW CERTAIN CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO BE APPROVED
BY mE PLANNING COMMISSION, RAmER mAN BEING
AUTOMATICALLY REFERRED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL
ACTION
EDC Discussion: Certain uses currently require a conditional use permit to be
approved pursuant to a public hearing by the City Council, following a public
hearing and recommendation by the Planning Commission. For many of these
uses, the Planning Commission could be given authority to approve the CUP,
subject to appeal by the City Council or any other party. In accordance with
current practice, the Director of Planning would provide written notification to
the City Council of action taken by the Planning Commission in the next City
Council packet, and the Council would be required to take any action to appeal
such matter at its next regular meeting. Unless such appeal action were taken by
the City Council at that meeting, the action of the Planning Commission would
be final.
Staff Comment: Staff sup pons this recommendation.
4. ALLOW TENTATIVE MAPS FOR INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS WITHIN
PLANNED COMMUNITIES TO BE APPROVED BY mE PLANNING
COMMISSION, RAmER mAN AUTOMATICALLY BEING REFERRED
TO mE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL ACTION
EDC Discussion: All tentative maps currently require a public hearing by both
the Planning Commission and City Council. In cases where a "master tentative
map" for a planned community has already been approved by the City Council,
there appears to be little benefit for the Council to also hold public hearings on
tentative maps for individual projects (e.g., condominiums, small-lot single-family
detached projects, etc.) which are normally processed after the master tentative
map is approved.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation.
II. DESIGN REVIEW AND SIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
5. ADOPT CONCISE AND OBJECTIVE WRITTEN GUIDELINES FOR
DESIGN REVIEW
EDC Discussion: The City's existing Design Review Manual is outdated, and
should be replaced by a new set of design guidelines which would clearly state
the City's intent regarding building and site design, landscaping, and other
design-related issues. The guidelines should include illustrations of acceptable
and unacceptable design solutions. These guidelines should be placed in a format
which can be easily updated to reflect new conditions or standards. In addition,
10 - to
Page 7, Item /D
Meeting Date 06/09/92
staff should be able to provide examples of projects which meet the intent of the
guidelines, using plans and/or photographs of such projects.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation and is already developing
an updated Design Review Manual.
6. CLARIFY THE ROLE OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AND
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS AS IT RELATES TO OTHER PLANNING
REVIEW PROCESSES
EDC Discussion: The role of the Design Review Committee should be focussed
on building and site design issues. Other planning issues, such as zoning Qand
use, parking requirements, etc.), circulation, and environmental review should,
to the maximum extent possible, be handled by other appropriate reviewing
authorities.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation. Additionally, staff
recommends that legal analysis be given to the need for the DRC to review EIRs
both under current practice and under a narrowed EDC role.
7. ALWW FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF A BROADER RANGE
OF PROJECTS WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO DESIGN REVIEW
EDC Discussion: Currently staff has the authority to approve additions to
buildings which involve an increase of not more than 25% to the building area,
as well as duplexes. In order to reduce the number of cases which need to be
reviewed by the Design Review Committee, staff should be given the authority
to approve additional classes of projects, provided that they meet the established
design review guidelines. In cases where a project which falls into such a class
does not meet all of the guidelines, it could be referred by staff to the Design
Review Committee.
One example of an additional type of project which could be approved
administratively would be new commercial or industrial buildings in planned
communities for which comprehensive design guidelines have been approved by
the City, and where such project is determined to have met those guidelines.
Further evaluation will be necessary to determine what additional types of
projects could be approved administratively, what types should be automatically
referred to the Design Review Committee, and what types of should be exempt
from any design review (note that currently single-family detached houses and
other minor projects are exempt from design review).
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation.
/D -7
Page 8, Item /0
Meeting Date 06/09/92
8. UPDATE THE ZONING ORDINANCE SECTIONS PERTAINING TO
SIGNS, AND ADOPT WRITTEN GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF SIGNS
EDC Discussion: The sections of the Municipal Code dealing with sign
regulations are poorly organized and, in some cases, internally inconsistent. In
addition, while the Code establishes "maximum entitlements" which can be
allowed for various types of signs in various zones, it does not indicate what
types of signs are normally considered acceptable in specific situations.
Therefore, the City should:
1) revise the Zoning Ordinance to set forth more clearly the standards and
procedures for sign review and, where necessary, eliminate redundant or
antiquated sections; and
2) adopt a set of written guidelines which indicate what types of signs and
sign programs are considered acceptable in specific situations. These
guidelines should include illustrations, as well as specific examples of
approved sign programs which conform to these guidelines. In addition,
staff should be able to provide color photographs or drawings which
depict actual approved signs which conform to these guidelines.
Staff Connnent: Staff supports this recommendation.
9. ALLOW FOR A BROADER RANGE OF SIGN PERMITS TO BE
APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY, AND STREAMLINE THE SIGN
PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS
EDC Discussion: Staff should be given the authority to approve a sign permit
for any sign proposal which conforms to ordinance requirements and the written
guidelines which are proposed above. In cases where staff determines that a sign
proposal does not meet ordinance requirements or the sign guidelines, the request
should be referred as quickly as possible to the Design Review Committee for
review and action, consistent with the recently proposed ordinance revisions
which are under consideration by the City Council.
Staff Connnent: Staff supports this recommendation and is currently processing
an ordinance amendment which implements the procedural changes outlined
above.
10. STREAMLINE THE APPEAL PROCESS FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND
SIGN REVIEW ACTIONS
EDC Discussion: Currently, an appeal of an action of the Design Review
Committee is heard by the Planning Commission, and is scheduled for hearing
5-6 weeks after it is filed. An applicant may also appeal the action of the
It) ~ r
Page 9, Item It)
Meeting Date 06/09/92
Planning Commission to the City Council, which requires an additional 3-4
weeks. This appeal process could be streamlined by eliminating appeals to the
Planning Commission, allowing appeals to go directly to Council.
Staff Comment: Staff suppons this recommendation.
11. PROVIDE UPDATED APPLICATION FORMS AND "USER GUIDES" FOR
DESIGN REVIEW AND SIGN REVIEW
EDC Discussion: In conjunction with updating the guidelines and procedures for
design review and sign review, the Planning Department should also update and
simplify the application forms, and provide a "user guide" which clearly explains
the design review process and the requirements of the applicant for submitting
projects to the City for review. In particular, this user guide should encourage
applicants to schedule a pre-application conference with City staff prior to filing
a final project application, in order to discuss issues regarding the proposed
project and ensure that the applicant understands the processing requirements for
the proj ecL
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation.
12. PROVIDE SENIOR LEVEL STAFF COORDINATION AND ADEQUATE
OVERALL STAFF SUPPORT FOR TIlE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
EDC Discussion: Because of the need to coordinate the design review and sign
review processes with other City development review processes, and to ensure
that overall City objectives are met, it is important that at least one senior staff
member from the Planning Department (Senior Planner or Principal Planner) be
responsible for coordination of the design review process. This person would be
responsible for attendance at all Design Review Committee meetings, review of
all staff recommendations to the Design Review Committee, review of all
administrative design review and sign permit approvals, and direct contacts with
applicants as requested. In addition, this person, along with other assigned staff,
would be responsible for implementing the recommendations above regarding
development of written guidelines, updated procedures, and new forms and user
guides.
The annual operating budget for the Planning Department should specifically
include a senior-level planner position, with the appropriate education and
experience to perform these duties, as well as other necessary staff to ensure that
the Planning Department can meet the objectives outlined herein. In addition, the
Planning Department should ensure that staff assigned to the design review
process receive adequate technical training, as well as training in "customer
service" skills. Furthermore, the Planning Department should establish
procedures for receiving feedback from its clients, including questionnaires and
/0-9
Page 10, Item J()
Meeting Date 06/09/92
periodic surveys of recent applicants. Finally, the City should also ensure that fee
schedules are adjusted regularly to allow the costs of providing these services to
be fully recovered by the City.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation. The tentatively approved
FY 92/93 Budget includes an upgraded position to provide senior level support
to the DRC.
13. PLACE A HIGH PRIORITY ON IMPLEMENTING THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OUTLINED ABOVE
EDC Discussion: By implementing the changes outlined above, the City can
continue to ensure high quality design in all new development which occurs in
Chula Vista, while reducing the delays and frustrations which are often associated
with the design review process. The City Council should assure that adequate
staff resources are provided to institute these changes as soon as possible, and
should appoint representatives of the Design Review Committee, the business
community, design professionals, and other community interests to work with
staff in implementing these recommendations.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation.
III. BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
14. RESTRICT THE ROLE OF THE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEES (PACs)
TO THE SPECIFIC DUTIES REQUIRED BY CALIFORNIA
REDEVELOPMENT LAW; DISBAND THE TOWN CENTRE I & II AND
OTAY VALLEY PACs WITHIN ONE YEAR; AND DISBAND THE
SOUTHWEST PAC IN THREE YEARS FROM ITS FORMATION.
EDC Discussion: The California Health and Safety Code requires a Project Area
Committee (PAC) to be established within a Project Area where "...a substantial
number of low- and moderate-income families are to be displaced by the
redevelopment project" and, further states that the PAC should be consulted
regarding "... those policy matters which deal with the planning and provision of
residential facilities or replacement housing for those to be displaced by project
activities," and that, "The agency shall also consult with the committee on other
policy matters which affect the residents of the project area." These provisions
apply for a three (3) year period after adoption of each redevelopment plan, and
may be extended by the Agency by one-year intervals.
However, the Rules and By-Laws adopted by each of the three PACs state that
the PAC shall review "...all major proposals for the development, platting,
conservation, circulation, or public service of the Project Area, and shall report
its findings and recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency, Design Review
/O-Ib
Page 11, Item J()
Meeting Date 06/09/92
Committee, or referring body." And, under current practices, the PACs review
virtually all discretionary applications, creating additional layers of review and
time delays for redevelopment projects, actually acting as a disincentive to
development. Staff support demands are extensive and are not reimbursed by cost
recovery fees.
The three year periods have expired for TCI and II and Otay; Southwest will
expire in July, 1993. This recommendation will require Council to adopt
resolutions, PACs to amend their Rules and By-laws and the Redevelopment
Project Area Procedures Manuals/Implementation Plans to be amended.
Staff Comment: Staff concurs with the recommendation to disband the Southwest
PAC, merging it with the Montgomery Planning Committee. (See III. 17 below).
In regards to the Town Centre and Gtay Road PACs, should Council elect to
continue these committees, stafffeels that the need exists for Council to reevaluate
the role of these groups in terms of' (1) their legal mandate; (2) their role as
formally defined by Council; (3) their self-adopted by-laws; and (4) their role as
actually practiced currently.
Roles and responsibilities should be clarified byformal action (via revisions ofby-
laws, redevelopment plans and other such documents). Role clarification should
address the following questions:
(a) Should the committee be reviewing policy related issues? development
projects? EIRs?
(b) If the committee is to review development projects, should this include all
discretionary reviews (e.g. conditional use permits? variances? signs?
projects under $25,000?) or be limited to major projects?
(c) Which items should be taken to the committees by staff for a formal
recommendation to the Council/Agency versus those taken as informational
items or upon committee request?
15. CREATE A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY POLICY COMMITTEE
EDC Discussion: This committee would be created only in the event that the
existing P ACs are eliminated. In order to insure public participation in broad
redevelopment policies and programs, the committee would be charged with
general oversight of Agency matters and input regarding conceptual policy
direction. It is recommended that the Committee include at least two members
from each of the existing PACs and meet bi-annually.
10 ~ (/
Page 12, Item /0
Meeting Date 06/09/92
Staff Comment: This recommemiation would be triggered only if Council
eliminates the PACs, ami would require further evaluation based upon Council's
direction in this regard.
16. AMEND REDEVELOPMENT PLANS, PROCEDURAL MANUALS AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS TO BRING SPECIAL PERMIT, VARIANCE,
CUP, DRC AND OTHER PROCEDURES INTO CONFORMITY.
EDC Discussion: Significant inconsistencies exist between Redevelopment Plans
regarding the Agency's authority to process Conditional Use Permits, a.k.a.
"Special Permits". In addition, inconsistencies exist between Redevelopment
Plans and/or Project Implementation Plans regarding the order of review by the
DRC and the PAC.
Redevelopment Plans should be amended to enable staff to take recommendations
regarding special permits and variances directly to the Agency. The Procedures
Manuals/Implementation Plans should be amended to provide for consistent and
expeditious review of variances and Special Permits by: 1) amending the Town
Centre I Procedures Manual to conform with the Otay Valley Road Procedures
Manual so that projects go to the PAC prior to DRC*, and 2) amending the Town
Centre I and Otay Valley Road Procedures Manuals to allow the Zoning
Administrator to make routine discretionary review decisions pursuant to City
Code and the Southwest Project Area Redevelopment Plan, and in conformance
with the Subcommittee's recommendations regarding revised CUP procedures.
* This is only applicable to the extent that the PAC continues to review projects.
Staff Comment: Staff agrees with the need to bring all five redevelopment plans
into conformity in terms of review ami processing procedures. Specific areas
needing attention relate to special permits ami variances, the order ami nature
of review by advisory bodies, ami the ability to hamile certain items
administratively.
17. RESTRICT THE REVmW AUTHORITY OF THE MONTGOMERY
PLANNING COMMITTEE REGARDING LAND USE MATTERS TO
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO THE MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN.
REVmW THE MPC'S ROLE IN THREE YEARS TO EVALUATE THE
DESIRABILITY OF SUNSETTING THE COMMITTEE.
EDC Discussion: The MPC is a seven-member group that was formed by City
ordinance subject to the Montgomery Annexation in 1985. The MPC was
initially charged with recommending a community element of the General Plan
and reviewing and making recommendations regarding land uses, transportation,
open space, variances, CUP's, subdivisions, architectural review and "all other
police regulations affecting land use." The MPC's duties were revised by
I~-/z..
Page 13, Item )D
Meeting Date 06/09/92
ordinance in November, 1990 to include "analysis of critical planning issues,"
"mobilizing public agencies to develop resources," "drafting policies,"
"recommending sources of public funds," and "providing recommendations to
City departments, boards and commissions with regard to zoning, health,
licensing, building codes and public safety" in the Montgomery area.
The MPC currently reviews all major land use actions affecting the Montgomery
Community (e.g., General Plan amendments, Montgomery Specific Plan
amendments, rezoning) as well as other discretionary approvals (e.g., tentative
maps, CUP's). The recommendation recognizes the short-term need for a
community group to provide input into the remaining Special Study Areas land
use decisions (e.g., Otay River and West Fairfield) and to continue to act as an
advisory body concerning other issues delineated above (e.g., CIP and CDBG
review), while considering the overall goal of eliminating duplicative layers of
review, minimizing related costs and delays to business applicants, and
maximizing administrative reviews. Another consideration in narrowing this and
other advisory bodies' land use-related responsibilities is recent action by Council
instigating public forums for new planned community proposals and the extension
of public hearing notices from 500' to 1000' from the proposed project site.
The Southwest Project area is located within the Montgomery area. The City
Attorney is currently reviewing the potential merger of the MPC and the
Southwest PAC. Assuming the PAC's role is immediately limited, and the PAC
is sunsetted by July 1993, per the Subcommittee's recommendation, it should be
noted that two current PAC members are also members of the MPC.
Staff Comment: Staff suppons the recommendation to phase out the Project
Area Committee and merge its responsibilities with the Montgomery Planning
Committee. The role of this "new" group should concurrently be clarified.
18. RESTRICT THE RCC'S ROLE IN REVIEWING ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORTS AND SUBMITTING COMMENTS TO STAFF.
EDC Discussion: The RCC's role is defined in Ordinance No. 1928, (revised
November 1980) to provide advice to Council "in the areas of energy
conservation, resource recovery, environmental Quality. historic and prehistoric
site protection and other related fields." The ordinance further calls for a
"citizen's assessment" of, among other things, "the effects of individual projects
being subjected to environmental review. . ." The Subcommittee's
recommendation would allow the RCC to provide comments/questions to the EIR
consultant and City Environmental Coordinator, while eliminating the need for
applicants (and their costly consultants) to appear before the RCC either in a
public meeting or public hearing format. The recommendation reflects the lack
of any state legal mandate for a separate City committee to review or conduct
environmental analyses. The review by Chula Vista's RCC is being undertaken
/C)~/3
Page 14, Item JD
Meeting Date 06/09/92
in addition to that of the City's internal departments and Environmental Review
Coordinator; the surrounding property owners routinely receiving the Notice of
the EIR; the numerous public and private agencies/organizations routinely
receiving Notice of the EIR; and the ErR public hearings before both the PC and
the City Council. Again, the recommendation reflects the desire to streamline the
process by eliminating unnecessary duplication and resulting costs and delays,
while still insuring adequate public review.
Staff Comment: Staff agrees with the recommendation and feels that the current
process coriforms to this recommendation.
19.
SCHEDULE PERIODIC REVIEWS OF ALL BOARDS
COMMISSIONS WHICH HAVE AUTHORITY OVER LAND
MATTERS, TO EVALUATE THEIR SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS
PERFORMANCE, AND DETERMINE WHETHER CHANGES
WARRANTED
AND
USE
AND
ARE
EDC Discnssion: There are several boards and commissions which currently
have authority to review land use matters within the City of Chula Vista. The
roles and duties of many of these boards and commissions have changed over
time, both in response to specific direction from the City Council, and as a result
of decisions made by the boards and commissions themselves. There should be
a periodic review of all boards and commissions at least every three to four years
to evaluate the specific functions being performed by each board and commission,
the effects of their actions on permit processing schedules, the level of staff
support required, and overlapping duties among various boards and commissions.
Staff Comment: Staff suppons this recommendation.
IV. CUSTOMER SERVICE
20. BULLETIN BOARD
EDC Discussion: In recent years development fees have been adjusted several
times. There have been changes in engineering requirements due to adoption of
zoning changes and completion of studies. Many of these changes have trapped
unwary applicants in the middle of project planning, in some cases causing
expensive redesign or refinancing. A bulletin board should be placed inside the
hallway near the Planning Department counter. Pending changes in fees, street
widening, roning ordinances, and other items which would be helpful to
applicants would be posted. Also, copies of the brochures mentioned below
would be displayed, with directions on how to get them. All applications would
direct applicants to check the bulletin board for changes which might affect them.
Staff Comment: Staff suppons this recommendation.
/0-11/
Page 15, Item )()
Meeting Date 06/09/92
21. BROCHURES
EDC Discussion: Although larger developers and those who regularly deal with
the planning process understand local procedures, ordinary citizens and
professionals unfamiliar with Chula Vista may not. Brochures should be available
at development related department counters which highlight the City's
commitment to fair and courteous service and provide concise explanations of the
application process, step by step, for the various types of permits and processes.
The brochures should clarify how applicants can obtain assistance as needed,
including registering complaints.
Staff Comment: Staff sup pons this recommendation and is planning to prepare
a series of user-friendly publications describing different application processes
and time frames, answering frequently asked questions, providing contact names
and numbers, and indicating how applicants can "register complaints. "
22. COMPUTER TRACKING
EDC Discussion: All applications would be tracked by computer, so that any
planning department employee could give an applicant a status report - and
properly refer the applicant for an in-depth update.
Staff Comment: Staff supports this recommendation and the Building and
Housing Department has begun implementation of the first phase of an automated
permit tracking system, which will be used to track building permits and plan
checks. The second phase, which will automate processing of Planning and
Engineering permits and approvals, will require additional computer hardware
and software, and has been conceptually approved by the City Council in the
FY 1993 Capital1mprovement Program.
23. OMBUDSMAN
EDC Discussion: The policy of this city is to encourage responsibility
development, especially commercial and light industrial development which adds
to the tax base and provide jobs. One key to attracting this type of development
is fair treatment by city staff during the planning process. There should be a staff
person whose only job would be to assist applicants as they make their ways
through the planning process, an "ombudsman." This would be especially
valuable to those new to the process and to small businesses which may be less
sophisticated in their approach to the process. The availability of an ombudsman
would signal the city's commitment to economic development. It would also
provide the assistance applicants need when they feel they have been treated
unfairly, giving them an advocate.
/O-I,s-
Page 16, Item J D
Meeting Date 06/09/92
Staff Comment: Staff agrees with the need to provide "hands-on" shepherding
of projects through the system to insure that projects do not get bottlenecked
causing significant costs and delays to the applicant. An Ombudsman position is
an approach often used by local govemmems. Typically this position is located
within the Manager's Office or the Community Development/Economic
Depanment.
Currently an informal Ombudsman system exists within the Administration Office
via the Assistam City Manager and Deputy City Manager. Staff recommends that
this system be formalized by designating one individual as the Ombudsman. The
Ombudsman program should be made more visible by promoting it directly to
applicants and within City brochures and other development-related materials.
Program "publicity" should identify the steps an applicant should take in terms
of informal administrative appeals, i.e., through the Project Manager to Senior
staff, including the Depanment Head, and then to the Administration's
Ombudsman. The goal would be to resolve complaints at the lowest level possible
within the City organization.
A supplemental approach is the assignmem of Project Managers to insure
continuity of staff support for projects as they go through the system by
coordinating all environmental, design review, and land use approval processes.
The Planning Depanment and Community Development Depanment currently
assign Project Managers to all major projects. Planning is evaluating the
feasibility of assigning Project Managers to small projects, as well as
implementing other improvemems to the interdepanmental project review process.
A common approach which could immediately be implemented is the establishment
of aformal interdepartmental meeting as the initial step in the formal auulication
process. Along these lines, staffis pursuing a more structured, imerdepanmemal
ureauulication process to evaluate proposed projects and provide comments to the
applicants prior to formal submission, to facilitate and expedite the process.
24. PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
EDC Discussion: Planning Department personnel should approach their contacts
with applicants as sale of a service. Service must be efficient, fair, and
courteous. Anything less is unacceptable. The number of complaints about
treatment by staff and the Design Review Committee indicate the current level of
service is unacceptable. The staff position seems to be that this is due to
unhappiness with results, that applicants always ask for more than can be granted
and so will never be satisfied. However, discussions with past applicants
indicates that their contacts with staff and the Design Review Committee are too
often adversarial.
Individual preferences should be removed from evaluation of projects, and staff
and the DRC should concentrate on bringing each project quickly and
inexpensively into line with City regulations. An acceptable project should escape
/~ -ltO
Page 17, Item II)
Meeting Date 06/09/92
modification. A project that does not meet standards should not be summarily
dismissed. It is possible to say no, yet be helpful. The applicant should be
informed of acceptable alternatives and given approval conditional upon
submission of conforming plans. The applicant's concerns of time, money, pride
of ownership (of design) should be given great weight.
The means to achieve the above are various. It is the responsibility of
management, and managers should be made accountable. There should be better
trainin~ of those who meet with applicants, both staff and commissioners. Senior
planners should be available to assist their juniors; there should be an ooen door
policy, with senior planners being available to meet with all applicants. This
policy should be explained in all applications. Senior planners should make
appointments with a sampling of applicants for candid discussions of their
experiences with staff.
Staff Comment: Staff agrees with the goal of implementing a "customer service"
philosophy and approach to development review throughout the City. However,
it should be noted that applicants' perceptions as discussed above may be an
oversimplification of the issue. While recognizing that service to the public can
be improved and there are occasionally valid complaints, other factors should be
considered. For example, inexperienced applicants can become frustrated by
state and local regulations and need to be assisted by better guidance and
information. More sophisticated applicants may try to "work the system" and
compromise Council policy in order to achieve the lowest cost possible.
Among steps currently being planned or undertaken which relate to this
recommendation are:
a. Customer Service Trainimz
A trainer has been retained to provide a one-day seminar to selected
development departments staff on the topic of customer service and "how
to deal with people". Training will include topics such as "courtesy under
pressure" and "handling angry customers". The first workshop will be
held in July 1992. Staff will evaluate the program's effectiveness to
determine jitture training needs. It is envisioned that this training will be
offered periodically to all Development Department employees. Other
training will be developed as needed.
b. Interdevartmental Coordination
In addition to the customer service training discussed above, one or more
workshops are being planned by the development-related departments to
encourage interdepartmental coordination. A special emphasis will be
placed on coordination of redevelopment projects, clarifYing review
If) -! 7
Page 18, Item ) ()
Meeting Date 06/09/92
policies and procedures, including staff roles. The purpose is to improve
review efficiencies and responsiveness to applicants.
c. Minor Pennits
The Building & Housing Department is developing a streamlined system
for reviewing minor pennits such as patio covers and room additions.
d. Access to Senior Level Staff
See Item II. 8.
e. Administrative AO.]Jeals
As discussed in Section IV. 21, brochures are planned which will provide
guidance through the process, including an outline for administrative
appeals from Project Manager up to the Ombudsman position and
Management.
25. FOLLOW-UP
EDC Discussion: Applicants should be given "Talk Back" evaluations to give
critiques of the service provided.
An independent group, such as the Economic Development Commission or the
Chamber of Commerce should periodically contact applicants whose projects are
completed to determine if the above objectives are being attained.
Staff Comment: Staff suppons the need for a "customer feedback"
questionnaire. A questionnaire has been developed and will soon be available at
the counters of all development departments. Regarding follow-up contact with
applicants, staff would only caution that the EDC's role should not be one of a
"complaint" committee or "mediation committee" but suppons the concept of
irifonnally obtaining general feedback.
FISCAL IMPACT:
A. Fiscal Imnact to City
The fiscal impact of the recommendations is extremely difficult to determine due to the many
variables and unknowns at this time. Many recommendations require further refining in order
to define their scope (for example, how many permits currently requiring Planning Commission
and Council approvals would be handled administratively?). Some recommendations would
reduce staff time in certain areas but increase it in others (for example, administrative approvals
might require an interdepartmental team approach, using more staff time, while reducing staff
/O~/Y
<)
lu
~
~
t
\I
'?
"
~
Page 19, Item /0
Meeting Date 06/09/92
time before the Planning Commission and Council). Others would theoretically reduce staff time
due to clearer policies and procedures, while requiring extensive staff time to update and refine
those same policies and procedures (e.g. design manual, zoning code, redevelopment plans).
Staff has attempted to identify impacts of each recommendation using five categories ranging
from no impact to ml!ior impact. Two fiscal impact matrices are attached; one reflects impacts
to the Community Development Department and the other reflects impacts to the Planning
Department. (See Tables I and 2.)
B. Fiscal Imnact to Anplicants
The EDC feels that their recommendations will result in meaningful cost savings to business
applicants due to easier to understand development guidelines and project evaluation criteria,
expanded administrative reviews, narrowed Design Review Committee and other committees'
roles (the latter two reducing the need to appear with consultants at public meetings), direct
senior level input, better training of staff, and user-friendly informational materials. Again,
quantification of such impacts is difficult and may be presented by the EDC or Subcommittee
members.
ATTACHMENTS:
, Table I -- Permit Process Streamlining Recommendations: EDC Recommendation / Staff Comment
~ Table 2 -- Permit Process Streamlining Recommendations: Fiscal Impacts to Planning Department
\ Table 3 -- Permit Process Streamlining Recommendations: Fiscal Impacts to Redevelopment Agency/
Community Development Staff
Permit Process Streamlining Recommendations
Minutes: Economic Development Commission, May 6, 1992
Minutes (Unofficial): Excerpt from Planning Commission, May 13, 1992
Minutes: Town Centre Project Area Committee, April 16, 1992 and Letter from Chair Will Hyde
Minutes: Resource Conservation Commission, April 20, 1992 and Memo from Barbara Reid,
Associate Planner relative to recommendation of Resource Conservation Committee
Minutes: Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee, April 27, 1992
Minutes: Montgomery Planning Committee, May 6, 1992 and Letter from Chair Lee Wheeland
Minutes: Design Review Committee, April 27, 1992 and Correspondence from members of the
Design Review Committee: Chair Barbara Gilman, Vice Chair Mike Spethman, Member Matt
Flach, and Alex Galchenco
Minutes: EDC and Chairmen/Representatives of Development Related Advisory Groups,
May 5, 1992
Minutes: EDC and Chairmen/Representatives of Development Related Advisory Groups,
April 13, 1992
Permit Processing Subcommittee Membership
Permit Processing Subcommittee Working Groups
\
A --
B --
C --
D --
E --
F --
G --
H --
1--
J --
K --
L--
[C:\WP51lDOCUMENI1PROCESS.113]
/ c - (q / I 0 .. J.b
Table I
Table 1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
I. DISCRETIONARY LAND USE
PERMITS AND APPROVALS
I. Change certain conditional uses to
permitted uses.
2. Allow certain Conditional Use Permits to
be issued administratively.
3. Allow certain Conditional Use Permits to
be approved by the Planning Commission
rather than being automatically referred to
City Council for final action.
4. Allow Tentative Maps for individual
projects within planned communities to be
approved by the Planning Commission
rather than automatically being referred to
the City Council for final action.
II. DESIGN REVIEW AND SIGN REVIEW
5. Adopt concise and objective written
guidelines for design review.
6. Clarify the role of the Design Review
Committee and design review process as it
relates to other Planning review processes.
7. Allow for administrative approval of a
broader range of projects which are subject
to design review.
STAFF COMMENT
1. Staff supports this recommendation.
2. Staff supports this recommendation.
3. Staff supports this recommendation.
4. Staff supports this recommendation.
5. Staff supports this recommendation and is
already developing an updated Design
Review Manual.
6. Staff supports this recommendation.
Additionally, staff recommends that legal
analysis be given to the need for the DRC
to review ErRs both under current practice
and under a narrowed EDC role.
7. Staff supports this recommendation.
-1-
It) -.21
Table 1
Table 1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
8. Update the Zoning Ordinance sections
pertaining to signs, and adopt written
guidelines for review of signs.
9. Allow for a broader range of sign permits
to be approved administratively, and
streamline the sign permit review process.
10. Streamline the appeal process for design
review and sign review actions.
11. Provide updated application forms and
"User Guides" for design review and sign
review.
12. Provide senior level staff coordination and
adequate overall staff support for the design
review process.
13. Place a high priority on implementing the
recommendations outlined above.
III. BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND
COMMITTEES
14. Restrict the role of the Project Area
Committees (PACs) to the specific duties
required by California Redevelopment
Law; disband the Town Centre I and II and
Otay Valley PACs within one year; and
disband the Southwest PAC in three years
from its formation.
STAFF COMMENT
8. Staff supports this recommendation.
9. Staff supports this recommendation and is
current! y processing an ordinance
amendment which implements the
procedural changes outlined above.
10. Staff supports this recommendation.
11. Staff supports this recommendation.
12. Staff supports this recommendation. The
tentatively approved FY 92/93 Budget
includes an upgraded position to provide
senior level support to the DRC.
13. Staff supports this recommendation.
14. Staff concurs with the recommendation to
disband the Southwest PAC, merging it
with the Montgomery Planning Committee.
(See III. 17 below). In regards to the
Town Centre and Otay Road PACs, should
Council elect to continue these committees,
staff feels that the need exists for Council
to reevaluate the role of these groups in
terms of: (1) their legal mandate; (2) their
-2-
/4 - J.-:J..
Table 1
Table 1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVEWPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EnC RECOMMENDATION
STAFF COMMENT
role as formally defined by Council; (3)
their self-adopted by-laws; and (4) their
role as actually practiced currently.
First and foremost, roles and
responsibilities should be clarified by
formal action (via revisions of by-laws,
redevelopment plans and other such
documents). Role clarification should
address the following questions:
(a) Should the committee be reviewing
policy related issues? development
projects? EIRs?
(b) If the committee is to review
development projects, should this
include all discretionary reviews (e.g.
conditional use permits? variances?
signs? projects under $25,000?) or be
limited to m~or projects?
(c) Which items should be taken to the
committees by staff for a formal
recommendation to the Council/
Agency versus those taken as informa-
tional items or upon committee
request?
15. Create a Redevelopment Agency Policy
Committee.
15. This recommendation would be triggered
only if Council eliminates the PACs, and
would require further evaluation based
upon Council's direction in this regard.
-3-
I() - 2..3
Table 1
Table 1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
16. Amend Redevelopment Plans, Procedural
Manuals and Implementation Plans to bring
Special Permit, Variance, CUP, DRC and
other procedures into conformity.
17. Restrict the review authority of the
Montgomery Planning Committee regarding
land use matters to legislative changes to
the Montgomery Specific Plan. Review the
MPC's role in three years to evaluate the
desirability of sunsetting the Committee.
18. Restrict the RCC's role in reviewing
Environmental Impact Reports and
submitting comments to staff.
19. Schedule periodic reviews of all Boards and
Commissions which have authority over
Land Use matters, to evaluate their specific
functions and performance, and determine
whether changes are warranted.
IV. CUSTOMER SERVICE (")
20. Place a Bulletin Board near the Planning
Department for posting pending changes in
fees and development review policies and
procedures.
21. Make Brochures available at development-
related departments which explain the
review process and how to register
complaints.
STAFF COMMENT
16. Staff agrees with the need to bring all five
redevelopment plans into conformity in
terms of review and processing procedures.
Specific areas needing attention relate to
special permits and variances, the order and
nature of review by advisory bodies, and
the ability to handle certain items
administratively.
17. Staff supports the recommendation to phase
out the Project Area Committee and merge
its responsibilities with the Montgomery
Planning Committee. The role of this
"new" group should concurrently be
clarified.
18. Staff agrees with the recommendation and
feels that the current process conforms to
this recommendation.
19. Staff supports this recommendation.
20. Staff supports this recommendation.
21. Staff supports this recommendation and is
planning to prepare a series of user-friendly
publications describing different application
processes and timeframes, answering
-4-
If) - Lf
Table I
Table 1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVEWPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
22. Implement a Computer Tracking system
to monitor the status of applications and
make this information available to the
public.
23. Create an Ombudsman position whose sole
responsibility is to help applicants navigate
the review process.
STAFF COMMENT
frequently asked questions, providing
contact names and numbers, and indicating
how applicants can "register complaints."
22. Staff supports this recommendation and the
Building and Housing Department has
begun implementation of the first phase of
an automated permit tracking system,
which will be used to track building per-
mits and plan checks. The second phase,
which will automate processing of Planning
and Engineering permits and approvals,
will require additional computer hardware
and software, and has been conceptually
approved by the City Council in the FY 93
Capital Improvement Program.
23. Staff agrees with the need to provide
"hands-{}n" shepherding of projects through
the system to insure that projects do not get
bottlenecked causing significant costs and
delays to the applicant. An Ombudsman
position is an approach often used by local
governments. Typically this position is
located within the Manager's Office or the
Community Development/Economic
Department.
Currently an informal Ombudsman system
exists within the Administration Office via
the Assistant City Manager and Deputy
City Manager. Staff recommends that this
system be formalized by designating one
individual as the Ombudsman. The
Ombudsman program should be made more
visible by promoting it directly to
applicants and within City brochures and
-5-
" -Jl'
Table 1
Table I
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
24. Encourage Personnel Management which
creates a more user-friendly environment,
-6-
111-21.
STAFF COMMENT
other development-related materials.
Program "publicity" should identify the
steps an applicant should take in terms of
informal administrative appeals, i.e.,
through the Project Manager to Senior
staff, including the Department Head, and
then to the Administration's Ombudsman.
The goal would be to resolve complaints at
the lowest level possible within the City
organization.
A supplemental approach is the assignment
of Project Managers to insure continuity of
staff support for projects as they go
through the system by coordinating all
environmental, design review, and land use
approval processes. The Planning Depart-
ment and Community Development Depart-
ment currently assign Project Managers to
all major projects. Planning is currently
evaluating the feasibility of assigning
Project Managers to small projects, as well
as implementing other improvements to the
interdepartmental project review process.
A common approach which could immedi-
ately be implemented is the establishment
of a formal interdepartmental meeting as
the initial step in the formal aoolication
process. Along these lines, staff is
pursuing a more structured, interdepart-
mental oreaoolication process to evaluate
proposed projects and provide comments to
the applicants prior to formal submission,
to facilitate and expedite the process.
24. Staff agrees with the goal of implementing
a "customer service" philosophy and
Table 1
Table I
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
through training and access to senior
personnel.
-7-
If)'" "7
STAFF COMMENT
approach to development review throughout
the City. However, it should be noted that
applicants' perceptions as discussed above
may be an oversimplification of the issue.
While recognizing that service to the public
can be improved and there are occasionally
valid complaints, other factors should be
considered. For example, inexperienced
applicants can become frustrated by state
and local regulations and need to be
assisted by better guidance and information.
More sophisticated applicants may try to
"work the system" and compromise
Council policy in order to achieve the
lowest cost possible.
Among steps currently being planned or
undertaken which relate to this
recommendation are:
a. Customer Service Traininl!
A trainer has been retained to provide
a one-day seminar to selected
development departments staff on the
topic of customer service and "how to
deal with people". Training will
include topics such as "courtesy under
pressure" and "handling angry
customers" . The first workshop will
be held in July 1992. Staff will
evaluate the program's effectiveness to
determine future training needs. It is
envisioned that this training will be
offered periodically to all Development
Department employees. Other training
will be developed as needed.
Table 1
Table 1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
STAFF COMMENT
b. Interdeoartmental Coordination
In addition to the customer service
training discussed above, one or more
workshops are being planned by the
development-related departments to
encourage interdepartmental
coordination. A special emphasis will
be placed on coordination of
redevelopment projects, clarifying
review policies and procedures,
including staff roles. The purpose is
to improve review efficiencies and
responsiveness to applicants.
c. Minor Permits
The Building & Housing Department
is developing a streamlined system for
reviewing minor permits such as patio
covers and room additions.
d. Access to Senior Level Staff
See Item II. 8.
e. Administrative Appeals
As discussed in Section IV. 21, bro-
chures are planned which will provide
guidance through the process, includ-
ing an outline for administrative
appeals from Project Manager up to
the Ombudsman position and
Management.
-8-
10 - 28
Table 1
Table 1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
EDC RECOMMENDATION
STAFF COMMENT
25. Provide applicants an opportunity for
"follow up" feedback to the City.
25. Staff supports the need for a "customer
feedback" questionnaire. A questionnaire
has been developed and will soon be
available at the counters of all development
departments. Regarding follow-up contact
with applicants, staff would only caution
that the EDC's role should not be one of a
"complaint" committee or "mediation
committee" but supports the concept of
informally obtaining general feedback.
(*IThe following recommendations have been paraphrased by staff based upon "EDC discussion" in the
EDC report.
-9-
ItJ- Z, /;0" J()
"
u
~
"
:.e
0
M
"
'2 "
r!.l u
~
.9 "
" :.e
c 0
" "
E
~ ~
"
" "
E :8
.
~ "
" ~
" . .9
0 ~
'~ ~
" "
~ 0
~ E
Q J2 ~
"
0
v E
'E .
""
it: ;;
~ ~
" "
>
"0 e
> "
5 J2
u "
"" 'E
a it:
Pi ~
.,' "
>
- "0
" >
J2 ,5
" "
s 0
u u
~ ~
"
" t:
. ~
Vi ~
~
~ ^ ^
"
';: ~ ~ ~ ~
. ~ ~ ~
'" ~ ~ ~
" 'I 'I
E .. ..
;:: M '"
-
*
^
~
c
" .;: ~ ~ ~ ~
d
" '"
d
~ ~
.s 0
u
~
.]
d ~
-
" 0
~
0 u 0 0 0 0
~
z
"
.
0
u
~ ~ 0 0 ~
, ~
t:
.s
'"
=
0
'.
~
. < co u Cl
,
,
0
"
~ -
16...,
"'
'"
z
0
;::
<
~
OJ
~
~
~ !;:
~
0
u ~
;;1"'....
Cltio::
~.."""
",'"
N :;~
"'-
::>:-,"
(]) ..,,<25
~ ;;1i;;~
-"
<0 ....1;:.."
f-- '" -'
'" '"
'" 0
OJ ....
U
0
'"
'"
t:
::>:
'"
OJ
'"
tit:
d d
~ ~-
C.5 ~
.. ~
~ 1: E
E G'-
<l.ll;: 5
""s'",
~.~~
'"
U II II
::;~~
u
.
~
~ .5
6'5
.- c
0'-
z::>:
U II
0'"
TABLE 2
.31
g
M
C
'~
g
So
iI
u
,
E
"
.0
]
~
o
-'"
..
'"
.
~
.l:
"
il
^
M
,5
>
~
~
u
.
TABLE 2
.
u
~ :;
:; 0
~ , ~
0
0 . 0
.2 ., ~
e 0
"- 0
0 0 2
~ .2
. "-
~ " 0
:; ." ~
0- .
i "- ~
. :; i
. e
., i .
" '" ,
" " " ~
.!2...Q " .,
:0 . ~ e 0
.2
o E v .~ "
c...~ 2 :0 ."
g"E 0 0-
'" '"
u , '"
~ 0 " .
~ v 2 e
. .,
'" ~ '"
~ 0 ~ ~
"'- v . 0
0 " v .~ '" 0
0 "' " v
.~ " 0
.~ i! n..:=
v " u
~ B ~ 0- .E 0
'5 0 ~
is ::: 0 ~ ~
" , '" Jl
" " .5 v ci
v '" " ::: "
> .S 0 . ~
a > ~ ~ i! :;
> ~ "
.S " > " <:
" a '"
~ E E 0 "
> ,
'5 i= 0 E ~ ."
0 '"
. ~ v .~
" ~ '5 E
u ~ 0 'll
~ 0 " e , i= ~
0 'll v ~ UJ 0
. ~
2 .~ '5 ~ <J
oi 0 a .5 .S
'" . 11
.{ "' "
] " " ~
" .~ '" " s ~
;: 0 '" '5
~ ,
"' ~ ~ ~ .E ~ ~
~ 0 a
{J :; 0 (3 {J " "
2 "
0 " u 0 C 0
u " " '" u " u
'" .S u '" E '"
0 "' 0 0 ~ 0
~ " C i3 ~ 0 ~ '"
~ '" "
" - . 0 " E "
o ~ 0
~ "'- ~ . ~
00
'" " " "
0 ~ ~
.;: ~ ~ 1 ~
. ~ ~ ~
'" . '0 . . .
.
" 'i' > 1" ~ 1" 1"
E ~ N ~ ~
;::
-
.
~
~ .;: ~ ~
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
v '" ~
.
c. 1;;
.s 0 ~
u .~
'"
0 "
.., 2
e ~
K ~ '"
0 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 'll
~ u
0
~
>,
.L
~ ]
~ ~
c
U ~ .?c
c. ~ 0 0
~ 0 0 ~ ..
0 ~
1': .~
.
Jl "-
'" 1i
>,
. 5
.
'" "
. ~
] <: '" u " '" "- 0
.;:
~ ~
.
. " ~
'" u
.
lb-- .J1~
TABLE 2
E
"
;;;
"
;r
~
"
2
"
~
E:
"
.3-
"
'C
0-
S!
~
'~
o
U
"
"
o
C
"
a:
.q
"0
0-
E
'"
C
'"
~
"
~
"
o
I;.
C
o
'~
~
is
o
a
v
'"
~
o
o
2
1'i
]
"
1i
~
"
o
~
.::; g
.~ .~
.~
o
- v
] ~
~I) ~
'" "
~ .~
11.-5
" to
t 8-
o c-
U "
"
c
"
a
to
.
c-
o
Cl
C
"
e
c-
o
"
>
"
Cl
'"
'E
~
o
U
;;;
-5
~
"
;;:
'C
.
~
." ~
.
'" ~ . ~
"
" . 'C ."
E - . Z ."
;:: > .
or Z
N
to
~
'" ."
" . 0
. '" 0 ."
0. Z ~
.s .
0 ~ 0
'" U "
.= Jj
~ '" '"
<5 0
8- '~
~ 0 0
~ ." e
Z Z 0 c-
o 1l
u
0
~ ]
0 >,
U .D
0. '" ~
0
t: ~ 0 ."
II Z 0 0
'" 0 .!O
"
'~
g .
'0 c-
. 2
~
~ >,
. CJ S
. '" -
0 ." .
. '"
" '" 0
"
~
- .
It) -.1:3 0
u
.
TABLE 2
~
0
iI
2
~
= ;;
0
'~ "
t
~ 3
i:5 E
~
"
M
"
"
-B
0
"
E
]
~
"
"3
c
~
"
E
"
"
"
"
E
E
0
~
"
~
.
" "
=
';: "
" ., ~ ., ., .,
'" z ~ z z z
. -r
E
;:;
.
.
"
=
'" ';: ~ ~ 0 0 0
" " ~
" '"
c. ~
.s u
"
.5
e '"
. "
c. 0
0 u 0 0 0 ~ ~
~
'"
8
u .,
c. ~ ~ 0 ~
, ~ Z
1':
s
'"
=
=
'"
.
~
ij u Cl "' '" .,
,
,
. <:
~
If)'" 3'f
f
~
'"
.~
~
~
E.
"&
o
]
~
"
~
o
-"
;;
',:
.
~
11
~
il
"
'"
"
'>
~
"
o
U
.
TABLE 2
~
"'
""
:::
0
11
~
"3
0
. ii
.~ E
.. .
" ~
. 2
" 0.
0 0
E .Q
t: "
.
0. 0
" "
Cl >
" "
"
0 ~
E
0. E
0
" '"
>
" 0 8-
0 Cl
'~ .'0 ~
2 "
~ .
0 ~
i5 ~ 0
.2
0 "g
u
" il
il u
0
-g .
"'
u 0
" 0
~
~ 0
. "
,
0 0
~ u
~
~ 0
0 i5
0 \'" b
~ 0 :E
0
0 ~ -
~ ;; ~
" ,,'8
:s ~ 0..
" uil
'" 0.>
" " 0
" t "
0 ~ 0.
U ~ ~
.
~
'r;: " " " " "
"
'" Z Z Z Z Z
.
E
;:
-
.
~
"" 'r;: ~ " ~
u " ~ ~ Z ~ ~
" '"
0. .
oS 0
u
"
"5
~ ""
. ~
0. U "
0 ~ ~ z ~ ~
~
z
1>1
0
u ~ "
0. ~ ~
~ ~ z ~ ~
0 ~
1':
5
'"
=
=
-
.
~
. co u Cl OJ "'
,
,
.
~
If) ~ IS 'ID -.31.
":'
~
~
.~
"
g
~
il
u
0
]
~
"'
]
~
0
.'0
..
'€
.
0.
11
~
.
~
.5
i~ >
~
J> .
0
cd u
.
cry
OJ
~
-0
'"
I-
'"
~
;::
."
'"
'"
'"
u
o
g:
~
- -
" "
~ ~
"" ""-
.5.5 ~
. - ""
-n.s
~ ~ '"
'g'a'~
~~::E
II II II
ttai
-
~
-""
l.!3
a .
.- g
~~
11 II
" ..
II I I
.~ ~ TABLE 3
'" ~
~ "
. . ]
.S: Cl
~ Cl >-"-
~ u o.U
.a 0._
" 0 -"
<' .2 ;; S
0 0 .
'" " "0:::;
5 ~ -a "
o .
U " ~ '" --,
0:: 0 U ~ >-
g "
- ~ 0
~ .
0 -g..2 ~
.~ - ."
15 > . .Jj
;; e ~
0 '" 0.- 2
.~ -a 0..
~ - ~ ~
" .~ .S
'" ~ U > ~
5 - ~
-5 - ~ 'iJ
- .
~ ~ g 8 0
.
".;::l:t: -5
'ii ~ ~ " '"
"' "~ 5
Cl .s g ii- u
'" -<
0 ] @ ! ""
0 .~ .
.9 ",-< -5
~ ~~
0: II _ 0 2
-5 rJ ~ 0
is .~ 8' 0. ~
_ 0 i
.~ "" ::;::""i3
~ o ~
~ .S] .
~'" .~
g. ~ . E
~ ;:; I~
> !i
" ] ..,
.2 '" ~€ "
:.2
] 2 '" ~ ~
0 >- ~:.a ~
] 0. '" 0
0. g ~
- '"
" "" "'~
~ '3 ~ n -<
o . II
2 ~ .- 8"':::
> o.~
. '" ~ l
.g - >- ~ 0
o ~
. . 0 ~ .
1l " ~
.~ e< 0.'"
0-
- "
'" . 0 0.
2:'" ~ ~ 0
ti ;:;
- 5 ~""' >
Cl .~ u .
Cl u-< " > ~
0."
u -"" ~ e
.s ::::'0 ];! 2
0 g 0 ~g -'l
.9 ._ 0 ..,
0 ~ .~ "jjil .~
] u .~ 11 ~
~ s e ;;
.9 ~ ~ '" 0. 0
._ 0.
~ . - ..
~ " ilg .
-'" il
. .
'" .. ..
.9 .
'" ~ U -<
0 '" - z
- -
0. .
..E! 0 "'
u "'
.s '"
e '" 0
8 8 0
0
~ 0
.
z
'"
8 -< -<
z z -<
f z ~
z
"
'"
g
.0
-g
~ -<
0 '"
~ U
Cl
-
IIJ -.11
TABLE 3
!i s
~ ~
E
0 g, 0-
-B "il
.., .~
" >
0 .., e
. ~ ~
0
.., 0
~ .., >>
.Ej 0)
~ " .~
0 Ii
. ~
~ " .~
.e- .~
0- S ~
" '" "
11 .9 ..s
15 " u
0 e '"
-B a 0
s .~ ..
>> ;;; 8
0. 0 ~
0- ~
.
Ii 0
0- "
~ .., ..
. :; '"
0 tl !l
.~ " .
n ~ .~
~ ~" ]1 ..
is 0- B s ~
. 0
-'0 0 0
~ '" .., 0 ]
.., U
~9 1;- .~ '"
. E. 0
!J,j > ;;
e 0 .., ..
.- " ] . 0
~ . . u
O-B 0- . ~
~ .E " .
~;':1 " .1J ]
'"
o . il '" N ..
'" 0 il . "il
._ 0 Q "
~ .~ 0 0 u
u 5 "
" .9 . 0 ]
"" 0 u u
Jl 8 .~ ~ B B
. u oil ~ . .
- .9 0 " 0
1l 8 " .., ..,
~ ! .~ .~ 0
d~ .jj
]' '" '"
n u il il
" .~
~o 0 0 0
..,
00 0 0 0
_u ~ Jl u U
>>. .., .9 .9
- u I
"" "
~"il 0 .~
- " ~ .~
g,e ;; ;;
~ ;; 0 "
n J ] ]
.., e '" " B
.re, . 0
~~ i'! .9 .9
v; ~ ~
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
'" ~
.~
'" .
~ '"
"
]" 0
u
'"
.9 0 0 0 0 0
I '"
.3
~
z
'" <( <( ::: ::: <(
8 z z z z Z
"
i'
~
'"
,
0
.0
i
i <( '" u 0 '"
" " I
~
II) ::n
N
TABLE J
c
.2
" "
ij ,
. E
.. ~
.C
. u
~ '"
'" .f.
.9 <;;
I "
, ]
- ij
"'
~ ;;;
8 ~
" 0:
e ]
.
"8
::l '" ~
ri >I E
" "-
s " 11 ;i
] u
Jl 8 .2
0.>
t >- o e
II @ ." -
t..8
'" " llu
;., .C c
. .~ "'<(
u U ,,0.
Ii Jl 8- ij .
'"
g <( . . ..s
i , ~ ~ 0
;; " . -
~ ~ .~ .... 5
is 0. - ~ E3
0
." '" 0 ~ i1
~ >I "
~ .5 0. .
" il ~ ."
" .- -
. " > .
.s u :s e.s
0 _ 0
Jl 8. ;; . "
-'" , .s .9 ~
~ ~ . " s
"0 - ~
'il .~ 0 ~ .~
- e
0 . ~ 0.
'" :~ :;: '0 ....
-'" 3 0
;; 8- 0 '"
. .~ ~ .~
t: ~
, g-g
u ]
. '" 1l .
I 0
.~ " Jl Jl
.>
'iJ s .
. .S . ,
~ - 8. 8"
8' '" It: ~
] s .-
0. ] . -
~ 11 0'"
8- '" 0>1
" uo
g- . >I 1l :01"
."
> ~ " S :::: U
. " . .9 '"
~ .> ri 0 0 " .S
u u
e .S 0. e ~
0.." Jl ,
...: H. <( t: '8 g
z z s ::l .9
~
. ~ ... <( <( ...
... Z Z ...
'" Z ... ...
.9
s ~
u ~
. ;;
~ 8
'"
II 0 ... 0 0 0
e s
8- 8
~
z
s <( <( ~ ~ ...
8 z z ...
z Z
0.
t
s
~
.
0
.,
i
i ... '" '" - <(
0
~ - -
,fJ -:fl
M
.~
~
is
'"
J
'"
,8
I
'"
<3
0.
"
to
s
'"
c
,2
i
i
~
~
o
.
,s
i
"
s
'"
~
u
'"
"
'.,
"L
o
it:
~
'"
'"
U
..
o
o
'.,
'il
il
"
o
,9
:>i
~
.
;:,
'ti
o
,S
;;
~
!l
'~
8
~
.
o
.
;;
~
"
.
."
Ii
0.
o
OJ
>
.
."
S
.
'"
8
it:
S
"
'"
'"
u
]I~
q
~ 8
-
"
'"
,8
~
'"
<3
'"
.
o
U
~
.
Z
~
o
o
'S
~
'"
'C
.
."
S
.
"
."
.
'"
o
"
~
~
u
'"
,9
o
'"
g
.
e
.
11
:>i
,,;
]
Ii
:>i
"
o
"'
S
~
.
]-
'"
~
0:
;;
.
9
g.
OJ
>
~
."
o
.
E
.
S
'"
8
it:
S
.
'"
'"
u
3
! ~
~l
:>io.
o
....
....
'"
~
o
jj
C
o
u
,8
8
Ii
"
1!
o
"
o
'~
iJ
g ~
UB
",'-
H
0:3
~.~
9 ..
0<;;
~.So
" .
~b
o
11 0
." "
e<E
8 "
. 8-
. 0.
~ 51
~it:
~ S
.",;
Ii",
g.u
~]
. "
~]
o $a
~ .
,,-6
fr~
"'~
"'~
h
_ u
0. .
~ e
.~ ~
S:>i
~ Q.i
n
it:u
S<:
"0.
811
u ~
:3~
:~ ~
~]
.s .>
:>i e
....
....
o
....
....
u
-g
'3
[
II
S
~
"
,5
;;
8
"
~
"
it:
~
J
~
,;
:0
:~
]>
"
.
II
i
....
....
o
....
'"
~
4.. V-!,tf(J
'0
o
"
o
U
'"'
JO
~
.
.~
u
'8
'C
8-
t:
~
"
it:
~
.
:E-
~
.
"E.
,~
S
'ii
o
u
it:
ii
..
o
o
'.,
'il
il
i
'a
::1
o
o
~
z
"'
TABLE 3
,,;
.~
JO
;;
g
u
o
o
"2
.
.8
9
31
"3
JO
,9
S
,9
E
S
'"
~
u
it:
ii
"
o
,8
:>i
.:
z
.,.
o
<:
Z
....
....
<:
Z
~
z
0.
<:
~
d
.2
~
is
o
""
.s
s ~
~ "
! 8
""
.s
! ~
~
z
"
8
0.
'i'
t:
S
"'
.
.g
-8
~
,
"
~
~
~
~
..
B
"
.
~~
"
t
o
~
o
~
0.
o
"
t
..
.s
.s
"
I
~ ~
!]
; 0.
o ~
~ ";;j
t: ~
:q
Cl~
-Ji
o:]l
,s ~
.- "
~ ..
" ~
H
u
o ..
_ 0
" ;;
8-6
o ~
u .s
.~ ~
:9 :s
~ ~
'" e
'~-8
";;];:E
B
" ~
~ 3
'8"
::d
I
~
"
""
~
'[
8
0.
II
]
B
.
"
..
o
""
.s
>
~
8
~
o
o
u
""
d
.0
""
;,
o
B
~
'8
E
e
.
~
'2
.
"
~
o
j
0.
3
.~
-
'"
ti
o
o
~
'"
.e,
"
...
...
o
...
...
...
'"
..s
3
li
-0
0.
~
.
~
.,
~
..
;
10-
T
!!i
'"
j
..
;
~
~
o
:B
8-
~
d
-
..s
8
""
.s
o
9'
o
o
~
'"
e,
"
g
{J
"
"
E
o
o
g
..
;
@
~
B
"
8
:3
.~
-
o
.s
:;:
...
...
...
o
...
...
...
u
..
;
~
:g
8.
~
o
d
.2
1l
'"
.C
.
u
B
"
"
..
~
.s
>
,
"
8
"
~
]
3
~
o
0.
~
1ii
0.
"
o .
o
~"".g
. .
.5
..
0:: 8
,s 0
~"
"d
.., 11
's 1::
'='11
'" .
""
o "
0.5
0..
u ;
'0"
.1"" ~
. t:
.
- 0.
- .
","
,,1l
o >
8 8
" ~
e ..
...
'8 ;
~ ~
H
0. 0.
...
...
...
o
...
o
ci
.2
u
o
'"
U
"
'"
~
.
d
-
..s
t:
8.
0.
"
'"
t!
"
"
U
~
.
d
-
'"
"
8
.
e
1
3
~
o
0.
~
0-
o
"
>
.
..
.~
8.
~
o
-
'"
"
o
o
u
t:
8.
0.
"
'"
t!
-
o
.~
..
~
o
0.
...
...
o
...
...
'"
TABLE 3
v;
...
...
~
~
"
.~
8.
~
..
3
"
il
""
.."
B
"
C.
;r
..
1
~
""
;
"
u
0.
~
U
.s
~
...
...
...
..
I
~
~
"
~
.~~
~ =
~~~
iilJ
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
I. DISCRETIONARY LAND USE PERMITS AND APPROVALS
1. CHANGE CERTAIN CONDITIONAL USES TO PERMITTED USES
Discussion: Certain uses which currently require a conditional use permit could be allowed
"by right," subject to meeting all other Zoning Ordinance requirements, andlor other
specific performance standards which the City could apply administratively.
2. ALLOW CERTAIN CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO BE ISSUED
ADMINISTRA TIVEL Y
Discussion: Certain uses which currently require a conditional use permit could be
reviewed by the Zoning Administrator, and a CUP could be issued administratively, subject
to appeal to the Planning Commission andlor City Council. This approach would be most
appropriate for such uses where the CUP is used primarily to apply specific conditions to
a use to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, rather than where a use mayor may
not be acceptable depending on specific circumstances.
In cases where a written or oral protest is registered with the Zoning Administrator
regarding a proposed administrative CUP, and the concern cannot be resolved through
conditions of approval which are acceptable to both the applicant and the party filing the
protest, then the matter shall be referred to the Planning Commission. The costs of
referring the matter to the Planning Commission shall be borne by the applicant. However,
staff shall attempt to minimize these costs, and shall schedule such matters before the
Planning Commission at the earliest possible date.
3. ALLOW CERTAIN CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO BE APPROVED BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION, RATHER THAN BEING AUTOMATICALLY
REFERRED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL ACTION
Discussion: Certain uses currently require a conditional use permit to be approved pursuant
to a public hearing by the City Council, following a public hearing and recommendation by
the Planning Commission. For many of these uses, the Planning Commission could be
given authority to approve the CUP, subject to appeal by the City Council or any other
party. In accordance with current practice, the Director of Planning would provide written
notification to the City Council of action taken by the Planning Commission in the next City
Council packet, and the Council would be required to take any action to appeal such matter
at its next regular meeting. Unless such appeal action were taken by the City Council at
that meeting, the action of the Planning Commission would be final.
-3-
___11J"~z,.
4. ALWW TENTATIVE MAPS FOR INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS WITHIN PLANNED
COMMUNITIES TO BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
RATHER THAN AUTOMATICALLY BEING REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL
FOR FINAL ACTION
Discussion: All tentative maps currently require a public hearing by both the Planning
Commission and City Council. In cases where a "master tentative map" for a planned
community has already been approved by the City Council, there appears to be little benefit
for the Council to also hold public hearings on tentative maps for individual projects (e.g.,
condominiums, small-lot single-family detached projects, etc.) which are normally processed
after the master tentative map is approved.
n. DESIGN REVIEW AND SIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDA nONS
5. ADOPT CONCISE AND OBJECTIVE WRITTEN GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN
REVIEW
Discussion: The City's existing Design Review Manual is outdated, and should be replaced
by a new set of design guidelines which would clearly state the City's intent regarding
building and site design, landscaping, and other design-related issues. The guidelines should
include illustrations of acceptable and unacceptable design solutions. These guidelines
should be placed in a format which can be easily updated to reflect new conditions or
standards. In addition, staff should be able to provide examples of projects which meet the
intent of the guidelines, using plans and/or photographs of such projects.
6. CLARIFY THE ROLE OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AND DESIGN
REVIEW PROCESS AS IT RELATES TO OTHER PLANNING REVIEW
PROCESSES
Discussion: The role of the Design Review Committee should be focussed on building and
site design issues. Other planning issues, such as zoning (land use, parking requirements,
etc.), circulation, and environmental review should, to the maximum extent possible, be
handled by other appropriate reviewing authorities.
7. ALWW FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF A BROADER RANGE OF
PROJECTS WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO DESIGN REVIEW
Discussion: Currently staff has the authority to approve additions to buildings which
involve an increase of not more than 25 % to the building area, as well as duplexes. In
order to reduce the number of cases which need to be reviewed by the Design Review
Committee, staff should be given the authority to approve additional classes of projects,
provided that they meet the established design review guidelines. In cases where a project
which falls into such a class does not meet all of the guidelines, it could be referred by staff
to the Design Review Committee.
-4-
~ If) -11.3
One example of an additional type of project which could be approved administratively
would be new commercial or industrial buildings in planned communities for which
comprehensive design guidelines have been approved by the City, and where such project
is determined to have met those guidelines. Further evaluation will be necessary to
determine what additional types of projects could be approved administratively, what types
should be automatically referred to the Design Review Committee, and what types of should
be exempt from any design review (note that currently single-family detached houses and
other minor projects are exempt from design review).
8. UPDATE TIlE ZONING ORDINANCE SECTIONS PERTAINING TO SIGNS, AND
ADOPT WRITTEN GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF SIGNS
Discussion: The sections of the Municipal Code dealing with sign regulations are poorly
organized and, in some cases, internally inconsistent. In addition, while the Code
establishes "maximum entitlements" which can be allowed for various types of signs in
various zones, it does not indicate what types of signs are normally considered acceptable
in specific situations. Therefore, the City should:
I) revise the Zoning Ordinance to set forth more clearly the standards and procedures for
sign review and, where necessary, eliminate redundant or antiquated sections; and
2) adopt a set of written guidelines which indicate what types of signs and sign programs
are considered acceptable in specific situations. These guidelines should include
illustrations, as well as specific examples of approved sign programs which conform to
these guidelines. In addition, staff should be able to provide color photographs or
drawings which depict actual approved signs which conform to these guidelines.
9. ALLOW FOR A BROADER RANGE OF SIGN PERMITS TO BE APPROVED
ADMINISTRATIVELY, AND STREAMLINE TIlE SIGN PERMIT REVIEW
PROCESS
Discussion: Staff should be given the authority to approve a sign permit for any sign
proposal which conforms to ordinance requirements and the written guidelines which are
proposed above. In cases where staff determines that a sign proposal does not meet
ordinance requirements or the sign guidelines, the request should be referred as quickly as
possible to the Design Review Committee for review and action, consistent with the recently
proposed ordinance revisions which are under consideration by the City Council.
10. STREAMLINE TIlE APPEAL PROCESS FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SIGN
REVIEW ACTIONS
Discussion: Currently, an appeal of an action of the Design Review Committee is heard
by the Planning Commission, and is scheduled for hearing 5-6 weeks after it is filed. An
applicant may also appeal the action of the Planning Commission to the City Council, which
-5-
:M' Jf).I/~
requires an additional 3-4 weeks. This appeal process could be streamlined by eliminating
the appeal authority of the Planning Commission regarding design review cases.
11. PROVIDE UPDATED APPLICATION FORMS AND "USER GUIDES" FOR DESIGN
REVIEW AND SIGN REVIEW
Discussion: In conjunction with updating the guidelines and procedures for design review
and sign review, the Planning Department should also update and simplify the application
forms, and provide a "user guide" which clearly explains the design review process and the
requirements of the applicant for submitting projects to the City for review. In particular,
this user guide should encourage applicants to schedule a pre-application conference with
City staff prior to filing a final project application, in order to discuss issues regarding the
proposed project and ensure that the applicant understands the processing requirements for
the project.
12. PROVIDE SENIOR LEVEL STAFF COORDINATION AND ADEQUATE OVERALL
STAFF SUPPORT FOR THE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
Discussion: Because of the need to coordinate the design review and sign review processes
with other City development review processes, and to ensure that overall City objectives are
met, it is important that at least one senior staff member from the Planning Department
(Senior Planner or Principal Planner) be responsible for coordination of the design review
process. This person would be responsible for attendance at all Design Review Committee
meetings, review of all staff recommendations to the Design Review Committee, review of
all administrative design review and sign permit approvals, and direct contacts with
applicants as requested. In addition, this person, along with other assigned staff, would be
responsible for implementing the recommendations above regarding development of written
guidelines, updated procedures, and new forms and user guides.
The annual operating budget for the Planning Department should specifically include a
senior-level planner position, with the appropriate education and experience to perform these
duties, as well as other necessary staff to ensure that the Planning Department can meet the
objectives outlined herein. In addition, the Planning Department should ensure that staff
assigned to the design review process receive adequate technical training, as well as training
in "customer service" skills. Furthermore, the Planning Department should establish
procedures for receiving feedback from its clients, including questionnaires and periodic
surveys of recent applicants. Finally, the City should also ensure that fee schedules are
adjusted regularly to allow the costs of providing these services to be fully recovered by the
City.
13. PLACE A HIGH PRIORITY ON IMPLEMENTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS
OUTLINED ABOVE
Discussion: By implementing the changes outlined above, the City can continue to ensure
high quality design in all new development which occurs in Chula Vista, while reducing the
-6-
~ /IJ ''1.1
delays and frustrations which are often associated with the design review process. The City
Council should assure that adequate staff resources are provided to institute these changes
as soon as possible, and should appoint representatives of the Design Review Committee,
the business community, design professionals, and other community interests to work with
staff in implementing these recommendations.
m. BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
14. RESTRICT THE ROLE OF THE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEES (PACs) TO THE
SPECIFIC DUTIES REQUIRED BY CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT LA Wj
DISBAND THE TOWN CENTRE I & IT AND OTAY VALLEY PACs WITHIN ONE
YEAR; AND DISBAND THE SOUTHWEST PAC IN THREE YEARS FROM ITS
FORMATION.
Discussion: The California Health and Safety Code requires a Project Area Committee
(pAC) to be established within a Project Area where "...a substantial number of low- and
moderate-income families are to be displaced by the redevelopment project" and, further
states that the PAC should be consulted regarding "... those policy matters which deal with
the planning and provision of residential facilities or replacement housing for those to be
displaced by project activities, " and that, "The agency shall also consult with the committee
on other policy matters which affect the residents of the project area." These provisions
apply for a three (3) year period after adoption of each redevelopment plan, and may be
extended by the Agency by one-year intervals.
However, the Rules and By-Laws adopted by each of the three PACs state that the PAC
shall review".. .all major proposals for the development, platting, conservation, circulation,
or public service of the Project Area, and shall report its findings and recommendations to
the Redevelopment Agency, Design Review Committee, or referring body." And, under
current practices, the P ACs review virtually all discretionary applications, creating
additional layers of review and time delays for redevelopment projects, actually acting as
a disincentive to development. Staff support demands are extensive and are not reimbursed
by cost recovery fees.
The three year periods have expired for TCI and II and Otay; Southwest will expire in July,
1993. This recommendation will require Council to adopt resolutions, P ACs to amend their
Rules and By-laws and the Redevelopment Project Area Procedures Manuals/Implementation
Plans to be amended.
15. CREATE A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY POLICY COMMITTEE
Discussion: In order to insure public participation in broad redevelopment policies and
programs, this committee would be charged with general oversight of Agency matters and
input regarding conceptual policy direction. It is recommended that the Committee include
at least two members from each of the existing PACs and meet bi-annually.
-7-
~ J() -1/-'
16. AMEND REDEVELOPMENT PLANS, PROCEDURAL MANUALS AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS TO BRING SPECIAL PERMIT, VARIANCE, CUP,
DRC AND OTHER PROCEDURES INTO CONFORMITY.
Discussion: Significant inconsistencies exist between Redevelopment Plans regarding the
Agency's authority to process Conditional Use Permits, a.k.a. "Special Permits". In
addition, inconsistencies exist between Redevelopment Plans and/or Project Implementation
Plans regarding the order of review by the DRC and the PAC.
Redevelopment Plans should be amended to enable staff to take recommendations regarding
special permits and variances directly to the Agency. The Procedures
Manuals/Implementation Plans should be amended to provide for consistent and expeditious
review of variances and Special Permits by: 1) amending the Town Centre I Procedures
Manual to conform with the Otay Valley Road Procedures Manual so that projects go to the
PAC prior to DRC*, and 2) amending the Town Centre I and Otay Valley Road Procedures
Manuals to allow the Zoning Administrator to make routine discretionary review decisions
pursuant to City Code and the Southwest Project Area Redevelopment Plan, and in
conformance with the Subcommittee's recommendations regarding revised CUP procedures.
* This is only applicable to the extent that the PAC continues to review projects.
17. RESTRICT THE REVIEW AUTHORITY OF THE MONTGOMERY PLANNING
COMMITTEE REGARDING LAND USE MATTERS TO LEGISLATIVE CHANGES
TO THE MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN. REVIEW THE MPC'S ROLE IN
THREE YEARS TO EVALUATE THE DESIRABILITY OF SUNSETTING THE
COMMITTEE.
Discussion: The MPC is a seven-member group that was formed by City ordinance subject
to the Montgomery Annexation in 1985. The MPC was initially charged with
recommending a community element of the General Plan and reviewing and making
recommendations regarding land uses, transportation, open space, variances, CUP's,
subdivisions, architectural review and "all other police regulations affecting land use." The
MPC's duties were revised by ordinance in November, 1990 to include "analysis of critical
planning issues," "mobilizing public agencies to develop resources," "drafting policies,"
"recommending sources of public funds," and "providing recommendations to City
departments, boards and commissions with regard to zoning, health, licensing, building
codes and public safety" in the Montgomery area.
The MPC currently reviews all major land use actions affecting the Montgomery
Community (e.g., General Plan amendments, Montgomery Specific Plan amendments,
rezoning) as well as other discretionary approvals (e.g., tentative maps, CUP's). The
recommendation recognizes the short -term need for a community group to provide input into
the remaining Special Study Areas land use decisions (e.g., Otay River and West Fairfield)
and to continue to act as an advisory body concerning other issues delineated above (e.g.,
CIP and CDBG review), while considering the overall goal of eliminating duplicative layers
-8-
~f)1f)-1/1
of review, minimizing related costs and delays to business applicants, and maximizing
administrative reviews. Another consideration in narrowing this and other advisory bodies'
land use-related responsibilities is recent action by Council instigating public forums for new
planned community proposals and the extension of public hearing notices from 500' to 1000'
from the proposed project site.
The Southwest Project area is located within the Montgomery area. The City Attorney is
currently reviewing the potential merger of the MPC and the Southwest PAC. Assuming
the PAC's role is immediately limited, and the PAC is sunsetted by July 1993, per the
Subcommittee's recommendation, it should be noted that two current PAC members are also
members of the MPC.
18. RESTRICT TIlE RCC'S ROLE IN REVIEWING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORTS AND SUBJ\.unlNG COMMENTS TO STAFF.
Discussion: The RCC's role is defined in Ordinance No. 1928, (revised November 1980)
to provide advice to Council "in the areas of energy conservation, resource recovery,
environmental Quality. historic and prehistoric site protection and other related fields." The
ordinance further calls for a "citizen's assessment" of, among other things, "the effects of
individual projects being subjected to environmental review. . ." The Subcommittee's
recommendation would allow the RCC to provide comments/questions to the EIR consultant
and City Environmental Coordinator, while eliminating the need for applicants (and their
costly consultants) to appear before the RCC either in a public meeting or public hearing
format. The recommendation reflects the lack of any state legal mandate for a separate City
committee to review or conduct environmental analyses. The review by Chula Vista's RCC
is being undertaken in addition to that of the City's internal departments and Environmental
Review Coordinator; the surrounding property owners routinely receiving the Notice of the
EIR; the numerous public and private agencies/organizations routinely receiving Notice of
the EIR; and the EIR public hearings before both the PC and the City Council. Again, the
recommendation reflects the desire to streamline the process by eliminating unnecessary
duplication and resulting costs and delays, while still insuring adequate public review.
19. SCHEDULE PERIODIC REVIEWS OF ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHICH
HAVE AUTIlORITY OVER LAND USE MATTERS, TO EVALUATE THEIR
SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS AND PERFORMANCE, AND DETERMINE WHETHER
CHANGES ARE WARRANTED
Discussion: There are several boards and commissions which currently have authority to
review land use matters within the City of Chula Vista. The roles and duties of many of
these boards and commissions have changed over time, both in response to specific direction
from the City Council, and as a result of decisions made by the boards and commissions
themselves. There should be a periodic review of all boards and commissions at least every
three to four years to evaluate the specific functions being performed by each board and
commission, the effects of their actions on permit processing schedules, the level of staff
support required, and overlapping duties among various boards and commissions.
-9-
;;r ID --~8
IV. CUSTOMER SERVICE
20. BULLETIN BOARD
Discussion: In recent years development fees have been adjusted several times. There have
been changes in engineering requirements due to adoption of zoning changes and completion
of studies. Many of these changes have trapped unwary applicants in the middle of project
planning, in some cases causing expensive redesign or refinancing. A bulletin board should
be placed inside the hallway near the Planning Department counter. Pending changes in
fees, street widening, zoning ordinances, and other items which would be helpful to
applicants would be posted. Also, copies of the brochures mentioned below would be
displayed, with directions on how to get them. All applications would direct applicants to
check the bulletin board for changes which might affect them.
21. BROCHURES
Discussion: Although larger developers and those who regularly deal with the planning
process understand local procedures, ordinary citizens and professionals unfamiliar with
Chula Vista may not. Brochures should be available at development related department
counters which highlight the City's commitment to fair and courteous service and provide
concise explanations of the application process, step by step, for the various types of permits
and processes. The brochures should clarify how applicants can obtain assistance as needed,
including registering complaints.
22. COMPUTER TRACKING
Discussion: All applications would be tracked by computer, so that any planning
department employee could give an applicant a status report - and properly refer the
applicant for an in-depth update.
23. OMBUDSMAN
Discussion: The policy of this city is to encourage responsibility development, especially
commercial and light industrial development which adds to the tax base and provide jobs.
One key to attracting this type of development is fair treatment by city staff during the
planning process. There should be a staff person whose only job would be to assist
applicants as they make their ways through the planning process, an "ombudsman." This
would be especially valuable to those new to the process and to small businesses which may
be less sophisticated in their approach to the process. The availability of an ombudsman
would signal the city's commitment to economic development. It would also provide the
assistance applicants need when they feel they have been treated unfairly, giving them an
advocate.
-10-
3,L,- If) --1/ 9
24. PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Discussion: Planning Department personnel should approach their contacts with applicants
as sale of a service. Service must be efficient, fair, and courteous. Anything less is
unacceptable. The number of complaints about treatment by staff and the Design Review
Committee indicate the current level of service is unacceptable. The staff position seems
to be that this is due to unhappiness with results, that applicants always ask for more than
can be granted and so will never be satisfied. However, discussions with past applicants
indicates that their contacts with staff and the Design Review Committee are too often
adversarial.
Individual preferences should be removed from evaluation of projects, and staff and the
DRC should concentrate on bringing each project quickly and inexpensively into line with
City regulations. An acceptable project should escape modification. A project that does not
meet standards should not be summarily dismissed. It is possible to say no, yet be helpful.
The applicant should be informed of acceptable alternatives and given approval conditional
upon submission of conforming plans. The applicant's concerns of time, money, pride of
ownership (of design) should be given great weight.
The means to achieve the above are various. It is the responsibility of management, and
managers should be made accountable. There should be better training of those who meet
with applicants, both staff and commissioners. Senior planners should be available to assist
their juniors; there should be an open door policy, with senior planners being available to
meet with all applicants. This policy should be explained in all applications. Senior
planners should make appointments with a sampling of applicants for candid discussions of
their experiences with staff.
25. FOLWW-UP
Discussion: Applicants should be given "Talk Back" evaluations to give critiques of the
service provided.
An independent group, such as the Economic Development Commission or the Chamber of
Commerce should periodically contact applicants whose projects are completed to determine
if the above objectives are being attained.
Revised: June 3, 1992
[C,IWP51ICOUNCILI113SIPACREVW2.RPrJ
-11-
~""9
AITACHMENT A
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT
Permit Process Streamlining Recommendations
and Discussions
0<3
ATTACHMENT B
DRAFT
MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Wednesday, May 6, 1992
12:00 Noon
Council Conference Room
City Hall
CALL TO ORDERlROLL CALL
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meetings of February 5, March 4, and April 1, 1992
2. OLD BUSINESS
a. Ken Clark - southwestern College
b. Report on Targeted Industries Strategies - Gonza1o Lopez
c. CALED Conference Report
3. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Retention of Manufacturers - Penny Allen
B. Permit Process Streamlining - Patty Davis! Albert Gerber
. Discussion Regarding Meetings with Impacted Committees - Apri113 and May 5
Ms. Davis informed the Commission that two meetings were held with representatives from the impacted committees
referred to in the Permit Process recommendations report. The representatives met with their respective committees
and reported their input at the May 5 meeting. Ms. Davis felt that nothing should be eliminated from the report
and it should go to Council as is with the exception of one word that is to be changed regarding RCC's review of
EIR's. Ms. Allen added that this slight change in wording does not change the EDC recommendations at all.
Member Tuchscher agreed that the report should not be modified and also suggested that Council direct those
committees to further define their own roles.
Ms. Allen cited an example of commissions overlapping in roles that came out of their discussion the previous
evening. Members from two different committees spent time talking about their roles in reviewing parking issues.
Each felt their committee should have the discretion to review and make decisions or recommendations on parking.
Member LoBue stated he was supportive of the report but still disagreed with the recommendations on the
Montgomery Planning Committee and the PAC's.
Ms. Dye informed Commission members that the Montgomery Planning Committee is holding a public meeting on
this tonight. Member Read responded that their remarks would not alter this report.
Ms. Dye also noted that the Planning Commission would meet on May 13 on this item and that the Southwest PAC
did not have a quorum so there was no discussion to submit on this item.
MSUC (TuchscherlDavis) that the Economic Development Commission recommend that statTprepare a report
to accompany the recommendations from the Permit Process Subcommittee (9-0-0).
35
UNOFFICIAL MINUTE,S
ATTACHMENT C
EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 5/13/92
ITEM 3:
REPORT - RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT
Assistant Planning Director Lee summarized the Economic Development Commission Report,
pinpointing the areas which specifically related to the Planning Commission, and asked the
Commissioners for their comments.
Commissioner Tugenberg commented that the Montgomery Planning Committee should not be
discontinued; he felt citizen input was very important. He stated he had benefitted by the input
by the Montgomery Planning Committee on items which had come before the Planning
Commission. Even more important was the idea of giving the community input.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if the Otay Planning Group dovetailed with the Montgomery
Planning Committee. Mr. Lee replied that the Otay Area was part of Montgomery; the
Southwest Redevelopment Area encompassed the Montgomery Area, but also extended into part
of Chula Vista. The boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Area were not coterminous
with Montgomery. Otay was part of the Montgomery responsibility.
Commissioner Casillas concurred that it was very beneficial to retain the Montgomery Planning
Committee.
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the report didn't really get into the issues of
streamlining the permit process, the process of going through the various departments.
Chair Fuller noted that there was no interaction of the Economic Development Commission with
the various boards and commissions prior to making the recommendation.
Commissioner Tuchscher, who was a member of the Economic Development Commission,
discussed the methodology of preparing the report and concurred with Chair Fuller that the
Commission subcommittee had not discussed it with any of the boards and commissions
addressed in the report. He continued to explain some of the reasons for their recommendations.
In reply to Commissioner Decker, Assistant Director Lee gave some examples as to the types
of items which would be considered administrative actions.
Commissioner Martin commented on the ombudsman, and asked if that person would be part
of the Planning Department and where he/she would fit into the structure. Mr. Lee noted that
the ombudsman had in the past been in Administration. Commissioner Tuchscher explained the
concept of the ombudsman.
31
~,
J
ATTACHMENT D
MINUTES OF THE TOWN CENTRE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
April 16, 1992
8:45 a.m.
Council Conference Room
City Hall
1. ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Chairman Hyde; Vice Chairman Peter; Members Blakely,
Mason, Ohlau, and Altbaum
Members Excused:
Member Harper
Staff Present:
Principal Community Development Specialist Pamela
Buchan, Community Development Specialist Alisa Duffey
Rogers, Parki ng Ope rat ions Offi cer Robert Baker, and
Community Development Specialist II Miguel Z. Tapia
Joan Campbell, Downtown Manager
Others Present:
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 2. 1992
MSUC (Mason/Peter) to approve the minutes as mailed.
REDEVELOPMENT BUSINESS
3. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION ON THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLANS
Chairman Hyde item had been placed on the agenda for final discussion on
the issue of public transportation. At the previous meeting, the
Committee had Bill Gustafson and Paulette Duve talking about future
transportation plans throughout the South Bay, especially within Chula
Vista. The guests explained what the plans are for future development of
trolley and bus routes throughout the area. The Committee today needs to
conclude this discussion and come up with some determinations to inform
Mayor Nader what the Committee's recommendations are.
The Committee basically discussed the three issues which were brought up
by Mayor Nader. One issue is the idea of usi ng funds from the Parki ng
Meter Fund for the promotion of public transportation. The comments from
the Committee members were that currently, there are not sufficient funds
in the Parking Meter Fund. Most of the funds that have been used for the
provision of parking have come from the Redevelopment Agency in light of
the fact that the Parking Meter Funds have not been sufficient to cover
the cost of parking. In addition, there is the question as to whether or
not it would be legal to use parking funds for public transportation.
The Committee's determination on this issue was that parking meter funds
are needed for the provision of parking.
Another issue is the trolley line along Highway 54 towards the east. It
was indicated by the Committee members that based on the report from Bill
Gustafson and Paulette Duve, the route along H Street might not be
feasible because of the physical problems that are encountered and also
39
( )
,
r--,
'. I
\, ."
.
Minutes
April 16, 1992
Page 2
the high costs incurred by bringing the route along H Street in addition
to a lack of ridership. Even though the trolley line along Highway 54
might not be very beneficial for downtown Chula Vista, it is probably the
most feasible. If there are sufficient bus connections to this 1 ine
leading to the downtown area in addition to a transit center at 1-805 and
H Street, as suggested by the Transit Coordinator, this might be the most
beneficial plan. Given the studies that have been done by SANDAG and the
MTD Board, it might be unproductive to try to push for the H Street route.
The last issue that the Committee dealt with was advertising in City
buses. It was stated that there are different types of advertising. One
is advertising of City services; another is advertisement of businesses
within the City and a third one is advertising of products. Of all of
these, the most appropri ate woul d be advert is i ng for City servi ces and
City businesses. Also, there are two ways to advertise: inside and
outside the bus. The Committee members indicated that it would be
appropriate to do some level of advertising. They felt it was something
that could be done if it was tastefully done and if it was of service to
the community. Downtown Manager Joan Campbell indicated that it is
possible to do some level of advertising; it is a good idea and it may be
a valuable tool for the promotion of the downtown area. She indicated
that she could look into the feasibil ity and type of advertising that
could be done on City buses. The Committee agreed on the above-stated
determinations and decided to respond with a letter to Mayor Nader
indicating the Committee's determinations.
MSUC (Hyde/Mason) to forward letter to Mayor Nader respondi ng to hi s
requests and indicating the following. The Committee heard the report
from the Transit Coordinator and from a representative from the MTDB and
made the following conclusions:
1. The trolley route along H Street has been considered by the Transit
Authorities, but has been found to be infeasible. The most feasible
route would be along Highway 54.
2. There are opportunities for advertising in buses as long as they are
tastefully done. This issue should be further explored by the
appropriate authorities involving the Downtown Business Association
and other organizations.
3. In regards to the use of parking funds for public transportation, it
appears that funds are very limited and are most needed for
parking. In addition, there is a question in regards to the
legality of using parking funds for public transportation.
4. PERMIT PROCESS - STREAMLINING RECOMMENDATIONS
Chairman Hyde indicated that attached to the agenda was a report from the
Economic Development Commission discussing the ways to streamline the
permit process and outlining the recommendations for the implementation
4-0
Minutes
April 16, 1992
Page 3
of the process. Among the recommendations is the disbandment of the Town
Centre I Project Area Committee as well as other Project Area Committees
and the Montgomery Pl anni ng Commi ttee. He spoke about the fact that in
the process of streamlining the permit processing, they would be getting
rid of the important input that the Committee provides on redevelopment
projects that go to the Redevelopment Agency. He also indi~ated that the
Commission had made determinations prior to getting any comments from the
committees. Mr. Hyde indicated that it is important for the Committee to
discuss the Commission's recommendations, the Committee's role and make
some determi nat i on and send a response to the EDC on thei r
recommendations.
The comments from the Committee members are as follows. Some of the
Committee members indicated that the role of the Committee is very
important for the downtown area and the redevelopment process. However,
they expressed that they questioned the effectiveness of the Committee in
making recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency. Some of the members
responded that whil e some of the recommendat ions made by the Committee
are not adopted by the Redevelopment Agency or the City Council, they are
important nonetheless, and have been crucial in certain projects.
It was also i ndi cated by other members that the Commi ttee has a much
broader responsibility than just permit processing. In addition, it is
important to have a Committee with the interest and expertise in an area
such as Town Centre I which provides input for the Redevelopment Agency
or the City Council to make decisions which would affect in any way the
area. They indicated that not all of the committees should be dropped.
Perhaps the role should be specified more strictly. Other members
indicated their concern about the cost to the City in staff time.
The question was raised, however, as to what was the reason for the
Commission's recommendation to disband the committees and there were
several opinions on this. Some of them were that it wasn't necessarily
clear why they were making such a recommendation. Other opinions were
that it was with the purpose of expediting the permit process and to cut
the tape. Chairman Hyde indicated that one of the reasons for the
recommendation to disband the committees was that the Commission felt
that the role of the Commi ttee was just to advi se the Redevelopment
Agency on housing demol ition and tenant relocation issues for the first
three years of the establ i shment of the Redevelopment Project Area. He
indicated, as well as other members, that the role of the Committee was
not limited to this, the role of the Committee was much more broader and
the Committee is certainly more involved in many other issues that affect
the area. Consequently, the importance of the Committee is more
outstanding because of the role which goes beyond the mandate of
redevelopment law.
Principal Community Development Special ist Buchan indicated that there
were some concerns on the part of the pub 1 i c as well as the Economi c
Development Commission about the process that developers go through and
Lfl
;--)
,--'
Minutes
April 16, 1992
Page 4
they feel that because of the existence of so many committees and
different levels of review the improvement of processing of permits might
be improved by reducing the number of committees involved in this
process. She i ndi cated, however, that the recommendations had not been
made by staff. Although, som,e staff members have been involved in
providing the Commission with information, these recommendations come
directly from the Commission.
The determination of the Committee on this issue was that while the role
of the Committee could be limited, the Committee should not be
disbanded. It was indicated that the Committee's role could be limited
in terms of what projects should be reviewed by the Committee and which
ones should not. Maybe the role should be limited to projects or
important aspects of projects which relate to direct effects on the
area. The final determination of the Committee made through a motion was
the following:
MSUC (Hyde/Peter) to forward letter to Chairperson of the Economic
Deve 1 opment Commi ss i on thanki ng her for the i nvitat i on to discuss th is
issue and indicating that the Committee concurs with th,e Commission's
efforts to streamline the permit process. However, the Committee
strongly disagrees with the idea of abol ishing the Town Centre Project
Area Committee because the Committee cons iders that its input is very
important for the Town Centre area. The Committee's role is not limited
to the overvi ew of hous i ng demo 1 it i on and tenant rel ocat i on, but it's
rather broader and goes into the economic development of the area. In
fact, the objectives of the Town Centre Project Area Committee are very
simil ar to those of the Economi c Development Commi ssi on. Further, the
Committee members are very familiar with the area and their input is very
valuable. It is the opinion of the Committee members that it would be
short sighted to abolish the Committee.
It was indicated that Chairman Hyde would work with staff on the formal
preparation of this letter.
5. CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS: None.
6. MEMERS' COMMENTS: None.
7. STAFF COMMENTS: None.
8. OTHER COMMENTS:
Joan Campbell spoke in regards to the next activity in downtown which is
the Street Fair organized by the Cultural Arts Commission in the downtown
area which will be on May 2. There will be several cultural activities
such as the presentat i on of singers, dancers, etc. There wi 11 also be
all types of foods sold. This will require the closure of Third Avenue
between E and G Street. There was some discussion about the way this
activity has been processed by the Parks and Recreation Department. Some
42.J
~
)
~
,
)
Minutes
Apri 1 16, 1992
Page 5
of the Committee members complained that there had not been initial
contact with the Downtown Business Association and while the Third Avenue
businesses could be negatively affected by this event, the department
never checked with the Downtown Business Association to get their input.
Community Development Speci a 1 i st Al i sa Duffey Rogers i ndi cated that thi s
was certainly a problem of miscommunication between the Parks and
Recreation Department and Community Development Department. She
indicated that steps have been taken to make sure that in the future the
Parks Department communicates appropriately with Community Development
Department in order to avoid the problems that could interfere with
businesses in the downtown area.
The Committee adjourned at 10:15 to its regular meeting of May 7, 1992.
/"
Tapia, Recorde
~--.J
WPC 4943H
45
'-.,
~Jf?
:-~=.-:
-------
.........-:....-.::....""""-
- -
~
)
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
ATTACHMENT D
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
April 17, 1992
Penney Allen, Chair
Economic Development Commission
Community Development Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Ms, Allen:
Thank you for inviting the Town Centre Project Area Committee's Chairman and Vice Chairman
to the discussion on City Committees held on April 13, 1992, On April 16, 1992, the Town
Centre Project Arca Committee at its regular meeting discussed the recommendations from the
Economic Development Commission on the disbandment of the Town Centre Project Area
Committee. The Town Centre Project Area Committee's determinations regarding this subject
are the following:
L We concur with the Economic Development Commission's efforts to streamline the
City's Permit Process.
2. We strongly disagree with the Commission's recommendation to abolish the Town Centre
Project Area Committee.
3. The role of this committee is not only to oversee the potential relocation of residents
displaced by redevelopment. It also includes a variety of activities geared toward the
economic and physical improvement of the downtown business area and theChula Vista
Center.
4. The Committee helps the Redevelopment Agency formulate and implement strategies to
improve the redevelopment process in Town Centre Project Areas I and II.
5. The functions provided by the Committee are important and valuable to the merchants
and property owners of the Town Centre I and II Redevelopment Project Areas.
6. The redevelopment of Town Centre Project Areas I and II is far from complete. The
services of the Project Area Committee, in the role it has performed since 1976, are still
necessary .
1./5
r"'.
. )
\
~
)
Penny Allen, Chair
Economic Development Commission
Page Two
7. The Town Centre Project Area also serves as the Parking Place Commission. Abolishing
the Committee would not eliminate the need for most development projects in the area
from going to the same body in the future for approval or consideration.
We believe that the objectives of the Town Centre Project Area Committee are very similar to
those of the Economic Development Commission. We believe that it would be very shortsighted
to abolish the Town Centre Project Area Committee. Rather, our two bodies should try to work
together for our common goal of improving the economic well being of the entire community.
Sincerely,
~y~ (~
Town Centre Project Area Committee Chairman
L/b
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
.
,
ATTACHMENT E
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
6;00 p.m.
Monday, April 20,1992
Conference Room 1
Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL; Meeting was called to order with a quorum at 6:21
p.m. by Chairperson Hall. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll.
Present: Commissioners Fox, Ray and Kracha. Absent: Ghougassian and Johnson. Jackie
McQuade had submitted her resignation from RCC, leaving one vacancy.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: With the resignation of McQuade, minutes of the meeting of March
9,1992 cannot be approved as there is no longer a quorum from that meeting.
.
.
The minutes of March 23, 1992 were not approved due to lack of quorum present from that
meeting. Continue to next meeting of May 11, 1992.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Review of Negative Declaration IS-92-10, ECS So. Bay Head Start - comments
included Hall's concern of the inspection and maintenance of the fence around the
drainage ditch. It should be inspected not less than once a quarter and be maintained
by the city. It is further suggested that the Mitiaation Necessarv to Avoid Sianificant
Effects (Page 5, Number F-2) should read: "The opening between structures on the
east side of the site shall be closed off by shrubbery and a wooden gate." After brief
discussion, it was then MSUP (Kracha/Fox) to accept the Mitigated Negative Dec with
the additional noted comments on the maintenance of the drainage ditch and the
change of wording noted above; motion carried 4-0.
2. Review of Negative Declaration IS-92-20, Rollerskateland - Comments included the
following: On Page 1, Paragraph A: Change the word "flaunted" to "bounded". Ray
expressed concern of possible graffiti and the need for security in the area. It was
suggested that Rollerskateland seek permission to use the Office Depot parking lot for
its overflow during non-business hours, and avoid parking on the streets. It was then
MSUP (Fox/Ray) to approve the Negative Declaration; motion carried 4-0.
3. Review of Negative Declaration IS-92-29, Hazard/KolI 5th And C Street - There were
several significant environmental impacts noted on Pages 3-4 requiring mitigation.
After brief discussion, it was MSUP (Kracha/Fox) to approve the Mit; "ted Negative
Declaration subject to the Mitiaation Necessarv to Avoid Sianificant Effects as stated
on Pages 4-5; motion carried 4-0.
4. In an attempt to set a hearing date for Historical District Ordinance, John Kracha
announced he will be absent May 11 to the end of June. Due to an RCC vacancy, it
was requested of Staff to request the City Council to appoint a new member as soon
as possible for a quorum at meetings. In the meantime, a hearing date was tentatively
set for May 18, 1992 on the Historical District Ordinance.
'-17
,
Page 2
5. Economic Commission Permit Process Streamlining Subcommittee Recommendations-
Comments included the following: It was specifically noted that RCC reports and
comments on EIR's and that these formal hearings should not be duplicated as it is
already done in the Planning Commission. Kracha made note that changes-were made
to the RCC charter a couple years ago without receiving any feedback from the City
Attorney. He suggests the ordinance should stand as approved, which allows RCC to
call public hearings as necessary. The charter also needs to be reworded to the fact
that RCC also reviews negative declarations and historical sites. Requests further
information from City Attorney on this issue.
STAFF REPORT:
1. Report on the Western Chula Vista Drainage was unavailable and continlj.ed to next
meeting.
2. Awards Banquet on May 21, 1992 - Barbara Hall to make presentations to Robin
Putnam, Tim Nader and the Environmental Panel.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Hall at 7:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES
1,-f(J{)A,~~ 0~,'
Barbara Taylor
if,!
ATTACHMENT E
May 14, 1992
Memorandum to:
From
Subject:
Cheryl Dye, Economic Development Manager
Barbara Reid, Associate Planner
Recommendation of Resource Conservation Committee
regarding the EDC Report
Barbara Hall, Chairperson of the Resource Conservation commission
provided the following statement regarding the above sited item:
"Reviewing Environmental Impact Reports is only one of the
duties which Council charged the Resource Conservation
commission to deal with. The wording of the heading under
letter "E" sounds as though the EDC wishes to restrict the
Commissions duties to only reviewing EIR's. Change the.word
"to" to "in" the heading."
'-/'1
DRAFT
Minutes
OTAY VALLEY ROAD PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE
ATTACHMENT F
Monday, April 27, 1992
9:00 a.m.
Conference Rooms 2 & 3
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDERfROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Chairman Casillas, Members McMahon, Palumbo, Hall, Olguin (arrived at 9:30 a.m.)
STAFF:
Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman; Cheryl Dye, Economic Development Manager; Benjamin
Martinez, Intern
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES from the meeting of February 24, 1992
Member McMahon noted that page two of the minutes indicated that the street parking on Nirvana Avenue is
supposed to be temporary. He indicated that it was his understanding that the parking allowed on Nirvana Avenue
and Energy Way was to be permanent. Mr. Kassman indicated that he would look into this issue to determine
whether parking on Nirvana and Energy Way was temporary or permanent.
MSUC (PalumbolHall) to approve the minutes as discussed.
2.
REPORT:
Economic Development Commission Permit Processing Subcommittee: Recommendations
to Alter Role of Proiect Area Committees
Economic Development Manager Dye indicated to the committee that the Economic Development Commission
(EDC) Permit Processing Subcommittee had been meeting to develop a list of recommendations to expedite City
plan processing. The recommendations were generated from the committee and did not necessarily reflect staff's
recommendations.
Chairman CasiUas indicated that the chairs of varioua committees met to discuas recommendations from the Permit
Processing Subcommittee. He indicated that some of the recommendations were a total surprise to the committee
chairs. However, many of the recommendations are valid. There needs to be a streamlining of the system. There
are a number of issues that bottle-necking plan processing. There are also examples on how effective some of the
committees have been. Chairman CasiUas further indicated that he asked if there was a consensua of the committee
chairmen as to how they felt about the recommendations. It was determined that it would be better to look at the
recommendations again before they go back to the Council in May. Chairman Casillas further noted that he would
like to get the comments of the rest of the committee members.
Member Palumbo indicated that the plan review process and the committees the plans go through does slow down
the process. There is significant redundancy. Fees are outrageoua. The City does not have a handle on this.
There are probably a number of issues which go before the varioua committees which don't have to. In some cases,
the committees are slowing down the process and wasting money. Fees are unbelievable, in some cases, 25 % of
.... project costs.
Chairman Casillas indicated that the task force wants to eliminate lengthy processing times.
Member McMahon also indicated that his experience with the plan review process of his past projects were that it
was long, full of delays and costly. Streamlining should start in Planning and all requirements for a project should
be given to the applicant up-front.
Ms. Olguin stated that the Growth Management Committee needs to stay and that this committee has not delayed
projects that have come before it.
5/
. .
Chairman Casillas noted that rules arid regulations are good for the system, but one should keep in mind that this
should be monitored to avoid bureaucracy.
3. SfATUS REPORT:
a) Otay Valley Road Assessment District
Mr. Kassman noted there would be a public hearing on May 26 at 6:00 p.m.
b) Auto Park
The Auto Park report was carried over to the next meeting.
4.
REPORT:
Proposal by Ken Smith for Temporary Truck Parking in Conjunction with Phased
Development of project at 1881 Nirvana Avenue
MSC ( /Hall) to rontinue this item to the next meeting (S~~)"
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None.
6. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
a. Chairman Casillas noted that he received an invitation from the Mayor to participate in a "round table"
discussion to facilitate communication between the Mayor"s office and other commissions. He will attend
on behalf of the committee.
7. MEMBERS' COMMENTS None.
8. SfAFF COMMENTS None
ADJOURNMENT at 10:30 a.m. to the regular meeting of May 25, in Conference Rooms 2 & 3 at 9:00 a.m.
I:.$.~-
.....
'1,
(A:\APRlL.MIN]
S2
U~~C:FFICIAL MINUTES DR4
ATTACHMENT G ~
MINUTE OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
7:00 p.m.
Wednesdav. Mav 6. 1992
Lauderbach Community Center
333 Oxford street. Chula vista
ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chair Wheeland, Members Berlanga, Castro,
McFarlin, Palmer, Scheuer
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Member Platt
STAFF PRESENT:
Associate Planner Frank J. Herrera-A
Planning Technician Patty Smith, Recorder
PUBLIC HEARING
Permit Process Streamlininq Subcommittee Recommendations
Committee Review and Comments
Associate Planner Frank J. Herrera-A stated that the purpose of
this meeting was to provide comments from the committee in response
to the report produced by the Economic Development Committee. He
asked member to provide comments, and at the end of discussion, put
their response as a committee in the form of a motion.
Chair Wheeland stated that she had attended a second meeting
between members of the Economic Development commission and
representatives of the city's other boards and committees. She
reviewed some of the dialogue that had taken place, adding that in
response to some of the comments made, the report written by the
EDC may be revised. Ms. Wheeland stated that, apparently, this
report will not be immediately forwarded to the City Council as had
been originally planned, but will be held for further review.
Member Scheuer asked staff when the report was scheduled to go
before the Council? Associate Planner Herrera-A stated that it was
currently scheduled for the City council meeting of May 12, but
that this might change after a meeting held tonight by the Economic
Development Commission.
Member Scheuer stated that his understanding of the report produced
by the EDC was that it would strip all other boards and committees
of input, and would create another, very powerful bureaucracy.
Other members agreed with this assessment; member McFarlin added
that this additional group would also be very autonomous; the
committee felt that it would lack accountability.
Member McFarlin stated that as committees are at the end of the
process, they should not be blamed for causing delays. Delays
come, rather, during time spent in review by city staff. She
S3
UNOFF1it<P:i ,,;
Ii:! . >.. ,'-' ('.~ 'th.
o . " . ~:~ !'-1:.tJ' IF/tWit.
,
( ,;'''?r~'''''
;u ~ Ir;,~
DRI/Ff
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
-2-
MAY 6. 1992
echoed member Scheuer's concerns about the creation of an
additional level of bureaucracy.
Member Palmer stated that bottlenecks are not caused by public
input; she noted that delays often happen when developers
themselves are not ready for presentations and hearings and have to
reschedule. Ms. Palmer further stated that the idea of eliminating
pUblic input and oversight is very worrisome.
Member Berlanga indicated that the problem had been attacked in the
wrong way. He reviewed problems and fees encountered in applying
for permits, saying that fees were climbing, and that applicants
did not have sufficient understanding of the process before they
begin; he felt that providing such information was important.
Member Castro noted that member Berlanga had discussed some of his
concerns. He felt that the report indicated an intent to establish
a "supergroup", and pointed out that one of the recommendations for
streamlining actually included adding staff. Mr. Castro also
stated that it was not fair for applicants to be affected by
changes in fees and processing requirements after they had
ini tiated a development proposal. He described public improvements
that could be required even for small home improvements, and stated
that the money required to upgrade one's property was prohibitive,
and made it easier for owners to move to new houses and simply rent
out their property; this often results in neighborhood decline.
Mr. Castro noted that these and other concerns had been put in
writing and submitted to staff.
Member Scheuer stated that the EDC report will be a part of the
problem, not the solution. He added that processing problems are
internal in the city, and that the recommendations of the EDC would
exacerbate the problem by removing public oversight capabilities.
Member Scheuer was particularly concerned with his interpretation
that the General Plan could be changed whenever the "supergroup"
saw fit, and stated that more public input was needed, not less.
Audience Discussion
Bill Harter, owner of property within the Broderick's Otay Acres
area, stated that he agreed with the committee's comments. He felt
that setting forth guidelines for applicants ahead of time could be
useful. He stated that staff is currently unable to provide
applicants with all of the requirements involved with a
development. Mr. Harter suggested developing information and.
sample recommendations of how to accomplish certain projects to
provide to applicants. He added that applicants may revise plans
after discussions with staff, only to find out that other things
were wrong which were not brought up previously, thus requiring
numerous trips and plan revisions.
51
UNOFFICIAL MINUTE,S
D~4Pf
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
-3-
MAY 6. 1992
-Member Palmer left the meeting at 7:45-
Committee Discussion
Members discussed streamlining the permitting process. Member
Scheuer stated that the issue of streamlining should be directed by
the City Council to the City Manager for addressment. Member
Castro felt that not all commercial projects should be required to
undergo design review. Member Wheeland felt that the comments in
the EDC report relating to the Montgomery Planning Committee were
misdirected. Member Castro stated that while he recognized the
need for streamlining the permitting process, another layer of
authority would not accomplish this.
Chair Wheeland stated that it would be appropriate to attempt to
summarize the committee's response to the EDC report in the form of
a motion. Associate Planner Herrera-A advised that any motions
should include specific reasons for the committee's response.
Members further discussed items in the report on which they had
concerns.
Motion (Castro) to reject the Economic Development commission
report based on a lack of corroborative evidence. An amendment was
offered by member Scheuer stating that additional concerns should
relate to the following issues: that the elimination of committees
would not accelerate processing, that the proposed process would
allow changes to the Redevelopment Plan without community input,
and that the report does not address the real problem and
streamline appropriate city departments.
MSUC (Castro/McFarlin) (5-0, members Platt and Palmer absent) to
reject the Economic Development commission report based on the
following: lack of corroborative evidence; elimination of
committees will not accelerate processing; proposed process would
allow Redevelopment Plan changes without community input; and
report does not address the real problem and streamline appropriate
city departments.
Member Scheuer noted that he was interested in seeing the
supporting evidence for the findings in the report.
CHAIR'S REPORT
Chair Wheeland advised the committee that she had attended the
round table meeting/discussion with the chairs of other boards and
committees and the mayor. She noted that, relevant to previous
discussions at this meeting, the mayor had stated that he was a
strong believer in community input. Included in the issues raised
by Wheeland and other chairs at this meeting was the difficulty in
5'5
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES:
Dlr4Pf
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
-4-
MAY 6. 1992
obtaining information requested from staff; she felt that this was
already being addressed. Chair Wheeland stated that everyone in
attendance at this meeting had found it very worthwhile, adding
that it may become an annual meeting with a more formal structure.
She indicated that she had forwarded the brought up the committee's
recommendation that Council members attend committee meetings, and
reiterated that she had found the mayor to be very concerned with
issues raised by those present.
COMMITTEE COMMENTS
Member Berlanga stated that he had addressed the City Council at
their last meeting and, referring to a reference pamphlet published
for the Council, had advised members of the Council that- he did
think a booklet was required for them to run the City.
Member Scheuer asked about the progress of Palomar Trolley Center?
Mr. Herrera-A stated that the project had been approved, and
appeared to be awaiting funding. Noticing of committee members for
items concerning Montgomery was discussed. Scheuer asked for
information on the funding for the Community Development Block
Grant program? Audience member Bill Harter advised that he had
attended the last Council meeting, and believed that the budget had
been approved as recommended by the City Manager.
Member Scheuer also advised that he would be unable to attend the
May 20 meeting.
STAFF COMMENTS
Associate Planner Herrera-A stated that the Director of Finance
would present a report on Montgomery revenues and expenditures at
the May 20 meeting of the committee. Member Scheuer stated that he
was very interested in this issue, and that as he would not be at
this meeting and was unable to change his plans, he would like to
have the item rescheduled. Mr. Herrera-A responded that he would
have the item agendized for a later date. Mr. Herrera-A noted that
a tentative subdivision map for Date/Palm villas will be presented
on May 20.
ADJOURNMENT
at 8:45 p.m. to the regular business meeting of
Wednesday, May 20, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
~~corder
56
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
D1t4f:!-
Comments on Economic Develooment commission reoort
Tonv Castro. Montaomerv Plannina Committee
Paae 1 of 2
Page 6 - If the current slow, ponderous system requires "x" number
of people, why would a new sleek, streamlined efficient system
require more people?
Page 7 - I was against the Project Area Committee to begin with and
still believe it is nothing more than the precursor to a "land
grab" . Tax increment funds lost by other agencies and
municipalities will be made up somewhere.
Page 9 - How many historic sites have been preserved? Two old
houses in Montgomery have been torn down in the last two years.
Page 10 - Any applicant should not have to pay for city initiated
changes made in the middle of his projects unless changes are the
result of applicant's errors.
Notes:
* DRC should set standards and applicant should comply. No
further ORC input should be needed.
* Small "room addition" type projects should be handled "over the
counter". I added a room under county jurisdiction in 1979. All
corrections were done at the counter (no new prints were required)
and I had my permits in less than one hour.
*. Built up areas should not require superfluous studies. Example:
I had a friend putting in a 12' x10' "L" shaped room addition in
fully built-out area. She was told that she would need a soils
engineering study. Fortunately, sanity prevailed and the request
was waived.
* Applicants should receive a checklist of every possible city
requirement with the appropriate boxes marked. If they are not
marked, the applicant should not be liable.
57
Dli4F:{
Comments on the Economic Development Commission report
Tonv Castro. Montqomerv Planninq Committee
Paqe 2 of 2
* On small owner occupied projects, there should be a realistic
limi t on the applicant I s requirements to put in pUblic
improvements. Example: an applicant on a corner lot who I s building
a small room addition may only plan on spending $10,000 - $15,000
on the project if he does the work himself, but he could
conceivably by required to put in the following improvements:
Alley $3,000
WheelChair Ramp $1,000
Streetlight $1,000
Sidewalks, Curbs $3.000
$8,000
Not to mention permit/plancheck fees and school construction fees
of $1.60 per square foot. And the ultimate improvement
"incentive": higher property taxes!
* Straw vote (Non-binding from Montgomery Planning Committee,
Planning Commission, etc., so applicant may get idea before paying
for amendment, zone changes, etc.
5J'
ckr~
ATTACHMENT G
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
Lee Wheeland. Chair
28 April 1992
Mayor Tim Nader and City Councii
City Hall
Chula Vista. CA
Sirs:
At the 22 April 1992 meeting of the Montgomery Planning
Committee the recently adopted recommendations of the
Economic Development Commission and the Commission
Co-chairs' meeting of 13 April with our chair and other
Commission Chairs were discussed. Included in the
discussion were the newspaper reports of the EDC's
recommendatons. The MPC wishes to express their dismay as
to the method and procedures employed by the EDC. I have
been instructed by unanimous vote to send this letter.
Initially, the EDC did not seek input from, nor were the
various Committees/Commissions invited to discuss the
negative comments or recommendations contained within the
document prior to it's adoption. The meeting with the
various chairs was poorly timed and necessitated some of the
participants taking time off from work to attend. As an
attendee I was stunned by the lack of knOWledge of the EDC
in the workings of the Committees/Commissions about whom
they were so critical and for which they felt no need.
Secondly, the MPC felt very strongly that there was a need
to have this topic discussed with their public. This item
is scheduled for our meeting of 6 May 1992. The members of
the MPC concurred whOleheartedly with the assessment that
these recommendations need to be reconsidered following
receipt of suggestions from the affected
Committees/Commissions and the public.
We request that any Council action be deferred until all
affected Committees/Commissions have had the opportunity to
meet. discuss and offer suggestions on these
recommendations.
Thank you for your understanding consideration of this
request.
5'1
~'-~'"
^ 'l:Y'~'" 1<' . .2,0\
'v C
~ c\
"Ii /fA '.
~ ~~~~c;,,:~9l 1.1
,r~ .. 41/)41'1/&1'('/-' - ~.>
('"J. '1;,..., ..
,.\ Iv
'~c" "
D", .V/
~~'
SincerelYi ~)
~--f..e..:. W~a.,.,
'ie; Whee I and
cc:Economic Development Commission
/
DRPtFT
ATTACHMENT H
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
ADril 27. 1992
4:30 p.m.
A. ROLL CALL
Conference Rooms 2 and 3
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairperson Gilman, Vice Chair Spethman,
Member Galchenko
STAFF PRESENT:
Member Flach, with notification
Associate Planner Luis Hernandez
Assistant Planner Amy Wolfe
Senior Planner Steve Griffin
MEMBERS ABSENT:
B.
ODUCTORY REMARKS
person Gilman made an opening statement explaining e
review process and the committee's responsibilit'es.
She as d that all speakers sign in and identify them lves
verbally or the tape when speaking.
C.
/
DRC-92-48
K 'se recise P a
lake Act'vit ent
nar esentatio
Staff Presentation
Assistant Planner
members that this
of the Eastlake
and a
Ms. Wolfe stated th , based on a prel inary review of the
Kaiser plan, the P nning Department had 'dentified concerns
relating to th following issues: t~ building mass
relationship b ween the medical office b ilding and the
southerly act' ity center structures; the archi ctural design
order betwe the Kaiser structures and the re tionship of
design el ents proposed for each phase; the man scale
building ase treatment along the medical office building
lower rimeter areas; the visual impacts from SR-12 and the
arch' ectural treatment of the parking structures; the ommon
cou yard space area design as it relates to the adj ent
bIding mass and height; and the screening of the cen~ al
Ian area from Eastlake Parkway.
01
'.\
ATTACHMENT H
~ "
,
"
..
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
-5-
APRIL 27. 1992
D. STAFF COMMENTS
Economic Development Committee Report - Review and Comments
Associate Planner Hernandez stated that once members had
reviewed the Economic Development Committee's report, they
should submit comments in writing. Chair Gilman stated that
the document appeared to be directed at Planning, and that
there were other departments involved that should also be
looked at. She felt ~hat some of the language in the report
was inappropriate, but acknowledged that some of the ideas,
such as providing more specific direction for applicants, were
valid.
The committee discussed some of the findings in the report;
Chair Gilman referred to a statement in the report that the
committee was too often adversarial in its dealings with
applicants; she stated that this was certainly not her intent.
Merritt Hodson, a regular audience member, was present at the
meeting; Chair Gilman asked him if he felt that the committee
appeared adversarial? Mr. Hodson responded that this was not
his impression at all.
Members agreed that they would submit comments in writing this
week to staff.
Desiqn Review Committee Workshops Schedule
Associate Planner Hernandez stated that he would like to
schedule some workshops for the committee's review of the
first draft section of the Design Manual. The committee
scheduled the first such workshop for Saturday, May 16, at
8:30 a.m.
E. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. to the Special Meeting
of May 4, 1992 at 5:00 p.m.
Patty Smith, Recorder
62
~. ,. SAki DIEGo A~c4"IIT€"e"C ~~ ~ AlA
ATTACHMENT H
WI~ Iqqz. ~.I"
,~~<......t"i.,~"'~~...,.a"'li">r"',":""""'~ -News Briefs ._:f!o;;e. - _ -,. <<,. _ ..'" ", "",.<<",_...",
. HOUSE THE HOMELESS STUDENTS: A
CAL POLY SLO field trip to San Diego
for senior students is scheduled for
April. George Hasslein would appreci-
ate hearing from those architects who
would be willing to provide lodging (or
students on the nights of April 15 and
16, The major purpose of this arrange-
ment is to provide a learning experience
for the stud en t on an architect's life after
a day at the office. Is there life after the
ffi. h' , k'd'
o ce... Q ouse. ... a spouse.... z s. ...
VI-'hat kinds of pictures on the wall?
Students that make their hosts (eel
at home, come with sleeping bags, are
good listeners, and dishwashers! For
additional information. please contact
George at 805/756-1351.
. MANUEL ROSEN, Hon. FAIA, and mem-
ber of the San Diego Chapter, AlA has
been named the Dean of the School of
Architecture and Coordinator o( Inter-
national Relations for the Universidad
Iberoamericana in Tijuana, Baja Cali-
PSI works with you to give your clients solutions
to their M problems. We are uniquely qualffied
to offer the following services:
. Constrvctlon Tilling .nd aU'11ly Control
. Roof & P......nt eo...lllng
. Dedlelt.d Proj.ct Testing llIIIIlnop.ctlDn
. lIeol.ehnle.' EnglnH,lng
. M.terl.ls Tilling .nd ClrtlllClUDn
. En.lronmenlaVAsbIllOl MI.......nt
. Tlllnlng Progllms
. .DndntructlYl Eumlnltlon .nd Tilling
. an.lrtle.'
t::;;;;".,
.~
Protesslonal Service Industries, Inc.
CO/>/s.. .,.,~s e",:;,"<=:;::I'>;",,:;. TESlli'llG. ENVlRQNME"I7A.L
WDIEGO
Call today 619-695-3730
Ask for Rick Kushner. District Manager
fomia. Rosen, a professor at the New
School of Architecture and an adjunct
professor for the School of Environ-
mental Design at Cal Poly, Pomona, has
done extensive work in Mexico and the
United States. His appointment is tem-
porary, until a search is cond ucted for a
permanent replacement. Rosen has ex-
pressed an open door policy for coop-
erative efforts on programs facilitating
interaction between both countries.
. FRIENDS OF SAN DIEGO ARCHITECTURE
presents a slide lecture on "Architec-
tural Vision in San Diego: Where is it?"
by Wallace Cunningham, Environ-
mental Designer, Saturday, March 21,
1991, 9:30a.m.,NewSchool of Architec-
ture, 1249 FStrcet,San Diego. Donation.
For information. call 287-0050 or 235-
4100.
. THE SOCIETY OF ARCHITECTURAL
ADMINISTRATORS is pleased to welcome
Barbara Huff, Licensed Clinical Social
Worker, as the March program speaker.
The program will emphasize learning
how to reduce stress by increasing
awareness of your feelings and
thoughts, and expressing them appro-
priately. She will include suggestions
on how to incorporate assertiveness
techniques into daily interactions with
others. March 19, 7:oop.m.,altheoffices
of Douglas Whitmore & Associates,480
Camino Del Rio Sou th, #218, San Diego.
Cost: $10 members; $12 nonmembers.
For reservations or additional informa-
tion. calJ Becky Hillmeyer. 296-1735.
. THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DIVISION has announced
an expediting plan for all development
projects involving biotech or biomedi-
cal industries. The program which is
suppose to decrease approval times by
up to one-half, is a response to the re-
cent recommendations from the Eco-
nomic Development Task Force report
to give priority assistance in emerging
industries which create job opportuni-
ties in the region. If you have either a
tenant improvement or new construc-
tion project planned for a client in the
biotech industry in the city of San Di-
ego, contact Robert Kruger with the
Economic Det3ment Division at
236-6927. The San Diego Archited will
have more on this program in next
month's edition.
. AlA, CEDAR ASSOCIATION ANNOUNCE
DESIGN COMPETITION FOR ARCHITECTS:
The AlA and the Western Red Cedar
Lumber Association have agreed to
cosponsor the 1992 Cedar Design Natu-
TalIy architectural awards program
slated (or this summer.
The program was originated to rec-
ognize outstanding projects using
Western Red Cedar lumber products,
such as siding, decking, interior panel-
ing and other applications, exclusive of
plywood, shakes and shingles.
AlA has selected three architects to
jury the competition: Carl Luckenbach,
FAlA, ofLuckenbach/Ziegelman &. Part-
ners in Birmingham, Mich.; Heidi
Richardson, AlA, of Richardson Archi-
tects in San Francisco; and Richard Con-
way Meyer, AlA, of Richard Conway
Meyer Architects, Philadelphia. Meyer
was a Grand A ward winner of the 1990
WRCLA architectural competition.
Submissions to the competition wilJ
be accepted until July 1, 1992. Jurying will
be conducted under supervision of the
AlA, and awards will be announced at a
spcdal dinner in October in Vancouverl
British Columbia.
Entry information may be obtained
by mail, phone or FAX request to UdDr
Design Naturally, Western Red Cedar
Lumber Association, 522 S.W. Fifth Ave.,
Portland, OR 97204, phone 5031224-
3930, FAX 503/224-3934; or the AlA, 1735
New York Ave. NW, Washington, D.C.,
phone 202/626-7930, FAX 202/626-7421.
The program is open to all archi tects and
designers, and entrants need not be
members of the AlA.
. THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA HAS AP-
POINTED ALEX GAlCHENKO. AlA to the
City's Design Review Committee. Gal-
chenko has been an AlA member for
more than thirty years. In accepting his
unpaid position to the committee, he
pointed out that "design review is not a
matter of looking at pretty pictures, but a
matter of working drawings, specifica-
tions, bid/contract documents and the
many other facets of design and construc-
tion considerations for the betterment of
Chula Vista and its lax-paying citizens."
ATTACHMENT H
TO: The Chairperson and members of the Economic Development
Commission
FROM: Barbara Gilman, chairperson of the Design Review
Committee
SUBJECT: Permit Process streamlining Recommendations
The survey conducted by the Permit Process Subcommittee solicited
input from residents and special interest groups and their views
are clearly reflected in the report. The committee, in my opinion,
did not fully research the other side of the issue by attending DRC
meeting, interviewing Committee members nor City staff.
The survey also ignored the changes already being implemented by
City Staff to not only expedite projects, but work closer together
with applicants to resolves design issues.
Due to the subjective nature of the design review process, some
applicants come to the meetings with an adverse attitude. The
Committee makes all effort to turn this around so that the outcome
is positive, but sometimes we are unsuccessful. The Committee has
always tried to be positive as well as flexible in order to achieve
the best result possible.
The task of the Design Review Committee is to evaluate the
aesthetic contribution of a project to our community and not
necessarily the economic feasibility of building it. However the
Committee has been, in recent times, more receptive to claims of
economic hardship.
(,1-
ATTACHMENT H
TO: The Chairperson and Members of the Economic Development
Commission.
FROM: Mike Spethman, Vice Chairperson of the Design Review
committee
SUBJECT: Permit Process Streamlining Recommendations.
After reviewing the permit process streamlining
report, particularly the section pertaining to the functions of
the Design Review committee, I'm offering the following
comments:
The Design Review Process can not be completely separate from
planning issues just like planning issues, some times, can not
be resolved without knowledge of design. Therefore, narrowing
the role of the Committee to building and site planning
issues may be difficult to achieve.
In regard to Business identification signs, It is important to
note that signs are a highly exposed architectural element of
the project and one of the most noticeable components of the
City's street scenes. Therefore, serious consideration should
be given to the appropriate design process.
J
b5
ATTACHMENT H
TO: The Chairperson and members of the Economic Development
Co~ission
FROM: Matt Flach, Member of the Design Review Committee
SUBJECT: Permit Process streamlining Recommednations.
EDC PERMIT PROCESS STREAMLINING SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
In some cases the conditional permit is not reviewed or approved until
the Design Review Committee (DRC) has completed action. The action of
the committee, in my estlmatfon and in most cases, should have no effect
on this type of permitting. This is . planning action and should be
completed prior to submission to the ORe.
DESIGN REVIEW AND SIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
A. ORe GUIDELINES: Guidelines are just what the word says, a guide.
Examples and descriptions are fine, but each individual project requires
integration of each system. Whether the system be signs, landscaping,
site adaptation, etc., they all must be integrated for complete design.
Guidelines, except for specific developments, shOUld be minimal and
adaptable for specific projects.
B. ORe PROCESS: As described above, all issues concerning a project
are part of the projects' design. For example, moving the building on
site changes it's clrculation; number of parking spaces and 10cat10ns
effects the buildings configurat10n(s) or location on site; and
env1ronmental considerations all plus other issues effect the design.
DeSign is also an indiv1dual issue and person preferences cannot be
removed from this process.
A major item for me personally is the quality of the designer used by
the developers. Why they do not use experienced qualif1ed professionals
is beyond my comprehension (except for cost, and an unqualified designer
usually ends up costing more). The city's staff time, or the ORe,
should not wasted in an attempt to get an acceptable design.
C. ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL: No comment except that as I commented
above, guidelines are Just gUidelines and not specific design
requirements.
D. SIGNS AND GUIDELINES: Again, guidelines are just guidelines not
design requirements. Each project requires design requirements, and 1n
some cases the correct design mlY be In conflict with the guidelines.
E. SIGN APPROVAL: No comment except as stated previously the correct
design does not always fall into the guideline requirements.
F. STREAMLINE PROCESS: Agreed.
G. UPDATED FORMS AND USER GUIDES: No comment on forms, but, again
guidelines are suggestions and are not always applicable.
bb
H. STAFF SUPPORT: This Is an internal matter on which I have no
comment. However, I personally, as a DRe member, have received
excellent support from the staff.
t. Recommend implementing only constructive changes. not those that
Will increase frustration, such as guidelines that are not always
applicable.
BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
No comments, although citizen comments should be obtained.
CUSTOMER SERVICE
This 1s an issue that is a goal of the latest craze, "Total Quality
Management," and if managed correctly is a plus.
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. Were any staff or committee members interviewed? None were as far
as 1 know. This is an important input and should be accomplished.
2. Wer; any commission or committee meetings attended? A must do kind
of thing.
3. Were all city departments visited and work analyzed? This should be
done.
4. Report seems to contain only the bad side, some good things must
have been encountered. These should be mentioned. '
5. Old anyone attempt to follow through on some of the procedures, not
one or two but enough to get a good feel of the operations, both pluses
and minuses.
,/
07
~ ~~~6"fA ~
c:c.: 1.. ~........~
E? G,.t~
(
ATTACHMENT H
l2e : ~~c. 1>e"e.ec('~t ~m.~~o-.. 4-lzel"iz
~'" ~c.uS "S1.u......2.'v.;."<! ~~. R,~,...,'...~t-.o-....."
ll~ e,"
~~
,
I. ':h.~~h~
~ <<..J,~"';~ G1J.;~ Df a.....b- 1/,',...... (.'I + ~S) /v..-~ &u....... a.
J;,C>>.A-~ Q.(t.l.,.'~ ~ 6J..; ~et.. ~ 31 ~5, a.. c-..-k(l.C~,
t....L;MtI.~ ~ ~ ~ ~>e1 ~(~.~ ~ Ok<-~~c.h~;
~J.u..h~1 ~d, .:..c..~~~4P.. OM.J. ~s..'G. V~ku
~~ of ~ DRC ~~~ ~ -64...- ~&-(!~kr P(;.w~'e.
N ok: A I A .u+; c1.e. ~ e... IJ!!S """d' ~c:t" ....e..v,.~ r..G.;ec$-O pL., :
~~ p{c~ -Is. 'ft.<A..e.;~ ~~!~w of a>>.. ~ka.d
d..o~h. :.> ~ tl.2 o~ ~~.rs 0.( DJaC ~~ ~'-
~
f;U' I .. Lve a-,-e o.f-StJ aU -6-us-.'Uoe-f5 -~~ .
2.~d
~'uk ~'(.f: ~~ """~ ~se-":"'" ii, ~.,~-t, ~
~ t;~ ~ ~cd ~c.-..'S-:5~C;M (~: ........u.t
C'f"t.;~ ~~~+s t..viK a~"':'" i s+.<a..,J.;~ "-f'p;-t'va,Q
~ {'Je~ s.l-a..{p ~ ~~ 1/~~.#ce~'S to 'Dee ~ ~),
E-lA.(.Ol.;~ ~1M~tS C~/A.o...k ~e.c4....i~ k~~-
wL..,tCWe,.( ~ ~ ) 1 ~ ~'SJ.,;~ f'~~~~ ct..t
"'tl~ -UL f~":'''a' 1~ ~ fu j)RC jbo#L &. ~+.-trWS
OM.J- -k~ 'rUlMJ... ~.f ~ lAJ-~ ~o a-ppu< tD k ~s""",.Ru--
s~J., ~~ tt-~ "rtlJ,blcc.4 I ~'d...... .J U:.we a.re
~e~~ I.,.. p.uJ.;~ ~ ~ €M."iT'tTl-\~~ il<\<f~t-
~, ru.J.- -tic.L ~ C'S ~) ~~s/~frt'\f~ ~'.,..d.
1/, ........ s~ "1'~\I'ds
~ IS~ M ..&.t-kr ~ ~ ~ 54-<-<. ;y,'egoi'a.u4 k4-S
i~" eJ. tJM,,~ Ie:.;. ~ ~'~ ~ a.. f.o J. - wf:....d-.. i..a 0.. {aci .
"
3. ~~f;Cf
:Z:. A \I~ I ~'t
B J.p
C J.o
'j ~I ~:+
A-~_ ~
~, ~ ~<t" tt14AJ...t l.ri,u -k f;~'~,t ~l/qqZ
t'~
I>
. J[. A
13
C
:D
t:
F.
G.
H.
-
III .
-
:t
A-F,
A-f.
IV
-
(" 'I
OK CJ2.rJ~ &oo.Soe.S A..(.~tt'<tS wf.u..~ ~)
( II I sl..we~/c....~,1/s~,. .,)
( " ,~y.J;/~.ul,..., )
'$ 100,000 E.sJ;~J. ~;v~ ,&w, Li; ,
oK. I
p-+- ~ .e.~ o-<-t. ~, w.. l'b) o.{. ~ft.;M.<."
C~
c~
A-p~ 4.rt- \I~ .,.a.re.~ :Dr<C ha..~ ~,~~ 1-e-
s.otJeJ.. '15'10 o( ~fe.'~ ~'~ ~ A"U~. t'1'
o,.c."
4p~s WvI~U~"~ ~se .t~ .;". ~ tLn...e.
o1~ I ~t: .&J.- i.b -sJ.a,...J Lf ik ~4<<e:; ~~
ft.et ~Hu. l~HL( ~~ {.'<~A H$ k.i~.( {-us ! )
&.....~ ct..bDV(!.. ".j-I.
S~., t'~ - :J ~ t.t..() tJf'->'IA-<'''''''/t~''''r:IJ.
t)fC, - -t:~~ il..i..:. SfH/ ...d.s ~- ~.,~ ~ IL .J-
,. II
~ or a..c... ~-t ~,~ ~ ~c+;cJ
-r-ec.o 1M. ~ ct",J..;6'tA .
'J a..c...... p.r.e r 4.,..e.l. -tc .l; S~'5 ~s~ ~ \J .,ell'l' "<! -I:;k.. P 1'1 . .. :.1,f
kl'~~~ ~ ~~ f2evie...J ~..~ ~J..(Q.A..J."~(
~. f,'c"''''''fJ1A'' a.<s ~~ ~te,'~ ~b.ove.
~ udeu,,",r":)
A,GJ.~, ~~,d/~4~~ 09
.P.5. /ls ~ Jove 4<-t.";r"-f ~ ~."':?/ :;:ee ()~-r -tk.
fot&W?'''1 S<c..<,. I"I?~ p.r d,;SC.U5'>7'n.- :
I. ~ ~I is ~'Ii.u fa-c~, ~r ;~/ ~ ~'eck~.
.Jt ~, ~ wet'e-r I A-- rt:l jU ~ I;cae ,! JCk T tA..-h'~ w-. -;.e a-
a/ea-r ""a--eS5~ -to f:-.t<p,t:I;k, ~~ c!k. &. ~I-o~f".
t, m()~1 ~k ~JI!W~ tfk. jJla<.H....if ;ge.~L(',k,,~1U t
~ ~ DRe ~ ~~ au<. ~sdt7-eckL/ ~f'~.>
J/ " .
c~ -'7 S~'Iorl~ ,1';C5 : ~)p... ~vu.e- I.$' -..0./ ~< /~J.CH/
~o/ ~ ?!h <t~-~ h~, kt:- -4 till- //I9~~a.-
of of4r 15' odd ~'If/""V'~$/~~/6,,~'es ~"d.
~~Q. h'~ t:c~1 -u-...t:~ ~ 6'...-, iff#l,. E"V~"'~$-
~~ 'JO~ 1/5 tk- /&li{ tf..y r;j), ~ ~RC.(~-';('~I
~I fc ';..at-..k ,h',.-e )1;~s<J/?a.nc~/,tI/71rnc/.)d~~e-; e.f)
3, f>t? A-u.t p.ec ~~ *' ,,~ "'"'I ~4.~, ~f44
I-m~!~'~~~;tu~t., ~ f't!!U-~,t.,~ t-r; o/~~ca4tn..s
of ~ $,,' If / 1it....,1 Y4-y 4-W"-r'e ~/ tfk. /Jt~.H j ~s;~S'.
(~ -t'k &,1 -1--5" PRe ~s ~"4- 6" - 9'0 u...~~
~s ' ~~ .y ~7;"'" ~<nc ~~$ ey'~y~ W?~I -c....~.eL
~t' a.-t,n" i:k s '< m-e day).
4. J ttd.~ -e~ -tie ~tU<;'1ne 19( ppj a/_4.'7J.4~H ~'.?
P"#tI4s ~ .ot.- ~"'- ~ - as 4re i4e. ~~ ~~/~IJ-
/71a.../-saE5 - a-f ~ ~s ,r..Jm,';M ()f Var7t'.U.J,.c,.e$/ ~'~
~;.;~s, ~ p-f.,t.~J'h~ deV7'a/,~$ Q..r€.. U<),t
~,cssd ~4.- .;;..r .PRe ;;r ~-5ht"~:<d / ~c.L
~ "I' 4<.S ~H.~"L -6f, a!o. 70
5. ~ Ec>a. ~I 4't...K~F ~ ~<<U'h__ &>/' cry..
c--,e-,'e -4f>~l/d l11a'.Jk.r ,P/~.- ~ ek -
~ lfku',,- .-k.Y'.u..r- (1'"f7 CIJ?1~,t"... t:.,4~ ~~ ~
14L ~I ~!J:f.,6-.
.- ,
u<<.",..,&, ..,<;-, ~,.~ A.I pf EQ.$~ r( 51-.
(~~jH., ~ ---'.J4!/ 4.s<.)
~, /::.a-,'s:q ~,t.d.-4s/t'~
(~ ~.,~ ~$"7 ~.h~h"-<)
c. lh-w-,.,' '7 ~ c4;,-u 1 11.-(. ~d W'",/ j;;A-t?<.
A C6'W .u..~HU ~s.'",,? ~/.y-tu.'k '
rlc..
, .
.uL "f ~'c4 M ry.-.-L i~ ?c:> ~ ..lJecs ~'sL,'c.4'h.,.
tM ~ ~ c/U.r ~J/54k .:,~uL ~~,L.'int-J/
Cow ~.,t p ~ ,.-er'-"~~-N C;t!J,p,if, E",da-t~
p/a-.~/~'''#wJ~.- s/<(.Ie ~.ted';;" u~'k-b EI d~
71
ATTACHMENT I
Minutes
Permit Processing Recommendations
EDC and Chairmen/Representatives of Development Related Advisory Groups
May 5, 1992
Council Conference Room
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Penny Allen.
Those in attendance:
Penny Allen, Chair, Economic Development Commission
Patty Davis, Economic Development Commission/Chair Permit Process Subcommittee
Chuck Peter, Town Centre Project Area Committee
Will Hyde, Town Centre Project Area Committee
A. Y. Casillas, Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee
Lee Wheeland, Montgomery Planning Commission/Southwest Project Area Committee
Bob Fox, Resource Conservation Commission
Barbara Hall, Resource Conservation Commission
Mike Spethman, Design Review Committee
Alex Galchenko, AlA, Design Review Committee
Mabel Rabe, HandyTrans
Staff:
Ken Lee, Planning Department
Steve Griffm, Planning Department
Cheryl Dye, Community Development Department
Alice Kemp, Community Development Department
Ms. Allen explained the purpose of the meeting was to get input from the committees which had
been asked to place the Permit Process Subcommittee's recommendations on their respective
agendas. Ms. Allen asked that each representative give a recap on the discussions and
recommendations from their committees.
Recommendations were as follows:
A. Y. Casillas:
The Otay Valley Road PAC met on Monday, May 4. They agreed the
permit process was slow and redundant and needs to be revamped. Some
of the fees are exorbitant. There are guidelines for the fee schedule but
they are not readily available for applicants. In a meeting with the mayor
this was brought up. The OVRP AC does not hold up projects. They felt
the hold-up on projects was when staff did not have complete information
or consultants were called. This particular committee was set up as a
result of a lawsuit that took place and the PAC was established as a
"watchdog" committee. Their recommendations were to: 1) improve
staff responsiveness; 2) re-define permit process to expedite applications,
73
Permit Process Recommendations
Mr. Galchenko:
Mr. Spethman:
Mr.Hyde:
Mr. Peters:
Ms. Hall:
Mr. Fox:
Page 2
currently there doesn't seem to be any timelines; 3) review the committee
roles in depth and come back with some improvement; and, 4) problems
can be traced back to Council, the Council needs to do a better job to
ensure the system is improved. It starts at the top. For clarification, Mr.
Casillas noted that ultimately, it is Council's responsibility to make sure
many of these complaints are dealt with. He stated that when people
come before Council with complaints, they are referred to staff and that's
the end of it. There should be some accountability.
Felt that most problems were in land use considerations. He noted
Council has to take control of this. The intent of the report is correct.
The applicant should know what the guidelines are. The DRC has done
a good job. Agrees that the Planning Department should have authority
to approve some things without going back to Council. The DRC does
not "rubber stamp" plans when people go before them. The issue is
Council and land use considerations.
Committee is in favor of adopting concise guidelines; this is an excellent
idea. Parking is a site issue as are arrangement, configuration and
circulation, and the DRC looks at all these issues. They are in favor of
streamlining process. Section G is a good idea. This should not have
been too general; needs to be more specific. The committee was in favor
of Section I.
As Chair of the Parking Committee, noted they look at all areas of
parking in Town Centre. Their charge encompasses everything relating to
parking, including design review. They have the primary charge in
regards to parking. The Town Centre PAC sent a letter to EDC outlining
their concerns.
It would be a great loss to the City to give up these committees.
The RCC has a problem with title of Section E restricting role to
reviewing EIR's. EIR's are only part of their role. The RCC also
includes recycling and energy programs. They have not held anything up
because they do have timeframes to follow.
Not sure of the intent of EDC in restricting their role to just reviewing
EIR's. They are looking at setting up an historical district; have added to
their responsibility review of Negative Declarations and recommendations
as to their adequacy. A recommendation has been made to expand the role
of the RCC. It is in the City Attorney's office now. The City made
specific commitments to MPC prior to annexation. There is a document
7'1
Permit Process Recommendations
Page 3
available listing certain things and he urged EDC to get a copy of this
document.
Ms. Allen clarified that it was not the intent of the EDC to restrict the role of the RCC to EIR's
exclusively, but rather to restrict their review of EIR's. She noted that the wording would be
changed from "TO" to "IN" (Section E).
Ms. Wheeland:
A letter was sent to the EDC in response to the recommendations with a
cc to the Mayor. The MPC was not happy with this report. They have
a public meeting scheduled for tomorrow and have no specific comments
at this time.
Ms. Allen thanked the representatives for their input and thoughts. She noted these concerns
would be passed on to the EDC at their meeting tomorrow. There were many good points
brought up.
AlireQ,~~
[A:\S-SIJub.min]
75
ATTACHMENT J
Minutes
Permit Processing Recommendations
EDC and ChairmenJRepresentatives of Development Related Advisory Groups
April 13, 1992, 11:00 a.m.
Council Conference Room
The meeting was called to order at 11:00 a.m. by Penny Allen.
Those in attendance:
Penny Allen, Chair, Economic Development Commission
Patty Davis, Economic Development Commission/Chair Permit Process Subcommittee
Don Read, Economic Development Commission
Joe D. Casillas, Planning Commission
Chuck Peter, Town Centre Project Area Committee
Will Hyde, Town Centre Project Area Committee
A.Y. Casillas, Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee
Lee Wheeland, Montgomery Planning Commission/Southwest Project Area Committee
Nancy Palmer, Growth Management Oversight Committee/Montgomery Planning Commission
Barbara Hall, Resource Conservation Commission
Barbara Gilman, Design Review Committee
Mike Spethman, Design Review Committee
Staff:
Councilman Leonard Moore
Ken Lee, Planning Department
Steve Griffin, Planning Department
Cheryl Dye, Community Development Department
Alice Kemp, Community Development Department
Ms. Allen gave a brief history of the purpose for the meeting this morning. She noted the
Economic Development Commission was directed by Council to develop an Economic
Development Plan. The first priority that both Council and the EDC came up with was to
streamline the permit process. A subcommittee was formed and the recommendations from that
subcommittee will be discussed at this meeting.
Ms. Allen and Ms. Davis asked those present if there were any sections from the
recommendations they wanted to discuss.
In response to Mr. Joe D. Casillas' questions regarding Conditional Use Permit reviews, Ms.
Allen responded that the noticing provisions would stay in place as they exist now.
17
Permit Processing Recommendations
Page 2
Ms. Hall stated the Resource Conservation Commission felt that CUP's should be categorized
and inspected periodically to ensure compliance. Ms. Allen responded that the EDC's scope did
not address compliance monitoring.
Ms. Gilman (Design Review Committee) stated the need for an updated design manual. It will
help because the public will know what is expected of them and they will not come in with an
adversarial attitude. The DRC had no objection to any of the recommendations. Mr. Spethman
was in agreement.
Ms. Allen suggested the members present each take a turn to voice their opinion of the
suggested recommendations to Council regarding the phasing out of PACs and implementing a
new committee made up of members from the affected PACs. Comments were presented as
follows:
Ms. Wheeland: Everything is aimed and targeted at the Planning Department. Feels the
report is biased against Planning. It is not the committees that are slowing
down the process, it is all the studies such as traffic and EIR's; most of
which are flawed. This is the fault of the consultants doing the work.
The report's recommendations would cut down on community input. As
to the combining of the three PAC's, the committee is not in favor of this.
She felt the wording of the report was negative.
Ms. Palmer: Noted that Council revised the MPC's mission statement by ordinance in
1990 without consulting them. However, she has not noticed a change in
projects coming to the commission since that time.
Mr. A.Y. Casillas: Agrees with Montgomery Planning Commission representatives. These
committees are vital. EDC needs to look at systems and procedures
within the City; not doing away with these committees. There needs to
be more re-thinking of the systems in place.
Mr. J.D. Casillas: Agrees that community involvement is very significant. Feels committees
such as the MPC are keeping the City from becoming another "Spring
Valley." The Planning Commission has representatives on the MPC.
This recommendation may be premature. Community input has been
quality input; we need to keep this.
Mr. Chuck Peters: Town Centre PAC performs other functions besides project review, for
example, things such as parking issues. Thinks procedures/policies could
be revamped/tightened up.
7J'
Permit Processing Recommendations
Page 3
Mr. Will Hyde: TCPAC is not ready to disband; they have not fulfilled their mission.
Both project areas are incomplete. Agrees with rest of committee
representatives. Establishment of "super committee" is worthless. These
areas are unique.
Ms. Gilman: Chula Vista is getting bigger. It seems the bigger we get the more we
need these committees. No one contacted any of these committees to talk
with EDC to see what their problems are. The last part of this report
(section E - Personnel Management) is written only from the viewpoint of
those people who complained about the Design Review Committee. The
language is negative. Economics are not our problem.
Mr. M. Spethman: DRC is completely sensitive to costs. They take this into consideration
when dealing with applicants. Got the impression from reading the report
that DRC just makes arbitrary decisions. DRC has much more to add to
design review and process.
Ms. Allen thanked committee representatives for sharing their concerns. She clarified that the
intent was not to set up an adversarial meeting. The intent was to look at these issues from an
economic standpoint. Ms. Allen also clarified that staff did not make any specific
recommendation but provided the subcommittee with information regarding committees' original
mandates and charges.
Ms. Allen suggested each representative take this report back to their committees for discussion
and return back for a follow-up meeting. Those recommendations will be included in the EDC
report to Council.
It was agreed that the next meeting would be on Tuesday, May 5 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council
conference room.
The meeting adjourned at 12:55 p.m.
~u
AliceKemp, Recofdi~tary
1?
ATTACHMENT K
I I I I Category or I
Name Address/Phone # AffiliatiOD RepreseotatioD
Patti Davis 653 Redlands Place South Bay Board of Realtortl Economic Development Commission
Co-Chair Bonita 91902
475-0233
Albert (pete) Gerber 694 Myra Avenue City of San Diego Economic Development Commission
Co-Chair Chula Vista 91910 Utilities Department
221-<;646 (8)
Penny Allen 355 K Street, Suite K Allen & Company Economic Development Commission
Chula Vista 91911
425-7606 (8)
William Tuchscher 8880 Rio San Diego Dr. Grubb & Ellis Real Estate Economic Development Commission
Suite 200
San Diego 92108-1622
297-5000
Mary Slovinsky 108 MilsCher Street Anomey Mayor's Task Force/Small Business
Chula Vista 91910
426-4400 (8)
John K. Kracha 358 East Millan Street RCC Mayor's Task Force/Education
Chula Vista 91910--6314
426-8295
Bob Beyerle 131 Alvarado Street Contractor Mayor's Task Force/Small Business
Chula Vista 91910
422-3265
Bill Robens 254 Camino Elevado Consultant Mayor's Task Force/Crossroads
Bonita 91902 [Fonner City Engineer]
479-7955
Mike Steiner 538 Berland Way Owner, Merle Nonnan Mayor's Task Force/Downtown
Chula Vista 91910 Cosmetics Business Association
421-3600 (8)
Jesus Sanchez 333 Third Avenue Owner, Harvey's Bakery Mayor's Task Force/Small Business
Chula Vista 91910 and Restaurant
420-8660 (8)
Pat Ables 158 Keamy Abigail's Pantry Mayor's Task Force/Small Business
Chula Vista 91910
470-9582 (8)
Jim Ondler 2727 Hoover Avenue McMillin Communities, Master Plan Developer
National City 91950 Inc.
477-41700"'.218 (8)
Art Sellgren P.O. Box 878 Rohe Industries, Inc. Major Local Business
Mail Zone 29-C
ChuIa Vista 91910
691-3248 (8)
Bob Snyder 900 Lane Avenue EastLake Development Master Plan Developer
Suite 100 Company
Chula Vista 91913
421-0127
John Turpit 6305 Lu.k Blvd.-Ste. 200 Turpit Architecta Architect
San Diego 92121
535-0606 (8)
Mike Green 535 H Street Chamber of Commerce Chamber of Commerce
Chula Vista 91010 [Fonner Planning Commissioner]
425-4020 (8)
C;\WPJruWE\cOMMll-IEE.IBLj 1
ECONOMIC DEVEWPMENT COMMISSION
Permit Processing Subcommittee Membership
!/
/619?
r..:l
r..:l
E
z~
90
VlU
~~
~oo
~
oe,:,oo
uZ!5
E-<Zo
z::s~
~~e,:,
~~~
ul~r;a
;>00i:a
~e,:,o
ClZ~
u....
_00
~oo
or..:l
ZU
00
u8:
~t::
~
j
.~ 1::
U ..
0. j fr
~ 0
""
0 t .9
"" '"
] e 6
... .s :I:
~ ~ ... oll
'il
U 0 Q ""
N '" ~
~ .. ~ .9...
] II > " '3
~ Iii 0"0
- >> l<l
0 '" '" 0
" II '" i:;'''' fl::
.... .~ ~ "-8
~ 5
0 ~l<l '"
.... .... ....
~
'=
~
- ~ 8
l<l "0
0. ij Iii
~ 1-
0
"" t'~ 1i ~
] ~]
... ... fr1::
~ 'il ofr
0 ""0
jj '" .. ... ~ lil
~ ] "
::( "0 ~ _ e
>> 0. g-
o "il
>> l>:: '" '" "1)
il ~ -8 ~ il:: >
iiS 5 "
0. .... l<l ",0
-< l!l
..
0. 1i3
e -
~ -
0 Ot ~
""
~ l:l:i ... ~ }
f- 'il
~ ~ 0
8 8 ""
... .~
Ii ! .8 '" ~ .j
~ >> .S a:
0 0 0",
'" ~ " " li::
e ~ .&J :!!i:!!i
0 OJ 5
;.:; .... l<l 0. ~~ '"
f3
ATTACHMENT L
J
SJI
~11
i::i . ~
t~
~;!
S:
w
-
>
W
0:
-J
<(
f-
Z
w
:E
z
o
0:
-
>
z
US
...J
<a:
z-
-w
LL
l'
CD
T
OJ
i
I-
LLa:
<-
a:W
D'
T
...J>
~D
1-::)
-I-
~CI)
-------........................ ..--~-----.
...
..
W
..J
Q.
~
<
><
W
III
- G/
o ...
G/<
'C_
- c
!l G/
::J E
o a.
_ 0
CJ -
G/ G/
->
o G/
"''C
Q. G/
a::
FIGURE 1
CD
CD
[I]
LL~
LLW
<-
I->
Cl)W
a:
...JLL~
<LLW
z<;;
-I-
LLCI)W
a:
i
S: [J
I
w
- >~
>
a:!!!
W <>
a: zw
~a:
Z -LL
...JLL
~ W<
Irl-
- Q.CI)
CJ)
US
Q
..........-.....- ....--..........J--....____.......... _... ...4___
z
o
I-i=
u<
wU
-'::::i
OQ.
irQ.
Q.<
~5
Cll
;= O.!:
~ .-...
> :'Om
<I> ::><1>
Ir Q. J:
I J
00
;:
W
-
>
W
a:
..J
~
I-
Z
W
~
Z
o
a:
-
>
z
W
C'l
...
W
..J
0.
::E
<C
><
W
..
CIl >-
o ..
~ COt'll
.c 0 e 0
"eO"
5 a.,El <C
(/)OCCl
- 0 C
CO"", -
_ > "'" C
.. 0 ...... C
U 'C t'll
o 0 t'll-
-a:Oo.
o ..
~ <C
-'
<e:
z-
_w
IL
i
rC?1
OOWrn
t+1'
I-
ILe:
<-
o:W
o
1
-'>-
~O
1-::>
-I-
~(I)
-
.
;:
W
-
>
W
a:
z
1*
IW
.Q
.
.
.
[I]
t
...Iu.~
<U.W
Z<;;
u:l-lJJ
(l)e:
o
0:
o
>-~
o:!!!
<>
ZW
~o:
-U.
-'u.
W<
0:1-
o.cn
FI GURE 2
@<
00
Oe:
cD
'f'-
CD
l'
fP
IL~
ILW
.<-
1->
(l)W
0:
______.. _____.L.---_..___.. .__....r.
Z
o
I-t:
0<
wO
...,-
o~
0:0.
0.<
R6
~ Cl
(1) 0.5
> ~~
Ql :> Ql
0: o.:r:
I I
DO
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
1\
Meeting Date
June 9. 1992
ITEM TITLE:
Ordinance ,25/1 Amending section 2.56 of the
Municipal Code relating to purchases of supplies,
services and equipment.
Resolution llo(O S"1 Adopting proposed Council
policy on consultant and other services.
SUBMITTED BY: Budget Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___ No-X-l
REVIEWED BY: city Managet9
At the July 23, 1991 city Council meeting, Council requested a
report on the city's use of consultants and service contracts.
This report was discussed by city council on October 18, 1991.
During Council discussion, it was determined that a City council
subcommittee be established to address the issue of consultants and
service contractors more in depth. The Council subcommittee
included Councilmembers Leonard Moore and Shirley Grasser Horton.
The subcommittee met with staff and proposed the approval of
revisions to the Municipal Code, the establishment of a new Council
policy, and some modifications in city procedures for determining
the need for consultants, consultant monitoring and hiring
practices.
At the April 7, 1992 City council meeting an Agenda Statement was
presented to amend the Municipal Code relating to purchases of
supplies, services and equipment, as well as a proposed Council
Policy on "Consultants and other Services". The Council raised
several issues which they referred back to the Consultant
subcommittee for review and comment. The Committee reviewed these
issues and is presenting a revised council Policy, and recommending
that some of the issues be referred to staff for further study or
implementation.
Specific issues addressed within the proposed documents are the use
of a cost comparison worksheet to compare costs of proposed
consultant or service contractor to City staff, establishing pre-
qualification lists for frequently used services, expanding
advertising, encouraging a 10% retention or reserve of total
contract amounts to be completed until the final work has been
accepted, and regular notification to the Council when the total
fiscal year's payments to one service provider exceed $50,000.
H- /
Xtem
I(
Meeting Date
June 9. 1992
RECOMMENDATXON: That Council adopt the resolution and place the
ordinance on first reading and refer the following issues to staff:
1. One-year evaluation of policy
2. Preparation of annual list of service providers
3. Expanding use of in-service training
BOARD/COMMXSSXON RECOMMENDATXON: N/A
DXSCUSSXON:
The City of Chula vista has historically used contracts for
serV1ces when existing City staff did not have the special
expertise or equipment required to complete a particular service,
was subject to time constraints, needed to meet peaks and valleys
of workload or it was determined to be more cost effective to hire
a service contractor than to use existing City staff. Generally,
the need for outside service contractors is determined during the
budget review process. Departments submit their budgets requesting
funding within professional or contractual service accounts. The
budget review of any department request focuses on justification
provided by the department which clearly demonstrates the need for
the requested service. Should a department request replacement of
a traditionally contracted service with a request for a city staff
position, the cost benefit of this change is thoroughly analyzed
during that department's budget review, and findings are presented
and reviewed by the Budget Manager, Assistant/Deputy City Managers
and the City Manager prior to bringing that request forward to
Council. Since we must be concerned about the cost effectiveness
of providing any city service, those services which will be needed
on a very limited basis or one-time only services related to a
single project are typically not recommended to be replaced with
permanent city staff.
citv Council Consultant Subcommittee
When the City Council Consultant Subcommittee was established, the
first meetings were used primarily to review existing City
procedures in the use of consultants and service providers, review
other cities' procedures and determine the type of product to be
developed.
The procedures for obtaining services and supplies are governed by
Chapter 2.56 of the Municipal Code titled Purchasing System. The
Subcommittee reviewed this section of the Municipal Code and is
recommending several changes (Attachment A).
2
'1-2..
Item
\ I
Meeting Date
June 9. 1992
Municipal Code proposed Changes
The current Municipal Code includes an exemption from the
competitive bidding process for selection of architectural,
engineering, environment, land surveying, construction proj ect
management, and other professional consultant services.
Recommended to amend this code is an additional statement that the
use of competitive bidding for services will be invoked when it is
in the interest of good government.
The primary changes recommended are:
1. Cost comparison analysis.
All contracts for services exceeding $5,000 which are
anticipated by any Department Head shall first be analyzed in
terms of cost effectiveness of having the proposed service
completed by in-house staff versus the cost of the outside
services. The department shall be responsible for completing
a cost comparison worksheet (Attachment B) which shall be
evaluated by the Budget Manager and/or Revenue Manager. The
cost comparison worksheet will walk a department step by step
through the tasks to be performed, the duration and frequency
of a project, evaluating in-house employees' abilities to
perform the task, evaluating possibility of some combination
of contract services and city staff, specialized training and
expertise required, and source of funding for the project.
The actual cost comparison takes into account the City's full
cost recovery rate to assess the true impact of hiring
additional City staff. This is compared to the service
contract cost which may require adjustments to find true cost
if the contractor will be requiring substantial City staff
support or work from on-site locations.
2. City advertisement, pre-qualification and letters of
interest
All requests for services estimated to be in excess of $10,000
shall be advertised through respective professional societies
and publications in newspapers of the appropriate circulation.
The Purchasing Division shall be responsible for maintaining
lists of interested firms along with their statements of
qualifications for services. The city Manager will annually
determine which services are to be of such frequency during
anyone fiscal year that it would be appropriate to establish
a pre-qualification list at the beginning of the fiscal year
3
\\-3
Item
\ \
Meeting Date
June 9. 1992
from which all future uses of that service would be drawn
throughout the fiscal year. The concept of pre-qualification
lists for services which will be used frequently during any
fiscal year could provide savings in City staff time spent
advertising, evaluating and obtaining appropriate contractors.
3. Selection Committees
An additional change recommended for the Municipal Code is the
content of the selection committees required for all service
contracts over $10,000. For contracts between $10,000 and
$25,000, a Department Head or designee and one or more staff
members are currently required to perform the duties of the
selection committee. The committee makeup is recommended to
be changed to two staff members serving along with the
Department Head or designee as the selection committee. In
cases where the contract is in excess of $25,000, the city
Manager currently shall appoint a 3-5 member selection
committee. The proposal is to change the selection committee
to three or more qualified persons in order to allow for
seating the most appropriate members on the selection
committee whether they are employees or outside members. The
selection committees are also being recommended to have the
option to augment any list with an additional recruitment for
service providers if they feel that the list provided them is
not appropriate or too few potential service providers have
applied.
Council policy
To augment the proposed changes to the Municipal Code, a council
policy (Attachment C) is also recommended to be established to cite
specific Council concerns and how staff will address these
concerns. The general philosophy of this proposed policy is that
periodic high citizen demand for services and heavy workloads do
not necessarily justify increasing permanent staff to meet those
periodic demands. The policy emphasizes that forethought, planning
and good judgement be used in determining the optimum staffing
levels with the appropriate cost effective complement of outside
consultants of other service providers. Key concerns include the
following:
1. Cost comparison evaluations.
2. Implementation of pre-qualification lists.
3. Expanding advertising.
4. A 10% retention on those contracts in excess of $10,000.
4
Il- 4
Item
\)
Meeting Date
June 9. 1992
5. City Council will be notified at any point during a
fiscal year when a contract is recommended for approval,
regardless of cost which will result in a total fiscal
year's payments exceeding $50,000 to anyone service
provider.
Local/Minoritv/Women Business Enterprise
The Council Subcommittee questioned the City's current practices
regarding preferences or advantages to prospective contractors who
operate in Chula vista or are minority or women-owned businesses.
The City does not provide any preference to minority or women-owned
businesses except when required by a project being funded by the
Federal Government. Use of Federal Aid to Urban (FAU) or other
government funds must be done in accordance with Federal guidelines
mostly for requiring a percentage of subcontractors to be minority
or women-owned firms.
When calculating the total cost of a bid, if the vendor is within
Chula vista we do look at the return to be gained by the
elimination of the 1% local sales tax, although no real preference
is given to the local firms.
The City Attorney's office has reviewed the issue extensively and
has concluded that it would be extremely difficult to legally
implement such a policy (Attachment D). Those local agencies, city
of San Diego and County of San Diego, which do have minority and
women business enterprise programs have done so under Federal
consent decrees to rectify past discrimination claims.
In order for Chula vista to implement such a policy, we would first
be required to perform a complicated study to prove past
discriminations against minority and women owned businesses, or, to
demonstrate financial hardships faced by local businesses as a
result of being located in the city or region. The process of
publicly claiming that we had discriminated in the past could
unnecessarily expose the City to potential lawsuits.
April 7, 1992 Council Review
There were eight (8) questions raised by Council regarding the
proposed ordinance and council policy on use of consultants at the
April 7, 1992 Council meeting. Each of these issues was addressed
by the Council consultant sub-committee and recommendations
formulated. The recommendations fall generally into three (3)
5
It-s
Item
\ \
Meetinq Date
June 9. 1992
categories: proposed amendments to Council Policy; referrals to
staff; and other issues.
Council Policy Proposed Amendments
1. Hiring of former employees as consultants
Staff recommended implementing a new policy which would limit
the compensation of former employees for the first year after
termination to be compensated at a maximum hourly rate equal
to their salary and benefits at time of termination. Any
proposed exceptions to this policy would need approved by
Council. The proposed Council policy has been amended to
incorporate these provisions.
2. Revise notification limit
The proposed Council policy originally recommended that
Council be notified when any contract recommended for approval
will result in the total fiscal year's payments to exceed
$100,000 to one service provider. Council had suggested that
this amount may be too high, and after review by the sub-
committee it was recommended to be revised to $50,000. The
proposed Council policy incorporates this change.
3. Local preference
The issue of local preference was addressed in the April 7,
1992 report on consultants. An opinion by the City Attorney's
office was noted and attached which questioned the legality of
local preference policies. As a response to the Council's
questioning of local preference the subcommittee has
recommended to add the following language to the Council
Policy: "In soliciting bids or proposals, staff should be
cognizant of locating and encouraging potential bidders who
have the potential to stimulate the local Chula vista
economy."
Referrals to Staff
4. One Year Evaluation
One year after implementation of this policy it is recommended
that the effectiveness of the policy be evaluated with a
report presented to Council on the outcome. The subcommittee
concurs with this recommendation and in addition would like at
least one member of the current subcommittee included in the
evaluation process.
6
11- to
Item
\\
Meeting Date
June 9. 1992
5. Annual list of Service Providers
On an annual basis, during the budget review process, staff
should present a listing of the service provider used, fees
paid, rates and types of projects worked on. This listing
should include those service providers who have been paid more
than $25,000 total during the fiscal year.
6. Expanding use of in-service training of current staff
Concern was raised that within the City we were not proactive
in ensuring that specialized skills, training and expertise
are not lost when an employee terminates. The City has
historically emphasized all aspects of training with
employees. Included has been encouraging cross training and
management development. Staff supports continuing this effort
and expanding it to include:
1. Completion of a proactive inventory of specialized
knowledge skills and abilities within the City to
determine areas of specialized need.
2. Those retiring or scheduled to leave.
3. Develop training plans for those who aspire to higher
positions.
4. Assist managers in establishing programs to train
subordinates to be able to replace them upon termination.
Provide an information item to Council to update them on the
progress of this program.
Other Issues
7. Existing Council Policy on Local Preference
During the review of this item, Council referred to a policy
on local preference which they believed to have been adopted
in the fall of 1991. Staff has researched this issue and has
determined that there is currently no policy on local
preference. However, on November 19, 1991 the City Attorney
presented a report which discussed the possibility raised by
Council of implementing a local preference policy for outside
legal assistance. The report (Attachment E) was accepted by
Council and did not recommend the implementation of a formal
policy.
8. Council Oversight
During Council's review of this item it was suggested that the
consultant evaluation process include additional Council
oversight by having councilmembers sit on selection committees
7
1I~1
Item
\\
Meeting Date
June 9. 1992
and/or review selection committees work. This issue was
reviewed by the Council subcommittee and was not recommended.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL
The Council Subcommittee was concerned that City staff had clear
directions regarding all aspects on contracting for services. Upon
approval of the proposed Municipal Code changes and the new Council
Policy, staff will begin the preparation of a "how-to" manual to
guide staff through the required procedures for determining the
need for contractual assistance, approval process and processing
requirements.
FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no direct cost associated with the action.
B:\(Al13)\CONSULT.A13
8
II - J-'
Attachment B
Cost Comparison Worksheets
Contract Consultants and Services vs. In-House staff
The following forms are to be used for comparisons of the cost of hiring
consultants or contracting for services to the cost of using in-house
staff. Please answer the following questions and complete the attached
Cost Comparison Worksheet. If you have any questions regarding these
forms, please contact the Revenue Manager.
GENERAL:
1. Describe the task(s) to be performed.
2. What is the expected duration of the proj ect/service (number of
weeks, months, etc.)?
3. How frequently does the City need to do this project/service (times
per month or year, times per development, etc.)?
4A. Are there any in-house employees who could perform the task? What
classification of employee(s)?
4B. If there are such employees, why wouldn't they be utilized in this
situation?
,),3- )J-
/ 1-1
4C. If such employees would not be used due to workload, what work would
be displaced if the task were to be performed in-house? .
4D. If workload is a factor, could staff of lower classification be
hired to handle extra work so that staff of higher classification could
concentrate their time on the task? Explain.
5. Would the project take more or less time for in-house staff versus a
contractor (e. g. consul tant has pre-prepared boilerplate materials,
software, etc.)?
6A. Are there any qualitative reasons to choose either a contractor or
in-house staff (e.g. expertise, knowledge of City operations, special
liability issues)? Explain.
6B. Is the project or service separable into parts, some of which could
be performed by in-house staff? What would be the benefits/drawbacks of
dividing the task?
7. Is there any special training that would be required for the service
to be provided by in-house staff? What would be the cost implication of
this training?
...) :1--;'}'-
II-ID
SA. Are there any special capital items or materials required or
additional expenses that would be incurred for the city to perform this
task? Explain.
8B. If the city were to perform this task, what impacts would
on the life expectancy/capacity of city equipment? Would
additional annual maintenance, or new purchases be required?
this "have
upgrades,
Explain.
9. How would this task be funded? What fees or reimbursements might
offset these expenditures? Answer for both contract and in-house
performance.
CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT:
10. Base Contract Cost:
11. Method and terms of payment.
"
12. If the term of the agreement would be for more than one year, what
provisions apply to COLA or CPI increases?
:2.:J-f.. ,('
-
))..-11
13. Applicable rates (including travel, word processing, hourly or daily
charges, clerical support, meeting attendance, sales tax, etc.),
estimated units per rate, and resultant costs (e.g. five trips from LA @
$50/trip = $250.)
TYPE OF CHARGE
RATE
ESTIMATED UNITS
TOTAL COST
14. Performance guarantees (e. g. wi thholding
unsatisfactory work, termination of contract, etc.)
of payment
for
15. Is consultant/contractor:
Licensed to do business in the city?
subject to FPPC conflict of interest designation?
If so, in which disclosure category should they be
required to file? (circle one)
category 1:
category 2:
category 3:
Investments (A, C-2) and sources of income
(D,E, F,H-l,H-2,H-3).
Interests in real DroDertv (B,C-l). (YoU need
only disclose real property which is located in
whole or in part within or not more than two
miles outside the boundaries of the City or
within two miles of any land owned or used by
the city).
Investments (A, C-2) interests in real DrODertv
(B,C-I) and sources of income (D,E,F,H-l,H-2,H-
3) subject to the regulatory, permit, or
licensing authority of the department. (You
need only disclose investments in business
entities and sources of income which do
business in the City of Chula Vista, plans to
do business in the city, or has done business
in the City within the past two years. In
';':1~ /V ~
II;,IL
Category 4:
Category 5:
Category 6:
Category 7:
addition to other activities, a business entity
is doing business within the City if it owns
real property within the City).
Investments (A,C-2) in business entities and
sources of income (D,E,F,H-l,H-2,H-3) which
engage in land development, construction, or
the acquisition or sale of real property.
Investments (A,C-2) in business entities and
sources of income (D,E,F,H-l,H-2,H-3) of the
type which, within the past two years, have
contracted with the City of Chula Vista
(Redevelopment Agency) to provide services,
supplies, materials, machinery, or equipment.
Investments (A,C-2) in business entities and
sources of income (D,E,F,H-l,H-2,H-3) of the
type which, within the past two years, have
contracted with the designated employee's
department to provide services, supplies,
materials, machinery, or equipment.
Business oositions (G). (YoU need only
disclose positions of director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee, or any position of
management in organizations or enterprises
operated for profit).
16. Additional Comments:
Note: If a draft agreement is available, please attach a copy.
?~j9- .
city of Chula Vista
Contractor vs. In-House Cost Comparison Worksheet
CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR COST
BASE RATES
Base Contract Cost
Hourly Rate
Estimated Actual Hours
Additional Rates
(Aggregate Cost)
Total Base Cost
FCR BASED COSTS.
Contract Monitoring/
support Costs
SUBTOTAL
(Base + Support Costs)
OTHER
Supplies, Furniture,
and Equipment
Business License Tax
Other Applicable Tax
CPI, COLA, Annual Cost
IN-HOUSE COST
BASE RATES
Full-Time Equivalent
Employee Hourly Wage
Estimated Actual Hours
Total Base Cost
.FCR BASED COSTS
Division FCR Factor
(W/Citywide Overhead)
SUBTOTAL
(Base x FCR Factor)
OTHER
Supplies, Furniture,
and Equipment
.
other Applicable Tax
MOU or Annual Cost
TOTAL COST
_________=-~_=____==__=__==__=________~__=______==____sc__===_c__==
'.
. For monitoring and support costs, see attached worksheet.
.:~ .8"
- -/
11~/'f
..
..
'" .
.= ~ ~
.. 0
.. ~
B - W .
J S ~l
~:;Il
Jd!-s
~ -
.. t i !
I_u_
~s="
_ ::l;
.. ... ..
.. ..
... Ie " I-
:'as:;
~
Ii
'"
..
...
..
~
i
!
..
o
~
1
t
~
~
~
a
t
~
i
1
!
1
t II
.: l
!!i
.. - .
u II- ~
- !l""
~ it
.. -
I. " ~
.. 10:
.. ..
:: ,,~
_ u
~ - .
~ ~ ..
.: '; v
o . It
~
S ~ .!
i2tii
.. - ~
" .., . ..,
UIi~2
.. ~ ..
- - II...
~I':!
" u '5 ~
~l~!H
~ 1 =
~ ~-
1_ ~ i
..
-
..
u
0:
" c . u
U
.;
..
..
..
f
Is.
.;
II
..
f
Is.
..
!l
u
..
:v
o
~ ~
~ Iii
~ Iii ::
i~'~~i
.~~.!u.ll
I u ..., -:s ..,
:: :; Ii -; Ii
.:le-.t
~.,.:!'J:
! !' '- -= ...
.. 'Z 0 f. 0
~ .. ~ I ~
_I._u_
A:~i!i
~=o:liili
~ .. !l co co co
_>- 0-0
.. _ co
:S;~l~
~"J:---
:d 1 ~! ~
.k_'5...'5
.. ~
:1:;1=1
. ... - -
.~!.8:~I~
~iiili
i~il~l
;;i-8.F..
_... II I ..
t-...-...-
!~i&l&
!
i
~
jc. u
..
~
..
:;;
o
~
!
~
..
..
I
..
...
...
.. ~
- ..
.. ...
I~
.. r
t:.-
~ ..
_ I
~ ..
.. ...
~ l
~i
t ..
~
I
..
..
~
..
..
..
i
'"
~
tl
u
~
tl
u
Ii
~
o
....
Ii
~
o
....
i
..
1
..
..
~
..
..
..
i
'"
,
1
..
.
;:
!
....
-
Ii
u
0:
..
.:
6
,.
-
..
~
..
..
1
..
..
:
..
~
~
..
;;
..
c
..
~
..
..
~
Iii
~
1
~
!
~
II
t
S
-
..
I
i
;;
t
!
!
..
o
~
1 .~3.../~ N
II-'Ir
i
t:
..
I
..
~
8
~
.!
.~
<>
l
i
..
-
'$
~
-
-
::l
.~
..
~
..
..
~
..
5
'"
l
1
~
Iii
~
1
~
S
~
II
..
..
~
!:
!
~
<>.
ii
u
Ii
~
o
....
i
..
1
..
!
....
..
~
..
..
t
~
t:
..
~
tl
u
-
'$
~
..
~
..
..
..
i
'"
l
i
..
'"
ii
u
Ii
~
o
....
i
..
1
..
!
....
~
Iii
~
'$
I
!
~
~
..
s
..
~
..
..
i
t:
..
11
0:
u
II
<>
~
8
-
-
::l
~
CONSULTANT/SERVICES COST COMPARISONS
DEPARTMENT/DIVISION
41
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.93887
GENERAL
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY CLERK
ADMIN/COtlNCIL
PAPE
INFO SYSTEMS
WORD PROCESSING
PUBLIC INFORMATION
PERSONNEL
COMM. DEVELOPMENT
ECON. DEVELOPMENT
FINANCE
PLANNING
NONDEPARTMNTAL
POLICE
ANIMAL CONTROL
FIRE PREVENTION
FIRE SUPPRESION
BLDG - PERMITS
BLDG - CODE
BLDG - COMM.
ENG-DESIGN
ENG-ADV PLAN/SEWER
ENG-LAND DEV.
ENG-CONSTR INSPECT
ENG-GIS
ENG-TRAFFIC
ENG-SIGNAL/LIGHT
PW-TRAFFIC
PW-STREETS
PW-TREES
PW-SEWER/LIFT ST
P/R ADMIN.
P /R PARKS
P/R RECREATION
LIBRARY
C , R
PARKING METERS
TRANSIT
BC'l'
150
159
210
212
213
214
215
245
260
261
400
600
720
1000
1100
1230
1240
1300
1300
1300
1420
1421
1422
1423
1425
1430
1431
.1432
1440
1450
1460
1511
1520
1522
1600
1470
2300
2350
4150
FULL COST RECOVERY
Without
Citywide Overhead
1.55399
2.44485
1.55399
1.55399
1.55399
1.55399
1. 55399
4.12258
1.55399
2.98938
4.24303
1.55399
2.55820
1.-55399
2.39830
2.16078
2.60062
1.91811
2.62380
2.25595
1. 96726
2.36991
2.40099
2.12614
2.32419
3.08192
2.49728
2.37151
2.31329
2.02686
2.41687
2.16519
1.89205
2.53840
2.45876
2.23218
2.13214
1.55399
1. 78997
1.55399
~ .3 --;.2.(:;
II "lip
FACTORS
With
Citywide Overhead
2.82973
1. 93887
1.93887
1.93887
1.93887
1. 93887
4.50746
1. 93887
3.37426
4.62791
1.93887
2.94308
1. 93887
2.92998
2.69245
3.13229
2.44978
3.00868
2.64083
2.35214
2.75479
2.78587
2.51102
2.70906
3.46679
2.88216
2.75639
2.69816
2.41174
2.80175
2.55007
2.27693
2.92328
2.84364
2.61706
2.51702
1.93887
2.17485
1.93887
Attachment C
SUBJECT:
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
20f2
Consultant or Other Services
ADOPTED BY:
I DATED:
ImDlementin~ Procedures
The City Manager will implement an administrative procedure covering the following areas:
1. Cost Comparison Evaluations
During the annual budget review process each Department's continuing and proposed use
of outside services to accomplish required work shall be evaluated based on a standard
cost comparison formula when the contract services are expected to exceed $5,000 during
the fiscal year. The resulting calculations shall be reviewed by the City Manager or
his/her designee prior to beginning the contracting process.
2. Pre-Qualification Lists
At the beginning of each fiscal year, the City Manager shall determine the need and
frequency for outside services which cannot be met by City staff. Those services which
will be required on a more regular basis shall be recommended to be filled by creating a
list of qualified providers at the beginning of the year from which to fill city wide fiscal
year needs.
3. Expanded Advertising and Outreach
Department Heads, in conjunction with Purchasing, shall access all appropriate forms of
media when advertising for consultant or other services with an anticipated cost in excess
of $10,000, in order to obtain the highest number of qualified respondents. In soliciting
bids or proposals, staff should be cognizant of locating and encouraging potential bidders
who have the potential to stimulate the local Chula Vista economy.
4. Contract Retention of 10%
Department Heads and/or Purchasing Agent shall attempt to negotiate a 10% retention
clause to be included in all consultant and other service contracts with an anticipated cost
in excess of $10,000. The 10% of the contract amount will be retained by the City until
final acceptance of the services.
5. Council Notification
The City Manager shall notify City Council when any contract recommended for
approval, regardless of cost, will result in total fiscal year payments exceeding $50,000 to
one service provider.
6. Former Employees - Consultant Compensation Limit
During the first year after termination with the City, any employee who is hired back on
a contract basis shall be compensated at a maximum level equal to the salary and benefits
level at time of termination.
!t -'/7
Attachment D
DATE: January 27, 1992
TO: John Goss, City Manager
ATTN: Dawn Herring, Budget Officer
t'I/'J-'
FROM: ~IRich RUdolf, Assistant city Attorney
SUBJECT: City Contract Preferences for Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises
Dawn Herring has requested an update on my January 31, 1989
memorandum to you relating to a preference for local business
enterprises (LBEs), which would also address the current state of
the law with regard to women business enterprises (WBEs) and
minority business enterprises (MBEs).
CONCLUSION
Our analysis of the case law leads to the conclusion that it is
possible to enact an ordinance which will provide public contract
bid preferences for MBEs, WBEs and LBEs, and pass constitutional
muster. However, the Privileges and Immunities and Equal
Protection Clause hurdles are formidable, and require a substantial
administrative record providing facts justifying the conclusion
Chula Vista has historically discriminated, and the preference
program is narrowly tailored to remedy that historic
discrimination.
DISCUSSION
The 1989 memorandum primarily concerned itself with the decision of
the Federal Ninth Circuit of Appeals in Associated General
Contractors of California. Inc. v. citv and Countv of San Francisco
(1987) 813 F.2d 922, petition dismissed, 110 S.ct. 296 (1989). In
that case, the Court upheld San Francisco's 1984 ordinance favoring
WBEs and LBEs, and invalidated the provisions favoring MBEs, and
ruled that all bidding preferences with regard to contracts in
excess of $50,000 were in violation of the San Francisco City
Charter provision requiring all such contracts to be given to the
"lowest reliable and responsible bidder".
Since my memorandum, the United States supreme Court considered a
similar minority set-aside plan in citv of Richmond v. J.A. Croson
Companv, 488 U.S. 469 (1989). Although the Supreme Court confirmed
that municipalities could employ race-conscious remedies to redress
discrimination in certain circumstances, the Court struck down the
racial set-aside plan adopted by the city of Richmond, Virginia, in
that case. Following the Ninth Circuit decision in Associated
General Contractors of California, supra, (AGCC I), and the Croson
decision from the united States Supreme court, San Francisco
amended its ordinance and Charter. The Charter change authorized
the Board of Supervisors to increase or decrease the competitive
bidding threshold, and an ordinance enacted pursuant to that
~3 -;1.3-
11;/7
John Goss
January 27, 1992
Page 2
Charter authority increased the bid threshold ordinance to
$10,000,000. Contracts below that level would be subject to the
new bid preference system adopted by a 1989 ordinance. LBEs, WBEs
and MBEs have a five percent bid preference, rather than the set-
asides mandated the 1984 ordinance. In Associated General
Contractors of California. Inc. v. Coalition for Economic Eauitv
and Citv and Countv of San Francisco (1991) F.2d , 91 Daily
....- -
Journal DAR 15128, the Federal Ninth CircuJ.t Court of Appeals
affirmed the Federal District Court's denial of a preliminary
injunction against the enforcement of San Francisco's ordinance,
concluding that the plaintiffs had not shown a substantial
likelihood of success on the merits. The plaintiffs did not
challenge the WBE and LBE portions of the 1989 ordinance.
Generally, these cases involve challenges under the Federal
Constitution relating to the Commerce Clause, the Privileges and
Immunities Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause. In White v.
Massachusetts Council of Construction Emolovers, 460 U.S. 204 103
Supreme Court 1042 (1983), the United States Supreme Court upheld
an executive order of the Mayor of Boston requiring that at least
sot of all jobs on construction projects funded in whole or in part
by City funds "be filled by bona fide City residents. The court
concluded that the administrative regulation did not run afoul of
the Federal Commerce Clause because Boston was acting as a "market
participant", rather than as a "market regulator". However, that
case did not consider application of the Federal Privileges and
Immunities Clause. The following year in United Buildina and
Construction Trades v. Mavor of Camden 465 U.S. 205, 104 S.ct. 1020
(1984), the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional in
violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, a City ordinance
establishing a good faith goal of 40% local residents for
developers and contractors where ever there was City money to be
expended.
The Privileges and Immunities Clause analysis is a two-step
inquiry. First, the court must decide whether the ordinance
burdens a privilege and immunity protected by the clause
prohibiting discrimination against out-of-state residents. The
local hire provision of the Camden ordinance was of the prohibited
type because it hindered the formation, purpose or development of
a single union of the United States. The fact that Camden was
merely setting conditions on its : expenditures for goods and
services in the market place, did not preclude the possibility that
those same conditions. (valid under the Commerce Clause) violate the
Privileges and Immunities Clause.
~ :J - .;L '1'
/I"J.t;
John Goss
January 27, 1992
Page 3
The second prong of the test is whether there was a substantial
reason for the difference in treatment resulting in discrimination
against citizens of other states. Non-residents must be shown to
constitute a peculiar source of the evil at which the ordinance was
aimed. As is the case currently in many California cities, the
City of Camden contended that its ordinance was necessary to
counteract grave economic and social ills such as spiraling
unemployment, sharp decline in population, dramatic reduction in
businesses located within the City, erosion of property values, and
depletion of the city's tax base. Although the court prefaced its
conclusion with the comment that states (including cities) should
have considerable leeway in analyzing local evils and prescribing
appropriate cures, the court remanded the case to the New Jersey
Supreme Court for further proceedings, since there was an
insufficient basis in the record to analyze whether the alleged
reasons in fact existed and whether the degree of discrimination
bore a close relationship to them.
As reported in my 1989 memorandum, in AGCC I the Ninth Circuit
found that the reasons asserted for discrimination in favor of
local business enterprises did exist and that the 5% preference for
such local businesses was reasonable. We emphasized in our 1989
memorandum that it was theoretically possible to establish an LBE
bid preference, but it might prove to be very difficult to attain
in practice.
Our emphasis is echoed in the 1991 Ninth Circuit decision involving
the 1989 San Francisco ordinance. From an Equal Protection point
of view, the court's analysis of the MBE provisions of the San
Francisco ordinance would be equally applicable to a WBE program.
First, the level of judicial review for such a program would be the
highest possible, that of "strict scrutiny". This means that any
city ordinance applying a race or sex conscious remedy without a
race-or sex-based injury, must serve a compelling state interest
and must be narrowly tailored to further that interest.
According to the majority in the. Croson case, a city has a
compelling interest in redressing both discrimination committed by
the municipality itself and discrimination committed by private
parties within the municipality's legislative jurisdiction, as long
as the municipality in some way perpetuated the discrimination to
be remedied by the program. Mere infusion of tax dollars into a
discriminatory industry, may be sufficient governmental involvement
to satisfy that prong of the test. However, mere recitation by the
city of a remedial basis for its racial or sexual classifications
was entitled to little or no weight by the courts. In the absence
of a factual record and findings by the City, allegations that
~.J..?
~/"';;"I
John Goss
January 27, 15192
Page 4
discrimination existed in the industry will be treated as
conclusory and have little probative value. similarly, the city
cannot justify its ordinance based on Congress's finding of
discrimination in a particular industry. The Croson majority
required that states and local agencies use their own fact finding
processes to establish the presence of discrimination.in their own
bailiwicks.
Looking at the San Francisco 1989 ordinance, the Ninth Circuit
found that the record disclosed that the board made detailed
findings of prior discrimination in construction and building
within the city's borders. The city held more than 10 public
hearings and obtained numerous written submissions from the public
and used those as a basis to find that city departments continued
to discriminate against MBEs and WPEs a.nd continued to operate
under the "old boy network" in awarding contracts, resulting in
disadvantage to the MBEs and WEs. The city's findings were
substantially based upon a study commissioned by the city and
prepared by BPA Economics Inc. The study indicated large
disparities between the award of city contracts to available non-
minority businesses and to MBEs. The study found that the
available MBEs received far fewer city contracts in proportion to
their numbers than their available non-minority counterparts. The
study found that disparities between the number of available Asian,
Black, and Hispanic owned locally based firms and the number of
contracts awarded to such firms was statistically significant and
supported an inference of discrimination. The city's findings were
also based on numerous individual accounts of discrimination.
The Ninth circuit found that it was unlikely the plaintiff would
prevail on the merits at trial, and accordingly denied a
preliminary injunction against enforcement of the city's ordinance.
In so concluding, the court noted that the 1989 ordinance only
applied to resident MBEs, not non-resident MBEs; and the record
indicated that San Francisco was likely to demonstrate a strong
basis in evidence supporting its decision, in contrast to the
sparse foundation for Richmond'S findings of discrimination. The
court stated the public entity didn't have to convince the court of
its liability for prior unlawful discrimination in order to justify
a race conscious remedy, but only a firm basis for concluding that
affirmative action is warranted.
..
Finally, the court concluded that the 1989 San Francisco ordinance
was "narrowly tailored". The court stated that the program was
instituted either after, or in conjunction with, race neutral means
of increasing minority business participation in public
contracting; it avoided the use of rigid numerical quotas, and it
.7.:3- ..r.r
1/ ' ).2
."
John Goss
January 27, 1992
Page 5
was limited in its effective scope to the city and county's
boundaries. The ordinance contained no goals, quotas or set-
asides, but a more modest system of bid preferences. The
preference only applied to minority groups found to have previously
received a lower percentage of specific types of contracts than
their availability to perform such work would otherwise suggest,
and were limited to companies who were economically disadvantaged,
thereby preventing the preferences being used to obtain windfalls.
Accordingly, although the Federal Constitutional limitations will
allow public contract bid preferences for HBEs, WBEs and LBEs, they
provide significant hurdles which can only be passed on the basis
of a substantial administrative record including facts justifying
the conclusion that the city has discriminated historically and
that the program is narrowly tailored to rectify that historic
discrimination.
Additionally, the city is providing some affirmative action for
some disadvantaged business enterprises where the city expends
federal or state money whose expenditure is conditioned upon
compliance with such affirmative action programs (e.g., Caltrans
OBE program for state and/or federal supported highway projects,
CDGB block grant expenditures for construction and certain housing
programs.) Although most of the provisions of the Public Contract
Code relating to the letting of contracts for public works are not
applicable to charter cities (Public Contracts Code 520160, 52061;
Pile Drivers' Local Union No. 2375 v. citv of Santa Monica (1984)
198 Cal.Rptr. 731), there are portions of the Public Contract Code
applicable to Redevelopment Agencies which authorize or require
opportunities for training and employment for lower income
residents of project areas with regard to any redevelopment project
contract in excess of $5,000 involving grading or construction
(Public Contracts Code 520688.2 and 520688.3).
C:\IJ\IooaI bMldDlc
02.3 ~ 7-
II.. 2.3
THIS PAGE BlANK
lJ.')'~
. II'A~
Attachment E
r '.
,
~. -
'; j ~ I \.;'
.J .
"
,
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
It.. 9
MeetiDg Datel 11/19/91
In:M ~In.E1
Report - Local Legal Preference Policy
C'n~lJct Waiver
City Attorney \~
and Attorney-Client
5UIlMIr.rED BY I
4/5tb. Votel Ye.___No-Z-
Referral No. 2480
BACKGROUND:
At the Redevelopment Agency meeting of October 1, 1991, the City Attorney was
directed to consider a policy for giving preference to local (i.e. San Diego
County) attorneys in recruiting out.ide legal assistance, including therein,
ways to evaluate and, if appropriate, waive Attorney-Client conflict of interest
situations that potential legal adviaor. may have between providing .ervice to
the City and providing services to private existing or pre-exi.ting, third party
clients.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: None applicable
RECOMMENDATION:
It is this office's recommendation that all such attorney-client conflicts be
evaluated on a ease by ease basis by the City Attorney because the risks of
injury to the City from biased legal advisora could vary tremendously with the
circumstances.
DISCUSSION:
The City Attorney in evaluating the retention of outaide legal assistance, for
business and other reasons, already gives due consideration to the retention of
local legal talent in providing aupplemental legal a..iatance to the City
Attorney's office and staff. The City Attorney'. office has aome concern that
the reduction of such a practice to a written policy may run into the .arne legal
obstacles as a local hiring preference policy. Aside from .uch considerationa,
however, a written policy would provide nothing further than what i. already
being accomplished by the City Attorney'a office in making deciaiona to retain
local outside legal asaistance.
In making a decision to waive an attorney'. conflict, the City Attorney takes
into consideration the nature, .cope and compen.ation between the attorney and
his or her the private .ector client and the nature and acope of aervicea and the
compensation that will be paid to the attorney by the City or Agency.
Furthermore, we give consideration to the extent and degree of in-hou.e knowledge
which can be used to aupervise,the advice of the outaide lawyer. At the aarne
time, we balance the potential for conflict with the coat efficiency attainable
by the City in the employment of auch local firma and the local economic
atimulation local hou.ing providea.
Rather than reducing auch item a to a written policy atatement, the City Attorney
will remain cognizant of all these variou. i.aues e&ch time that he make. a
ri,~ 5
recommendation to the City Council regarding the employment of an outside law
firm.
Therefore, rather than reducing such practice to a written policy statement, I
would like to provide assurances by this agenda statement, that the City
Attorney's office is remaining cognizant of the benefits that can be realized by
retaining local legal talent where available.
FISCAL IMPACTz N/A
C:\AUJ'-* ..ma.
-'I-;K
I/")jp
MEMORANDUM
June 8. 1992
FROM
The Honorable Mayor and Cil1.crncil
John D. Goss, City Manager 7f ~
.Dawn Herring, Budget Manager~
TO
VIA
SUBJECT
.Item 11 (6/9/92 Council Meeting)
Attached please find a corrected Resolution #16657 and correct copies of the
Consultant or Other Services Policy (Attachment C), pages 1 and 2.
These corrected items should replace the resolution and policy that were originally
distributed with the packets.
IIB-f
RESOLUTION NO. I Go &; .s 7
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING PROPOSED COUNCIL POLICY
ON CONSULTANT AND OTHER SERVICES
WHEREAS, at the July 23, 1991 Council meeting, Council
requested a report on the City's use of consultants and service
contracts; "and'
WHEREAS, during Council discussion, it was determined
that a Council subcommittee be established to address the issue of
consultants and service contractors more in depth; and
WHEREAS, the Council subcommittee included Councilmembers
Leonard Moore and Shirley Grasser Horton; and
WHEREAS, the subcommittee has met with staff and is
proposing the approval of revisions to the Municipal Code, the
establishment of a new council policy, and some modifications in
City procedures for determining the need for consultants,
consultant monitoring and hiring practices.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby adopt the proposed Council
Policy as set forth in Attachment C, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full.
Presented by
Approved as to
4-. At.
Dawn Herring, Budget Manager
Bruce M. Boogaar , c~ty Attorney
C:\n\cClDlUh policy
1/8, I
Attachment C
SUBJECT:
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
lor 2
Consultant or Other Services
ADOPTED BY:
I DATED:
Back~round
The City may nom time to time require the services of an outside consultant or other service
provider to provide a cost-effective supplement to existing City staff and/or obtain expertise not
available within city staff. The general philosophy is that periodic high citizen demand and
heavy workloads do not necessarily justify increasing permanent staff to meet periodic demand.
Council and City Management should use forethought, planning, and good judgement to
determine the optimum staffing level with the appropriate, cost-effective complement of outside
consultants or other service providers.
Puqx>se
The purpose of this policy is to establish a standard approach to determining the need for
consultants and other service providers and to ensure that when a need is determined that the
best service provider is selected at a reasonable cost and within a reasonable time frame. This
policy shall be followed in implementing the contracting procedures in Municipal Code sections
2.56.170 and 2.56.220 et seq.
Policy
The City Manager shall follow the policy of careful consideration and structured review prior to
initiating any contract for consulting or other services. The Council is primarily concerned with
six aspects of the consultant/service hiring, use and monitoring. First, that a cost comparison be
completed for each request to use outside services to compare the cost of the contract services to
the equivalent cost for in house staff. Second, that pre-qualification lists be established for those
services which are likely to be used frequently during any given fiscal year. Third, that the
process of advertising and outreach for consultants/service providers be expanded to generate the
highest number of qualified respondents and to locate and encourage potential bidders who have
the potential to stimulate the local Chula Vista economy. Fourth, that in all cases possible a 10%
retention be included in contracts for services which will be retained by the City until final
acceptance of the services. Fifth, that the Council receive regular notification from the City
Manager on contracts which, if approved, would place the total fiscal year's payments to that
service provider in excess of $50,000. Sixth, and finally, that former employees hired as
consultant shall be compensated for the first year upon termination of City at a maximum rate
equal to salary and benefits at time of termination.
liS, 2.
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT:
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
20f2
Consultant or Other Services
ADOPTED BY:
I DATED:
ImDlementin~ Procedures
The City Manager will implement an administrative procedure covering the following areas:
1. Cost Comparison Evaluations
During the annual budget review process each Department's continuing and proposed use
of outside services to accomplish required work shall be evaluated based on a standard
cost comparison formula when the contract services are expected to exceed $5,000 during
the fiscal year. The resulting calculations shall be reviewed by the City Manager or
his/her designee prior to beginning the contracting process.
2. Pre-Qualification Lists
At the beginning of each fiscal year, the City Manager shall determine the need and
frequency for outside services which cannot be met by City staff. Those services which
will be required on a more regular basis shall be recommended to be filled by creating a
list of qualified providers at the beginning of the year from which to fill city wide fiscal
year needs.
3. Expanded Advertising and Outreach
Department Heads, in conjunction with Purchasing, shall access all appropriate forms of
media when advertising for consultant or other services with an anticipated cost in excess
of $10,000, in order to obtain the highest number of qualified respondents. In soliciting
bids or proposals, staff should be cognizant of locating and encouraging potential bidders
who have the potential to stimulate the local Chula Vista economy.
4. Contract Retention of 10%
Department Heads and/or Purchasing Agent shall attempt to negotiate a 10% retention
clause to be included in all consultant and other service contracts with an anticipated cost
in excess of $10,000. The 10% of the contract amount will be retained by the City until
final acceptance of the services.
5. Council Notification
The City Manager shall notify City Council when any contract recommended for
approval, regardless of cost, will result in total fiscal year payments exceeding $50,000 to
one service provider.
6. Former Employees - Consultant Compensation Limit
During the first year after termination with he City, any employee who is hired back on a
contract basis shall be compensated at a maximum level equal to the salary and benefits
level at time of termination.
1\13-,3
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM I ~
MEETING DATE June 9. 1992
ITEM TITLE: Resolution \b~~~approving a contractual agreement
with LPA, Inc., for architectural services for the
south Chula vista Library to be constructed at the
corner of 4th and Orange Avenues
SUBMITTED BY: Library Director~
REVIEWED BY: city Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-l
On August 16, 1990, the city council authorized Library staff to
prepare an application for Library construction and Renovation Bond
Act (Proposition 85) funds and approved the Orange and 4th Avenue
site for the proposed library. These efforts were rewarded on
April 23, 1991, when the city of Chula vista was accorded a
$6,747,528 grant towards the construction of a 35,000 square foot
library.
During the last six months, the Library has administered an
architect selection process, carefully following the city of Chula
vista's purchasing system as outlined in the Municipal Code. Staff
has negotiated the attached proposed agreement with LPA, Inc., the
architectural firm ranked highest by the selection committee.
RECOMMENDATION: That the city council adopt the resolution
approving the contractual agreement with LPA, Inc. for
architectural services for the South Chula vista Library.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Library Board of Trustees
appointed Trustee Jose Viesca to be a member of the five person
Architect Selection Committee. The Board of Trustees has been
apprised of the selection process and informed of the Committee's
recommendation to contract with LPA, Inc. The Board has expressed
no disagreement with the Committee's recommendation.
DISCUSSION:
I. GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS
with the passage of the Library construction and Renovation Bond
Act of 1988 (Proposition 85), the city had a unique opportunity to
obtain grant money to construct one of the libraries proposed in
the Chula vista Public Librarv Master Plan. On August 16, 1990,
the Council approved a resolution authorizing Library staff to
prepare an application for Library Bond Act Funds, approving the
Orange and Fourth Avenue park site for the proposed library,
It-I
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
1'- , PAGE 2
JUNE 9. 1992
appropriating $114,500 for the architectural services necessary to
apply, and authorizing staff to negotiate a contract with Wheeler,
Wimer, Blackman and Associates for architectural services.
On January 22, 1991, council was provided a report on the progress
of the grant application and given an opportunity to review the
conceptual plans for the 35,000 square foot library. The
conceptual plans, which had also been reviewed and recommended by
the Montgomery planning Committee, the Parks and Recreation
Commission and the Library Board of Trustees included:
1. The site plan showing the placement of the building
on the lot to provide high visibility and location
vis-a-vis the SDG&E power lines. Landscaping, walkways
and passive park areas were suggested on the site plan.
2. The floor plan which was the result of the architect
outlining the spaces and relationships between areas
called for in the Building Program
3. The preliminary or conceptual elevations (drawings made
in projection on a vertical plane to show the face of a
building) .
The preliminary drawings and color rendering done by Wheeler,
wimer, Blackman and Associates were reflective of the Building
Program's directive that the general style of the library
incorporate the best elements of contemporary Mexican architecture,
but not a California interpretation of colonial Spanish
architecture.
On February 5, 1991 the City council approved a resolution
certifying the project budget; committing the city's matching funds
(35% of total eligible costs); certifying the city's ability to
finance the supplemental funds necessary to complete the project
in a timely manner; and commi tting to operate the completed
facility and provide direct public library service (ATTACHMENT A) .
II. GRANT AWARD
The California Library construction Bond Board met on April 23,
1991 and awarded the city of Chula vista $6,747,528 for the South
Chu1a vista Library project. This figure represents the 65% state
match of the total eligible costs ($10,380,812).
The contract with the California State Library (ATTACHMENT B)
accepting grant award number P85-032 was approved by the city
council on September 24, 1991.(ATTACHMENT C) The contract
specifies that the grant recipient agrees to start the project no
/-;. .2
ITEM I~ , PAGE 3
MEETING DATE: JUNE 9. 1992
later than one year from the August 30, 1992 date stated in the
application's time table. This means that unless construction
starts by August 30, 1993, the city will lose the grant.
III. ARCHITECT SELECTION PROCESS
In the city's purchasing System Ordinance of the Municipal Code,
section 2.56.220, entitled "Exception-Selection of Architectural,
engineering, environmental, land surveying and construction project
management professional services and other professional consultant
services," outlines the general procedures to be followed:
All contracts for professional consulting services
shall be negotiated on the basis of demonstrated
competence and professional qualifications for the
services required, and at fair and reasonable fees.
If the estimated cost of such services exceeds $25,000,
it shall be awarded by the City Council, after compliance
with the procedures specified therefor.
If fees are estimated to be $25,000 or more, the City
Manager shall appoint a three or five member selection
Committee.
The Selection Committee shall choose a minimum of three
interested firms for personal interviews to discuss anti-
cipated concepts and the relative utility of alternative
methods of approach for furnishing the required services.
The Selection committee shall evaluate and rank the firms
based upon criteria established in advance by the city.
A list containing the ranking information will be sent
to the responsible department head.
The responsible department head shall negotiate a contract
with the firm ranked No. 1 by the Selection committee at a
price determined to be fair and reasonable to the city.
The agreement shall define the conditions of the contract
scope, work plan and schedule, costs, fee, method of payment,
duration, insurance, and indemnification.
If the department head is unable to negotiate a satisfactory
contract with the first ranked firm, negotiations shall be
formally terminated.
The department head shall then undertake negotiations with
the second ranked firm. This process shall continue until
a satisfactory contract is negotiated.
~-3
ITEM '2., PAGE 4
MEETING DATE: JUNE 9. 1992
A design competition was briefly considered, but the time
constraints dictated by the required August 30, 1993 construction
start date meant that such a selection process was not feasible.
In fact, this deadline has been a driving force throughout the
entire process. In order to complete schematic design, design
development, construction drawings and put the project out to bid,
staff's goal has been to hire an architect by May 1992.
Therefore, after rejecting a design competition, staff decided to
issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ). using a pamphlet written
by the Architects and Engineers Conference committee of California,
Library staff then prepared a detailed plan for a qualifications
based selection process.
using examples of other RFQ's from both the city of Chula vista and
other public agencies throughout California, a Request For
Qualifications was written (ATTACHMENT D). It included a project
description, described the site at 4th and Orange Avenues, as well
as noting the construction budget and proposed schedule. There was
also an abbreviated scope of work which indicated that the selected
firm must interpret the project's existing Building Program and
preliminary schematic design and translating these into final
schematics, design development and construction drawings. The RFQ
asked that all respondents answer a set of questions:
What do you consider to be your firm's major strengths,
especially as they relate to this project?
How does your firm anticipate incorporating the bi-cultural,
bi-national theme of this library into its design?
What is your firm's approach to interior design? Will
interiors be a responsibility of your firm's personnel?
How does your firm evaluate an evolving design in terms
of cost of operations and life cycle costs?
What are your firm's CADD capabilities?
How does your firm arrive at dependable estimates of
project costs during the course of the design?
What is your firm's approach to lighting, including
daylighting, illumination and task lighting?
On what basis does your firm determine its fees?
Each firm was also asked to provide detailed information including
a statement of general qualifications; names and qualifications of
all key personnel to be used on the project, including any sub-
/2-t.J.
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
12 , PAGE 5
JUNE 9. 1992
consultants; the location of the office where the work is to be
performed; interior and exterior photographs or other illustrative
material of work deem typical of the firm; estimated time-table;
and a list of references.
Finally, it was indicated that all of the information provided by
the firms would be used as a basis for evaluation. However, the
RFQ did specifically indicate that the following points would be
of particular importance:
Completeness of the RFQ response.
Demonstrated experience in dealing with projects of
similar scope.
Past record of performance.
Qualifications of lead personnel.
Experience in dealing with municipal government agencies
in projects of similar scope.
Design philosophy and approach to solving architectural
and interior issues.
Willingness to contract on standard two party form.
Prices or fees, as permitted by section 4526 of the
California Government Code.
Before issuing the RFQ, it was reviewed by the City Attorney's
Office and the city's purchasing Agent.
The Request for Qualifications was issued in late December, 1991
and advertised in the Star-News. Knowledge of the grant award was
widespread and resulted in sixty-four firms from the San Diego
area, California and other parts of the united States requesting
copies of the RFQ. Firms having questions were asked to send them,
in writing, to the Library by January 13, 1992. All interested
firms were then invited to a workshop on January 17, 1992. Written
responses to the written questions were distributed at that meeting
(ATTACHMENT E). In addition, copies of the preliminary schematics
and grant application were distributed. The material provided at
the workshop was also sent to any firm unable to attend. The city's
Purchasing Agent was present during the workshop. The deadline for
responding to the Request For Qualifications was Friday, February
7, 1992. Thirty-four firms formally responded to the RFQ.
During the time that the RFQ was "on the street", the City Manager
appointed an Architect's Selection Committee as required by the
1.2 -5
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
/2.. , PAGE 6
JUNE 9. 1992
purchasing System ordinance. Library Director Rosemary Lane
provided the City Manager with a list of suggested names, which
included a trustee which the Library Board had selected. The City
Manager concurred with her suggestions and all of the individuals
agreed to serve on the committee.
The five members were:
George Krempl
Deputy city Manager. Extensive experience with developers,
architects, engineers,and contractors on both public and
private projects. Has been on many architect selection
committees.
Rosemary Lane
Library Director. Has served on two previous architect
selection committees. Was project manager for design and
construction of two branch libraries and for construction of
110,000 sq. ft. main library in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Jose Viesca
As a member of the Library Board of Trustees and a long-time
resident of the city, represents the general community with
particular sensitivity to the hispanic culture.
Gregg Hanson
Building Services Superintendent. Contract administrator for
city building-related projects with emphasis on cost-effective
building design and minimizing change orders. Has experience
as a construction administrator and general contractor.
Doug Childs
Architect. A licensed architect since 1982 and currently a
Principal with James Leary Architects. He has worked with the
Chula vista Planning Department as a consultant for the past
three years and served as the American Institute of
Architect's representative on the City of San Diego's
Consultant Selection Committee for the past two years.
The Committee members were provided with individual copies of each
one of the thirty-four responses. They met as a group to discuss
and agree to the evaluation sheets to be used (ATTACHMENT F) during
the initial review. After reading the responses, each member was
charged with rating the response on:
Firm's history and available resources
Evaluation of assigned personnel including sub-contractors
Related experience per design services and library buildings
/2-'
ITEM /;L , PAGE 7
MEETING DATE: JUNE 9. 1992
Budget, cost controls experience and results
Ability to relate to project requirements, i.e. following
building program and interpreting schematic design
Analysis of questions requiring response in the RFQ
Committee members reported that they spent between thirty and forty
hours, each, carefully reading, evaluating, and scoring the thirty-
four responses (ATTACHMENT G).
After scoring the 34 responses, eight firms were invited for
personal interviews. They were:
1. LPA, Inc.
2. Wheeler, Wimer, Blackman and Associates
3. George Miers and Associates
4. Rob Quigley, FAIA
5. stichler Design Group, Inc.
6. Architects Mosher/Drew/watson/Ferguson
7. Brown, Gimber, Rodriguez, Park
8. Martinez, cutrie, McArdle
Prior to the interviews, the Committee met to determine the
questions to be asked (ATTACHMENT H) and develop the Interview
Score Sheet (ATTACHMENT I). The questions focused on issues
such as experience in designing public libraries, understanding of
the existing building program, interpretation of the bi-
national/bi-cultural theme of the project, evaluation and
implementation of change orders, ability to meet scheduled
deadlines, and fees. The Score Sheet related directly to the
questions, reminding members to look at related experience, grasp
of the project, cost control mechanisms, relationship of the
architectural firm with its sub-consultants, accessibility of the
firm, and budgeting and fiscal controls.
On March 9, 1992 and March 20, 1992 the committee conducted eight
sets of personal interviews with the selected firms. Each firm
was informed, by letter, that they would have fifteen minutes for
a presentation of the firm's experience or ideas relevant to the
South Chula vista Library project as described in the RFQ. Then
approximately thirty minutes would be spent on the formal interview
questions and an additional fifteen minutes would be available for
informal discussion.
At the conclusion of the interviews, the Committee ranked the firms
in the following order (300 points maximum):
1. LPA, Inc. (261 points)
/2..'1
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
/1 , PAGE 8
JUNE 9. 1992
2. Rob Quigley (260.5 points)
3. Mosher/Drew/Watson/Ferguson (259 points)
4. Wheeler, Wimer, Blackman and Associates (250
5. George Miers and Associates (236 points)
6. Stichler Design Group (221 points)
7. Martinez, cutrie, McArdle (216 points)
8. Brown, Gimber, Rodriguez, Park (215 points)
points)
Following the interviews, LPA's references were checked by both the
Library Director and the Building superintendent. They proved to
be excellent.
As a result of the first place ranking of LPA, Inc. on both the RFQ
response and the personal interview, coupled with their
outstanding recommendations, the Committee unanimously agreed to
recommend LPA, Inc. On March 27, 1992 the Library Director sent
council an Information Item (ATTACHMENT J) indicating that she
would begin contract negotiations with the number one firm, as
specified in the city's purchasing System Ordinance.
IV. WHY LPA, INC.
Deputy city Manager George Krempl has been on many architect's
selection panels throughout his career. He recently commented that
the pool of applicants for the South Chula vista Library project
was the strongest he had ever seen. Indeed, all members of the
Committee agreed that it had been difficult choosing among so many
qualified firms. Nevertheless, the Selection Committee ultimately
decided to recommend one firm, LPA, Inc.
Clearly, the Committee was impressed by LPA's response to the RFQ
(ATTACHMENT K) and by their interview. After reviewing the results
of those two elements of the selection process, a number of factors
stood out which influenced the Committee's choice:
The Firm of LPA
LPA, Inc., with San Diego offices at 4350 La Jolla Village Dr., is
a highly respected California architectural firm. The firm was
founded in 1965, with the San Diego Office being established in
1989. The May 11, 1992 issue of the San Dieqo Business Journal
ranked LPA as the 21st largest architectural firm in the County.
The ranking was based on the number of licensed architects in the
local office (LPA has seven). Besides the San Diego location, LPA
has offices in Sacramento, Orange County, and Los Angeles. In
1990, LPA was awarded the California council of The American
Institute of Architects' "Firm Award" for excellence in design of
consistently distinguished architecture.
('?.-?
ITEM / 1.. , PAGE 9
MEETING DATE: JUNE 9. 1992
Work on the South Chula vista Library project will be done from the
San Diego office. The Principal-In-Charge of the San Diego Office
is John Mattox, while the firm's Project Manager is Sean Towne.
They were the key staff members involved with the design of the
135,600 square foot North Island Federal Credit Union office
building in EastLake. That project has just been given a Chula
vista Beautification Award. They have also previously worked with
all the sub-consultants assigned to this project.
LPA is currently active in a number of civic projects, including
the San Marcos Town Center, which includes a 15,000 square foot
public library, the Mission Viejo civic center, and the new
terminal at the Orange County John Wayne Airport. The firm
emphasizes value engineering and cost effective design solutions.
The San Diego office has never had a project completed over-budget
or behind schedule. The Committee was impressed by the fact that
the North Island Credit Union building was completed one month
ahead of schedule and substantially below its construction budget.
The Team
Probably the most influential factor in LPA I S proposal was the
quality, depth and strength of its SUb-consultant team, beginning
with the Mexican architect, Ricardo Legorreta.
As the design architect, Mr. Legorreta will insure that the bi-
national/bi-cultural theme of the new library is incorporated into
the design in a way that is free of cliches and yet reflective of
the two cultures. Internationally recognized as Mexico's foremost
architect, Legorreta combines contemporary design and color with
indigenous materials. His style is noted for the dramatic use of
walls to define exterior and interior spaces which are stuccoed in
deep colors. Legorreta is an Honorary Fellow of both the Mexican
society of Architects and the American Institute of Architects.
Since 1983 he has been a jury member for the annual Pritzker Prize
(the Nobel Prize of architecture). He is currently the design
architect for the new 200,000 square foot Main Library in San
Antonio.
Mr. Legorreta has worked with John Mattox on a number of major
projects, including the UCLA International student Center and the
Solana (Texas) Village Center. Both the San Antonio Library and
the UCLA Student Center are publicly funded civic projects similar
to the proposed Chula vista agreement in that Legorreta serves/d
as the design architect and was a subconsultant to a local
architect. Regionally, LPA and Legorreta were associated on the
design of the Tustin Ranch Market Place on 1-5 in Tustin.
Another outstanding Team sub-consultant will be San Diego interior
designer, Marshall Brown. The quality of Mr. Brown's work is very
1:2 -'1
ITEM IJ... , PAGE 10
MEETING DATE: JUNE 9. 1992
evident locally, as he was the interior designer for the Library
at 365 F street. His bold use of color, beautiful and practical
furniture designs, and interesting use of textures have withstood
the test of time. Residents and visitors alike continue to rave
about the beautiful Chula vista public Library sixteen years after
the completion of the building. After designing the interiors for
Chula Vista, Mr. Brown went on to make library design the hallmark
of his career. He has been involved with the design work on the
new Beverly Hills Library, the Tierrasanta Branch Library in San
Diego, the Coronado Library, and new ontario and Rancho Cucamonga
Libraries.
other key members of the team include Burton Associates (landscape
architects) , Tsuchiyama, Kaino and Gibson (mechanical engineering),
R.E. Wall and Associates, Inc. (electrical engineering), and Nowak-
Meulmester Associates (structural engineering).
In addition, LPA and all of its subconsultants have a large number
of Hispanic, Asian, Mexican, and women in decision making
positions (ATTACHMENT L). These individuals will play an active
role within their varied disciplines on the South Chula vista
Library project. Three of these key project managers live in Chula
vista.
Bi_national/Bi-cultural Theme
The Selection committee was impressed by the varied concepts
presented by each firm to implement the project's bi-national/bi-
cultural theme. Members specifically explored this issue during
the interviews by asking each firm to describe how their approach
to the theme would result in a unique expression of these concepts.
They also followed up with questions regarding whether key project
team members spoke spanish and how the firm would encourage
community input.
Once again it was the strength of LPA and Ricardo Legorreta which
impressed the committee. Legorreta was especially impressive when
he addressed the committee via video tape about the theme and his
desire to incorporate his style of architecture with the needs of
the community. Legorreta sent Gerardo Alonso to represent the firm
during the selection interviews in Chula vista. He responded to
many questions both in English and spanish. The team's open
approach and Legorreta' s stunning vision of vernacular architecture
was a major factor in the Committee choosing LPA, Inc.
References
References were checked for both LPA, Inc. and Ricardo Legorreta
and were found to be outstanding. Mr. Paul Malone, the Assistant
city Manager of the city of San Marcos said that LPA was
"energetic, easy to work with, and that their work was right on
schedule." He also commented; "(their) large office can produce
!;2.-/()
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
Il. , PAGE 11
JUNE 9. 1992
finished jobs on an accelerated schedule." Mr. Mike stroud,
President of Pacific Link Development Services and developer of the
sanyo Office Building in the otay Mesa Business Park indicated that
"LPA always came up with solutions rather than problems. There
were no change orders in the $4,000,000 Sanyo project and it came
in $500,000 under budget and 45 calendar days ahead of schedule."
craig zapatos, proj ect manager of the new San Antonio central
Library was very impressed with Ricardo Legorreta as the design
architect. He commented; "that Legorreta arrives at unique,
creative solutions to problems and that the Library found him to
be available and responsive."
The references supported the Selection committee's belief that LPA
and Legorreta would bring the project in on time, on budget and
that their work would result in a distinct design reflecting the
conceptual theme and the needs of the Library and its community.
V. The Agreement
The proposed agreement (ATTACHMENT M) with LPA, Inc. uses the
ci ty' s standard two-party agreement. The Library hired Kipland
Howard of Allegis Development services for $2,500 to assist with
the development of a complete scope of work and final contract
negotiations. Howard, President and founder of Allegis Development
Services, Inc. since its inception in June of 1989, leads his firm
in the coordination and supervision of every stage of project
development, from architectural design to construction and tenant
improvements. A licensed architect and B-1 general contractor,
Howard functions as the property owner's representative throughout
the design development, construction and completion phases of a
project providing assurance that the owner's goals and objectives
will be met in all aspects of the project's development.
In addition, the Library incorporated all the relevant portions of
the "Procedures for Compliance with Title 24 for the Public Library
construction Bond Act." A careful analysis of previous
architectural agreements was also done and relevant portions were
reviewed by the city's Building superintendent, the Risk Manager
and Parks and Recreation's Landscape Architect. Finally, the
Library has worked closely with the city Attorney's Office to
formulate the proposed agreement.
Under the proposed agreement, LPA, Inc. will be obligated to meet
all of the requirements of the State grant. They have agreed to
a "fast-track" schedule which would insure that the schematic
design is finished within four and a half months of the agreement's
execution, that design development is finished within one month of
the Office of the State Architect and State Library's approval of
12-11
ITEM I~, PAGE 12
MEETING DATE: JUNE 9. 1992
schematics, and that the working drawings are completed within
three months of the Office of the state Architect and state
Library's approval of design development. Adding on both the
city's and state's required review periods, this schedule will
allow us to meet the mandatory construction deadline of August 30,
1993.
LPA and their subconsultants shall perform the design and
preparation of drawings, specifications and addenda and other
required documents necessary for the construction of the 35,000
square foot library. This includes:
site Work
Interior Space Planning
Interior Design and Finish Selection
specification
Landscaping
Selection of Art Work
Selection and Specification of Interior Plants
LPA also agrees to perform the Scope of Work as outlined in Exhibit
A, pages 8-16. This section details what is required of the firm
and its subconsultants during the Schematic Design, Design
Development, Construction Document, Bidding or Negotiations, and
Construction phases of the proj ecL This section is extremely
precise in order to insure that all of the city and State Library
requirements are included in the base fee.
FISCAL IMPACT: The California State Library's grant award of
$6,747,528 represents the State's 65% funding of the total eligible
costs of $10,380,813. Total eligible costs for architectural,
engineering and interior designer fees is $627,348. Of that
figure, the State will reimburse 65% or $407,776. The remaining
$219,572 is the city's 35% match and comes from several funding
sources in the CIP.
The agreement calls for LPA, Inc. to be paid $627,348, on a phased
fixed fee arrangement, for the scope of work outlined in the two-
party agreement. This is the dollar amount eligible for
reimbursement under the Contract with the State Library for the
grant. Per the contract with the State Library, the city will be
reimbursed within sixty days of invoice. The necessary funds have
been allocated in the City'S Capital Improvement's Project.
Although the agreement provides that LPA and its subconsultants
shall provide the General provisions and detailed Scope of Work as
outlined in Exhibit A of the agreement for the base fee, there will
be additional reimbursable costs. These reimbursable costs for
copies, travel, postage, deliveries, long distance phone charges
12-12.
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
/2-
,
JUNE
PAGE 13
9. 1992
are capped at 15% of the consultant's fee for basic services or a
maximum total of $94,102. However, the Library intends to keep the
reimbursable costs well below the maximum cap by taking some
creative approaches. For example, the cost of producing the
necessary copies of the construction drawings might reach as high
as $30,000. Instead of having the architect produce those
documents, this requirement will become part of the agreement with
the future general contractor. As such, it will be an eligible
reimbursement from the state Grant. The funds for the grant
reimbursable costs associated with this agreement are allocated in
the eIP, as are other grant-ineligible costs.
/ ,2-/ 3
RESOLUTION NO. 14>l.>S~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT
WITH LPA, INC., FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR
THE SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY TO BE
CONSTRUCTED AT THE CORNER OF 4TH AND ORANGE
AVENUES
WHEREAS, on August 16, 1990, the city council authorized
Library staff to prepare an application for Library construction
and Renovation Bond Act funds and approved the Orange and 4th
Avenue site for the proposed Library; and
WHEREAS, on April 23, 1991, the city of Chula vista was
accorded a $6,747,528 grant towards the construction of a 35,000
square foot library; and
WHEREAS, the Library has administered an architect
selection process, carefully following the City of Chula Vista's
purChasing System as set forth in the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, staff has negotiated an agreement with LPA,
Inc., the architectural firm ranked highest by the selection
committee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement between
the city of Chula vista and LPA, Inc., for architectural and design
services for the South Chula Vista Library to be constructed at the
corner of 4th and Orange Avenues, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the city Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
agreement for and on behalf of the city of Chula vista.
Rosemary Lane, Library Director
as
Presented by
~
C:\rs\LPA
Il-I'f
BA YFRONT CONSERVANCY TRUST
1000 Gunpowder Point Drive
Chula Vista, California 91910-1201
(619) 422-8100
~
~\\,(
\<:::"'. ' ". ",'
~
SrEP~N NEUDECKER. PH. D.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
June 9, 992
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
The purpose of this letter is to provide a reference for Anthony G. Cutri of the
architectural firm of Martinez Cutri and McArdle. Tony Cutri was one of two
architects who designed the Chula Vista Nature Interpretive Center. During the
construction of the Nature Center, Tony was most receptive to the needs and
concerns of the people who were going to use the building. He responded to our
suggestions and made changes and adjustments as needed.
Since the Nature Center was completed in 1987, Tony Cutri has assisted us on
several occasions with advice and has provided design plans for two expansion
projects on a pro bono basis. Tony has clearly shown his commitment to this
facility and its success. Consequently, I can recommend without hesitation his
architectural firm for any project you might envision.
Sincerely,
\~~
Dr. Stephen Neudecker
-----
/,;) -/~S
.....,.L
- Ii
......
"
I /
/(7"',
June 4, 1992
SUBJECT:
Mayor Tim Nader
John D. Goss, City Manager~
Jim Thomson, Deputy City Aanager JI
Rosemary Lane, Library Director~
Architect Selection Process for South Chula Vista Library
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
This memo is in response to your request for information regarding the
feasibility of modifying the architect selection process for the South Chula
Vista Library. As we understand it, you are interested in establishing a Council
subcommittee to review the proposals of the eight finalists and to select a
smaller group that would make presentations to the entire Council. The Council
would then select an architect and direct staff to negotiate a contract for final
Council approval.
The main concern staff has with this approach is its potential effect on the
project's schedule and on the City's ability to meet the deadline for the State
grant. The City's contract with the State requ i res the City to award the
construction contract by August 3D, 1993. Since failure to do so would
jeopardize the $6.7 million State grant, this is an extremely important deadline.
Staff has reexamined the schedule of tasks that need to be completed prior to
August 3D, 1993, and that analysis is summarized below. Since there are 63~
weeks (14% months) between June g, 1992 and August 3D, 1993, staff considers this
current schedule to already be tight since it doesn't include much contingency
time. Unforeseen problems or controversies could require extraordinary efforts
to maintain the schedule.
The major components of the currently planned schedule, after award of the
architect contract (which will be on the June 9 Council agenda), are as follows:
WEEKS
18
3-6
4
3
12
6-8
8-11
54-62
TASKS
Schematic Design Phase
State Review of Schematic Design Documents
Design Development Phase
State Review of Design Development Documents
Working Drawing Phase
State and City Review of Working Drawings
Construction Advertising, Bidding and Award of Contract
If the Council, at its June 9 meeting, decides to modify the selection process
as outlined above to provide more direct Council involvement, the following
additional steps would need to be completed: Council subcommittee reviews
proposals of the eight finalists and meets to select top group; selected firms
notified and scheduled to make presentations at a Council meeting when the full
Council has the opportunity to review their proposals; staff negotiates contract
with firm selected by Council; and contract docketed and approved at Council
meeting.
Il -//'l
-<- '-"'"
Since a full Council is not anticipated at the June 16 or 23 meetings, the
earliest regular Council meeting at which the selected firms could make their
presentations would probably be the June 30 meeting. This assumes the Council
subcommittee is appointed on June 9 and is able to review the proposals of the
eight finalists and meet to select the top group by June 25.
If the Council hears the presentations and selects its top firm at the June 30
meeting, it would then direct staff to negotiate a contract with that firm.
Since no Council meetings are scheduled for July 7 or 14, the earliest such a
contract could be brought back for approval would be on the July 21 Council
agenda. This assumes that Council would be able to reach a decision at the June
30 meeting and that staff could successfully complete contract negotiations with
the firm by July 16. The latter might be difficult.
It thus appears that at least an additional 6 weeks (June g to July 21) would be
required to complete the above steps. If Council wanted the presentations by the
top group to include conceptual plans, the architectural firms would need to be
given additional time to prepare for their presentations, which would further
extend the time.
Adding 6 weeks to the 54-62 week range shown on the previous page results in a
potential range of 60-68 weeks. Since there are 63~ weeks until the State's
deadline, this potential 6-week delay could well be significant in terms of the
City's ability to meet the State deadline. As indicated previously, staff
considers the current schedule tight so reducing the available time by 9% (or
more) would be risky, especially considering the financial implications of
missing the State's deadline.
As additional background information, the general policy issue of whether to
increase the leve 1 of Counc i lovers ight and/or part ic ipat ion on consu ltant
selection committees was referred to the Council's subcommittee on consultants
at the April 7, 1992 Council meeting. The subcommittee subsequently discussed
this issue and decided not to recommend increasing the level of Council oversight
or participation on consultant selection committees. The follow-up report on
this and other policy issues related to consultants will be on the agenda for the
June 9 Council meeting.
Regardless of what action the Council takes on the above general policy issue,
the Council could of course make exceptions for specific projects. In terms of
precedent, there was a design competition for the Nature Interpretive Center
architect. As will be addressed further in the agenda statement (for the June
9 Council meeting) recommending an architect contract for the South Chula Vista
Library, staff considered holding such a design competition for this project but
did not bel ieve there was adequate time, given the State deadl ine discussed
previously.
Other projects that could be considered precedents in terms of Council
involvement include Council's reviewing development alternatives at the former
Windmill Farms site, on the vacant parcel at the Municipal Golf Course, and the
Pa lomar Tro lley project. These projects, however, involved broader po 1 icy issues
(e.g. land use and financing) than the selection of an architect.
cc: City Council
/-J - J 7
\\Jl~ J~
ATTACHMENT A
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM J 5
MEETING DATE 2/5/91
ITEM TITLE: Resolution i (~(J)O certifying the project budget in
the application for funds available from the
California Library Construction and Renovation Bond
Act for the construction of a new library at Orange
and Fourth Avenues; committing the city's matching
funds; certifying the city's ability to finance the
supplemental funds necessary to complete the project
in a timely manner; certifying the local matching
and supplemental funds will be available when needed
to meet the project's cash flow requirements;
certifying the accuracy and truthfulness of all
information contained in the application form;
committing to operate the completed facility and
provide direct public library service
SUBMITTED BY: Library Director~
~
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council adopt the resolution.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Montgomery Planning Committee, on January 2, 1991, recommended
conceptual plans for a 35,000 sq. ft. library as presented by the
architectural firm Wheeler, Wimer, Blackman and Associates.
(Attachment A) .
The Library Board of Trustees and the Parks and Recreation
Commission, through separate action in a joint session on January
9, 1991, recommended the conceptual plans (Attachment B).
BACKGROUND:
The California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
(Proposition 85) provides seventy-five million dollars
($75,000,000) to local jurisdictions to assist in public library
construction. The Bond Act provides that these funds be awarded
on a 65% State and 35% local matching basis. Since the initial
filing of the "Notice of Intent to Apply" on January 25, 1990 for
funds available from the Library Bond Act and the Pre-Application
on November 21, 1990, the Library has prepared the Application
(Attachment C).
In addition to the Montgomery Planning Committee, the Library Board
of Trustees and the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Design
} 2 ~/ i
PAGE ~, ITEM
MEETING DATE 2/5/91
Review committee discussed the conceptual plans on January 10,
1991. Comments were favorable without serious criticism of the
ideas. On January 22, 1991 the Council received a report on the
progress in applying for the grant and the opportunity to review
the conceptual plans for the Library. The report was accepted on
the consent calendar.
Discussion:
The California Library Construction and Renovation Board, a five
member board, consisting of the state Librarian, Senator Barry
Keene, Assemblyman steve Klute, the State Treasurer and the
Director of Finance, met on January 22, 1991 to review and discuss
the results of the preliminary applications. Of the 104 pre-
applications fil~d by November 21, 1990, Chula vista ranked 15th.
The Board also took action on the amount of Bond Act funds to be
allocated at each of the two funding cycles (February 15, 1991 &
July 19, 1991). The Board decided to appropriate 50% of the funds
in the first cycle and 50% in the second cycle combined with any
unexpended portion from the first cycle.
The Chula vista Library has determined by attending two Technical
Assistance Workshops for Public Library Construction Bond Act Funds
(January 7 and January 14, 1991) that fewer agencies will be
prepared to file in the first cycle (February) than in the second
cycle (July). Chuck Cole, of Advocation Inc., attended the January
22, 1991 Bond Board meeting on behalf of Chula vista and confirmed
that Chula Vista's chances_of being funded are better in the first
cycle.
"
The Library is therefore requesting Council take the necessary
actions as required by the Library Bond Act Regulations to enable
the City to file for Bond Act Funds in the first funding cycle by
the deadline of February 15, 1991. Since the Application has over
twenty supporting documents, these documents will be on file in the
City Clerk's Office for review.
The Bond Act requires a resolution certifying the project budget,
the local funding commitment, supplemental funds and the
application. The Bond regulations state, "the resolution shall be
supported by official action taken at an open meeting of the
governing body of the applicant and duly recorded in the minutes
of that meeting. The resolution shall be signed by the duly
elected head of the jurisdiction and notarized or validated by the
affixing of the official seal of the clerk of the jurisdiction.
The resolution shall be submitted with the application prior to the
State Librarian's deadline of application. An application
/~ - / c;
PAGE -L, ITEM
MEETING DATE 2/5/91
submitted without the resolution shall be deemed ineligible by the
State Librarian."
The City Council shall certify by resolution the following:
the project budget,
the commitment of local matching funds,
The city's ability to finance the supplemental funds
necessary to complete the project in a timely manner,
that local matching and
available when needed to
requirements
supplemental funds will be
meet the project I s cash flow
the '~ccuracy and truthfulness of all information
contained in the application form,
a commitment to operate the completed library and provide
direct public library service.
The total project budget is $12,180,254.
Total Eligible Costs
state Match (65%)
Local Match (35%)
$10,539,254
6,850,515
3,688,739
City monies currently opligated that are eligible for the
project:
Land Acquisition
Architectural Fees
Geo-technical Report
$1,865,000
114,500
2.965
$1,982,465
Remainder of local match
$1,706,274
A combination of the City's Development Impact Fees share in the
project plus DIF credits can cover the $1,706,274 capital needed
to complete the local match for the grant.
/;2,J{)
PAGE ~, ITEM
MEETING DATE 2/5/91
The ineligible costs include:
Relocation costs of church
street widening, etc.
Equipment
Books
Total
$420,000
200,000
521,000
500.000
$1,641,000
The relocation of the Missionary Church for $420,000 will be paid
through Community Development Block Grant funds. The street
widening, relocation of utilities, sidewalks and gutter
improvements, library equipment and a starter collection of books
can also be paid from the City's share of Development Impact Fees
and DIF credits.
The annual operating budget will largely depend on the number of
hours the new library is open and ranges from $1,498,000 for seven
days a week to $950,000 for five days a week. This includes staff,
operating expenses and books in 1991 dollars. The Library will
open in the spring of 1994, so it is difficult to estimate
operating costs precisely now.
since there was no Board and Commission consensus for a name for
the park and library complex in time for the Pre-Application due
November 21, 1990, the Library used the name "South Chula Vista
Library." On January 7, 1991 the State Library requested applying
agencies not to change the name of the proposed library during the
grant process. Council may name the park and library at a later
date if they so desire.
FISCAL IMPACT
If the California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act
grant is awarded, the City will receive $6,850,515 from the State
for a match of $3,688,739. Of the local match, $1,865,000 is
already committed by Community Development for land acquisition for
a future park and library site. Funds for architectural fees and
reports necessary for the Application amount to $117,465 in City
monies already allocated. The remaining $1,706,274 of the local
match can be funded by Development Impact Fees and credits. The
ineligible costs can be covered by Community Development Block
Grant monies and DIF monies and credits. The future operating
costs at 1991 dollars range from $1,500,000 to $950,000 depending
on the hours the library will be open to the public when it is
completed in 1994.
);2 / d J
ATTACHMENT B
December 17, 1991
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
LIBRARY-COURTS BUILDING. P,O. BOX 942837 . SACRAMENTO, CA 94237.0001
The Honorable Leonard M. Moore
Mayor Pro Tempore of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
SUBJECT:
Approved Grant Contract - California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act (CLCRBA) Funds
project Number:
Project Name:
P8S-032
South Chula vista Li~rary
Dear Mayor Moore:
Enclosed is your fully executed grant award contract for the
construction of a new public library in the City of Chula vista.
Also enclosed are the procedures for compliance with the state
Building Code (Title 24) regulations under the CLCRBA. Your
Assistant Library Director and Project Coordinator, Mr. David Palmer,
will need to contact Mr. Richard Hall, Bond Act Program Manager, at
916-323-5941 ~efore submittal of any schematic plans, preliminary
plans or working drawings.
There are stringent time frames under the state Building Code for
review of plans and drawings and Mr. Hall will need to discuss
assist your staff in the scheduling the submittal of plans.
the
and
.
Congratulations on your grant award. I look forward to seeing the
people from the City of Chula vista benefit from your new library
facility.
If I may be of assistance in helping with your project, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
sincerely,
G~~. ~t~~
california State Librarian
attach.
cc: Rosemary Lane, Library Director
David M. Price, Assistant State Librarian
Frederick Walgenbach, Administrative Officer
Richard B. Hall, Bond Act Manager
Michael L. Ferguson, Bond Act Fiscal Officer
/)/1~
IlUE 0< CA:.FOl'lNIA
S'r/ '~DARD AGREEMENT- :~~~~~:~~:AL
Ii..'."" .''\I.~'''''')
ClC:IImW: 1 ..... BE~
P8S-032
""NO
CX)t.,~c':"~ J;"EDt:iU.;. to ~Brl:;
1st July 91
nus AOREE.ME:'l, made ""d entorul into this elay 01 ,19_ .
in Ille Sw< of California, by and between SUIt< of Califomi..1hrou&h ils cluly .Iecled ar appoint.od, qualified ond actinE
1'FTl.I ~ QfFCER ACTwG FP!t STATE
state Llbrarian
...."""
CA State Library
. bc:teahcr caIledlbe SUIt<, and
Oc::W'I"RACTOR S NAME
CITY OF CEOLA VISTA
,bc:teahcr caIledlbe c:.mtraclor.
Wl1NESSE'l1i: 1l\&llbe c:.mtrOCIOl far and in consideration oflbe DOYen""", eonditiarts, agreements, and stipulations of Ille SUIte honinafter expressed,
does hereby lET"" 10 furnish to Ibe SlIle servit<:s ond malerial. IS follow>: (Se1 forth service /0 be nNlertd by CoTllractor, """'1UIl/O /It poid COTllraclor,
lime for perfo"""n,,, or complt/ion. tmd Gnach pi"", Gnd IptciflCGtioru, if any.)
PER ATTACHED GRANT AWARD
CONTlNUED ON SHEETS, EACH BEARING NAME OF CONTRACTOR AND CONTRACT NUMBER.
'-:The provisions on the rever.. side hereof constitute I pan 01 this IET""menL
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, lhis "E",ement has been executed by Ibe porties hereto, upon Ibe elate rll'Sllbove ...nllen.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CONTRACTOR
PRII<I.'1'EONA.
Gary E.
lTTl.E
state Librarian
t:Of'I,'TRAClOR (H oIfwIltlar. an itttJMd_.tw....".,. aarpcwal.o'l,~, ...)
city of Chula Vista
IY(AIJT
t>
PRlh.'TEO ~E ANO mu OF PERSON S G
Tim Naderr Mayor
ADORE
Chula vista, CA 91910
AGE~:Y
California state Library
AMQl../Ni ENCUMBERED BY TIolIS
DOCUME"''i
!6,747,S28.00
PRIOR A~OUN'T ENCUMBERED FOR
tHIS CONTiU.CT
$..0-
'TOTA1.MlOIJNT ENCl.JIMBEREO TO
Dan
$>,747,528.00
PROGRAMfCATEGORY (CODE AN:> Tm..E) fUND mu:
A Library Construction C A
(OPTONAl. USE)
nd Renovation Bond Act of 1988
o."artm,nr of G,n,,,t Slrvices
Ch, Only
fTElIl FISCAoL YEAR
120-621-794001 91/92
OBJECT Of EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TmE)
000-701-93999
APPROV
DEe - 5 \99\
, hereby ce:tify upon my own persona! knowledge I!IlII burJpeted flJnds
we available for /he period and rpose of lhe .xpefldillJTe ,rared above.
aGNATURE OF ACCOUNTNG~,
T.8.A.NO.
IY~
0lIl eeu-l
o cormu.CTOIl
o STan aGENCY
o DEPT. OF GEN. 8ER.
o COtmlOCLE~
.
o J)/ J.
Ill....'
('<,l...! S' I
-----~----_.
CALXFORNXA STATE LXBRARY
California Library construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD NO: P8S-032
1
2
AGREEMENT FOR LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION GRANT
3
4 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this Firet day of
5 July, 1991, at Sacramento county, California, by and between the
6 CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY, hereafter called the STATE, and the CITY
7 OF CHOLA VISTA, hereafter called the GRANT RECIPIENT.
8 DEFINITIONS
9 As used in this agreement, unless the context otherwise indicates
10 or unless specific exception is made:
11
"ACT" means the California Library Construction and
12 Renovation Bond Act of 1988, Education Code section 19950 et sea.,
13 and any regulations which implement the ACT.
14 "BOARD" means the California Library Construction and
15 Renovation Board as defined in the ACT.
16 "COMMITTEE" means the California Library Construction and
17 Renovation Finance Committee as defined in the ACT.
18
"ELIGIBLE PROJECT COSTS" are costs authorized in
19
Education Code Sections 19957, 19962 (d) and 19963.
The terms
20 "eligible project costs" and "eligible project expenditures" are
21 used synonymously.
1
/ ;2 -.2 1/
-- ..~-- ~--_._---
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
Calirornia Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD BO: P85-032
1 "FUND" means the California Library Construction and
2 Renovation Fund.
3 "GRANT RECIPIENT" means the legal recipient of California
4 Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act funds.
5 "OSA" means the Office of the State Architect, a Division
6 of the Department of General Services, State of California.
7 "PROJECT" means a new construction or remodeling project
8 for purposes authorized under Education Code section 19957 and as
9 designated in the GRANT RECIPIENT'S application.
10 "INITIATOR" means a description of a proposed change
11 order together with a request for a cost estimate for the ehange
12 order, prepared for transmission to the contractor by the project
13 architect or similar official representing the GRANT RECIPIENT.
14 An INITIATOR is sometimes referred to as a "bulletin".
15 "STATE" means the California State Library.
16 "STATE LIBRARIAN" means the duly appointed Director of
17 the California State Library, or his designee, who administers the
18 California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 1988,
19 and adopts rules, regulations and policies for implementation of
20 the ACT.
21
2
/)
'/
/ ;1. _i)
CALXPORHXA STATE LXBRARY
California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD .0: P85-032
1
WITNESSETH:
2
3
NOW, TREREPORE, it is mutually understood and agreed that
4 this agreement is entered into between STATE and the GRANT
5 RECXPIENT and the STATE agrees to make a grant under provisions of
6 the ACT to the GRANT RECXPIENT.
7 The final PROJECT budget as submitted with the GRANT
8 RECIPXENT'S application, and as approved by the BOARD and the GRANT
9 RECXPIENT I S governing body I s resolution, represents the STATE'S 65%
10 funding for six Million Seven Hundred Forty Seven Thousand Five
11 Hundred and Twenty Eight dollars ($6,747,528) and the' GRANT
12 RECIPIENT'S 35% local match for Three Million Six Hundred Thirty
13 Three Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Five dollars ($3,633,285) and
14 local supplemental funds for One Million Two Hundred Three Thousand
15
Two Hundred and Seventeen dollars ($1,203,217).
This grant is
16 being made under the following terms and conditions:
17
A.
That said grant shall be used solely by GRANT RECIPIENT
18 for the purposes of the PROJECT.
19
B.
The application for the PROJECT is attached (Exhibit A)
20 hereto and incorporated herein.
3
/2rJ-0
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
California Library Construction
and aenovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD 1l0: P85-032
1
C.
GRANT RECIPIENT agrees to start the PROJECT herein
~
~
~~~=~ibed no later than one year from the date of construction as
3
stated in the PROJECT timetable of the application.
4
D.
That GRANT RECIPIENT shall ensure through architectural
5 and engineering supervision, plan checking and inspection of
6 construction work, that the PROJECT is constructed in accordance
7 ~ith all applicable current state and local statutes, codes and
tl orcanances.
9
E.
That all funds made available for this PROJECT shall be
10 in compliance with the ACT, and regulations under Title 5, Division
...... ;., C;.c>!Jter 1, Sections 20410 et. sea. of the Edu<:..atiul1 ClJde and
12 Title 24, Part 1, sections 16-101 et. sea. of the State Building
13 Code.
14
F.
That any new or existing library book stacks constructed,
15 installed or re-installed as part of this PROJECT, or within one
16 year in the same facility of which the PROJECT is a part, following
17 completion of this PROJECT, shall be done in accordance with plans
18 for which seismic calculations that meet the seismic force
19 requirements of Section 11.7. of Table No. 2-23P, of the State
4
))/17
_.._...~-_._.. -~-------- ----
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1188
GRANT AWARD .0: P85-032
1 Building Code (Part 2, Title 24, California Code of Regulations)
2 and certified by a structural engineer licensed by the State of
3 California.
4
G.
That all library services provided as a result of the
5 funds made available for this PROJECT shall be available free of
6 charge and without discrimination to all members of the community,
7 district or region served by GRANT RECIPIENT, and that said
8 building and any land acquired with bond act funds will be devoted
9 exclusively to public library purposes for 20 years, or the useful
10 life of the building, whichever is longer.
11
E.
That all construction contracts shall be awarded on the
12 basis of open competitive bidding, in conformance with the Local
13 Agency Public Contracts Act, Public Contract Code Sections 20100
14 et. sea..
15
I.
That prevailing wage rates are complied with pursuant to
16 Labor Code Section 1770 et. sea.. Copies of the prevailing rates
17 may be obtained from the California Department of Industrial
18 Relations. Copies of the prevailing rates are also on file with
19 the California State Library, Bond Act Fiscal Officer, and will be
20 made available to any interested party on request..
5
/
ItA-:;?:
,
-
....--.-.. .- ------._-_.-..~--
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
California Library Conatruction
and ReDovatioD BODd Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD MO: P85-D32
1
J.
That the PROJECT is to be designed to comply with
2 provisions of the Uniform Building Code (Part 2, Chapter 33,
3 Section 3301 (3) and all relevant parts of the State Building Code
4 (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Requlations) for facilities
5
accessible to, and usable by, the physically handicapped.
All
6 library facilities shall display in a prominent place the
7 international symbol of access to the handicapped.
8
It.
That during construction the PROJECT shall display a job
9 sign predominantly stating the words "Constructed with funds
10 provided by the California State Library under authority of the
11 California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 1988".
12 The sign shall be placed in a prominent location viewed by the
13 public.
14
L.
That after completion of the PROJECT a permanent plaque
15 shall be displayed predominantly stating the words "Constructed
16 with funds provided by the California State Library under authority
17 of the California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of
18 1988". The plaque in the completed building will indicate the date
19 of completion of the PROJECT and shall be placed in a prominent
20 location viewed by the public.
21
6
/1~J-1
-------------.---.-.--- .-------- .....--------
-"-----_._~-------..-._~--
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
Calirornia Li~rary Con.truction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD NO: P85-032
1
PROJECT CRANGES
2
A.
Any change in the scope of the PROJBCT made by the GRANT
3 RECIPIENT subsequent to the approval of the PROJECT by the BOARD,
4 shall be submitted, with supporting documentation, to the STATE
5 LIBRARIAN to determine if it significantly changes the PROJBCT
6 information provided during the application process. The STATE
7 LIBRARIAN shall have the sole authority to determine if a change
8 is significant, thus requiring the STATE LIBRARIAN'. approval. If
9 the change is not approved by the STATB LIBRARIAN, the GRANT
10 RECIPIENT may appeal the STATE LIBRARIAN'. decision to the BOARD.
11 The decision of the BOARD regarding a change in the PROJECT is
12 final and binding.
13
B.
Following local award of the construction contract for
14 the PROJECT, the GRANT RECIPIENT shall submit to the STATE
15 LIBRARIAN a copy of each INITIATOR, regardless of its nature, no
16 later than the same time it is forwarded to the contractor.
17 The STATE LIBRARIAN shall, within three working days of
18 receipt of the INITIATOR, review all INITIATORS that is issued as
19 change orders would:
20
1.
Affect library operations, including but not
21 limited to work that affects the location or number of any
7 ) Jr ') ()
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
Ca1irornia Library Construction
and aenovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD NO: P85-032
1 bookstacks, storage shelving, doorways or direction of swing of
2 doors, paths of travel and circulation, access to any library
3
equipment, materials and services, or use of spaces.
Any such
4 initiators shall be accompanied by a statement by the local library
5 director describing how the change will be accommodated in the
6 operational program following completion of the construction; or,
7
2.
Change the scope of the PROJBCT, including the
8 PROJECT budget if the change would reduce the local contribution
9 to the PROJECT.
10
c.
Upon receipt of any INITIATOR requiring review in
11 accordance with the preceding subsection, the STATE LIBRARIAN
12 shall:
13
1.
Approve the change order; or,
14
2.
Return the INITIATOR for resubmission, for a
15 specified reason, in which case the resubmission will be reviewed
16 within three days of its receipt; or
17
3.
Notify the submitter than an additional period
18 not to exceed five days will be required to gather specified
19 additional information. No further additional time shall be taken
20 for this reason.
8 )l~3)
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD .0: P85-032
1
D.
If the STATB LIBRARIAN does not act in accordance with
2 the preceding subsection, the change order may be issued as
3 submitted.
4
B.
All other change orders may be issued without the STATE
5 LIBRARIAN's approval.
6
F.
Any changes to the project budget shall be approved by
7 the state Librarian, or designee, through a Budget Change Request
8 (Exhibit B).
9
1.
The amount of funding to be provided by the STATE
10 to the GRANT RECIPIENT shall not be increased. Any actual changes
11 which increase PROJECT costs shall be the full responsibility of
12 the GRANT RECIPIENT.
13
14
PAYMENTS
15
A.
Said Grant shall be payable on a reimbursement basis:
16
1.
Prior to payment for land and/or building credits,
17 The GRANT RECIPIENT provides evidence that the State's interest in
18 the building, and the land, if the land is owned by the GRANT
19 RECIPIENT, has been recorded in the title record; and if,
20
(a) The purchase price of the land is part of the
.
21 eligible cost of the PROJECT, the GRANT RECIPIBNT shall provide
9 ),'1 01
J~ )~
--.-.----..
CALIPORNIA STATE LIBRARY
California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD 50: P85-032
1 documentation acceptable to the STATE LIBRARIAN demonstrating proof
2 or the purchase price paid for the land. The GRANT RECIPIENT will
3 then provide a final title report subsequent to the title transfer
4 that demonstrates the GRANT RECIPIENT holds marketable record to
5 the land which is acceptable to the STATE LIBRARIAN; and,
6
(b) The title record for land shall specify the
7 STATE'S interest by recording that the land shall be used to
8 provide direct public library service for twenty years following
9 the completion date of the PROJECT or the useful life of the
10 library building in place upon it, whichever is longer, as
11 specified in Education Code Section 19967; or
12
(c) Since STATE grant funds will be provided by
13 the BOARD for the construction of a library facility, the GRANT
14 RECIPIENT shall record in the title record the STATE'S interest in
15 the building upon completion of the PROJECT; and,
16
(d) The title record for the building shall specify
17 the STATE'S interest by recording that the library facility shall
18 be used to provide direct public library service for twenty years
19
10
)) -})
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD .0: P85-032
1 following the completion date of the project or the useful life of
2 the building, whichever is longer, as specified in Education Code
3 section 19967.
4
2.
Prior to payment for furnishings credit, the GRANT
5 RECIPIENT shall certify that all furniture purchases will have an
6 estimated useful life of not less than 10 years.
7
B.
Payments shall be made no more frequently than on a
8 monthly basis. Payment requests shall state that the reimbursement
9 request is being made only for eligible project costs. Payment
10 requests shall be submitted, in triplicate, with an original
11 signature of the GRANT RECIPIENT'S fiscal officer, or that
12 officer I s designated agent, affixed to an original copy of the
13
payment request no later than the 15th of each month.
Payment
14 requests shall be submitted on a form (Exhibit C) as prescribed by
15 the STATE LIBRARIAN. Payment by STATE will be made within 60 days
16
of receipt of Invoice.
Failure by GRANT RECIPIENT to submit
17 invoice in the prescribed time may result in an additional payment
18 delay of up to 30 days.
19
1.
One-half of one percent (.5%) of the total PROJECT
20 cost (excluding land) is the state project administration fee per
21 Section 16-401 (b) of the state Building Code (Part 1, Title 24,
11
J2~ JL-/
.........-......--....---.
CALXFORNXA STATB LXBRARY
California Li~rary Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1'88
GRANT AWARD BO: P8S-032
1 California Code of Regulations). This administration fee will ~e
2 deducted in full from the GRANT RECIPIBNT'S first payment request
3 and any subsequent payment requests until such fee is collected in
4 full .
5
2.
Payment requests, in triplicate, should be mailed
6 to:
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
MR. MXCHAEL L. FERGUSON
BOND ACT FISCAL OFFICER
CALXFORNXA STATE LIBRARY
P.O. BOX 942837
SACRAMENTO, CA '4237-0001
(916) 445-8216
C.
In the event that the amount of funding which is provided
15 is greater than the cost of the project, the GRANT RECIPIENT shall
16 return that portion of the funding which exceeds the cost of the"
17 PROJECT to the STATE LIBRARIAN.
18
D.
GRANT RECIPIENT agrees that any STATE bond funds provided
19 for this PROJECT which are not used; or are diverted from the
20 purpose set forth above; or are not satisfactorily accounted for,
21 shall be repaid to STATE within ninety (90) days after it is
22 determined that the funds are not used, diverted or not properly
23 accounted for.
24
B.
Without limiting any other contractual remedies available
25 to the STATE for breach of this agreement, the GRANT RECIPIENT
12
) :J - )>
---.-.. ----.--...
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
California Library construction
and aenovation Bond Act of 1'88
GRANT AWARD .0: P85-032
I agrees to make restitution to the STATB for any cost incurred by
2 the GRANT RECIPIENT and paid with bond funds which are not
3 allowable under applicable state statutes, rules, regulations,
4 policies and procedures, or the terms of this agreement.
5
6
PAYMENT RETENTION
The STATE shall withhold 10% from each payment request
7
A.
8 which will be paid when all of the following have been completed:
9
1.
All eligible project costs have been expended; and,
The GRANT RECIPIENT certifies, by providing a
10
2.
11 compliance letter from the local building official, tha.t the
12 building has been completed in accordance with the approved plans
13 and specifications, including the installation of bookstacks,
14 funded by state and local matching funds; and,
15
3.
The GRANT RECIPIENT shows evidence of having
16 recorded a "Notice of Completion" for which the lien period has
17 expired and for which all outstanding liens have been settled; and,
18
4.
The GRANT RECIPIENT shows evidence of the building
19 title having been accepted by the GRANT RECIPIENT.
20
B.
The GRANT RECIPIENT must notify and obtain approval from
21 the STATE LIBRARIAN before the GRANT RECIPIBNT transfers title of
13
)) - '3 &,
CALXFORNXA STATE LXBRARY
Ca1i~ornia Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act o~ 1188
GRANT AWARD BO: P85-032
1 the building or land to an agency other than the GRANT RECXPXENT
2 within 20 years or useful life, whichever is longer.
3
C.
The GRANT RECXPXENT submits a final fiscal and program
4 compliance audit of eligible PROJECT funds performed by an
5 independent Certified Public Accountant (CPA) utilizing Generally
6 Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), to be submitted to the STATE
7 LXBRARXAN by the GRANT RECIPIENT.
8
9
AUDXT REOUXREMENTS
This agreement is subject to the examination and audit
10
A.
11 of the state of California Office of the Auditor General,
12 Department of Finance and Office of the state Controller for a
13 period of three years after final payment has been made.
14
B.
The GRANT RECXPXENT submits a final fiscal and program
15 compliance audit of eligible PROJECT funds performed by an
16 independent certified Public Accountant (CPA) utilizing Generally
17 Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), to be submitted to the STATE
18 LXBRARXAN by the GRANT RECXPIENT. The cost of the audit will be
19 the responsibility of the GRANT RECXPIENT.
20
C.
For purposes of project monitoring an.d audit, GRANT
21 RECIPIENT will make the following available: records maintained
/ .j. r-7 n
14 J- - ,) I
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
California Library Con.~ruc~ion
and Renovation Bond Act of 1.88
GRANT AWARD .0: P85-032
1 for the PROJECT, including but not limited to, payrolls on file,
2
change
orders,
Budget Change Requests
and payments to
3 contractor(s). GRANT RECIPIENT shall also make available whatever
4
the STATE LIBRARIAN
deems necessary in order to review the
5 performance, prosecution and progress of work by the contractor(s)
6 and to determine compliance with the terms of the contract by
7
contractor.
This shall include, but not be limited to on-site
8 inspection of the construction work, review of records maintained,
9 confirmation of payroll status of construction workers, review of
10 payments to contractors, and reporting of percentage of work paid
11 with percentage of work accomplished.
12
13 RECORDS RETENTION
14 GRANT RECIPIENT will retain on file all fiscal records supporting
15 expenditures under this Agreement for twenty (20) years after
16 completion of the PROJECT, or until notified by the STATE LIBRARIAN
17 that audit requirements of the STATE have been met, whichever is
18 sooner.
19
20
15
)J~ Ji
- ---.. -----------.-----.-.----.-
CALIPORNIA STATB LIBRARY
California Library construction
and aenovation Bond Act of ~988
GRANT AWARD NO: P85-032
1
PROJECT MONITOR
2 STATE LIBRARIAN will monitor the PROJBCT. OSA will assist the
3 STATE LIBRARIAN in the inspection of construction and shall serve
.. as a designated representative thereof. All recommendations made
5 by OSA concerning the PROJECT shall be transmitted to the GRANT
6 RECIPIENT by only the STATE LIBRARIAN.
7
9
PROJECT REVIEW
GRANT RECIPIENT shall submit to STATE LIBRARIAN for
8
A.
10 approval, prior to bid, the following:
11
~. A current PROJECT budget.
12
2. Schematic designs and outline specifications.
13
3. Preliminary plans and specifications (also known as
14 100% design development documents).
15
c.
Working drawings and specifications and contract
16 language (also known as construction documents or contract
17
documents).
This submission shall be prior to the local plan
18 check.
19
16
JJ - 3 ~
-
-. -- --. - .- --~----
CALXFORNXA STATB LXBRARY
California Lihrary Construction
and aenovation Bond Act of 1'88
GRANT AWARD HO: P85-032
1
5.
Any revisions to the approved set of schematic
2 designs, preliminary plans, or any revisions to the approved set
3 of working drawings, specifications and contract clauses, including
4 any resulting from the local plan check if they affect library
5 operations or project scope.
6
6.
A PROJBCT which, at the time of approval of the
7 application by the BOARD, has completed any of the design documents
8 outlined above, shall after approval of the application submit the
9 building program and the most current set of design documents to
10 the STATB LXBRARXAN for the required review. Earlier versions need
11 not be submitted.
12
B.
The STATB LXBRARXAN shall review and approve building
13 programs, schematic designs, outline specifications and the current
14 project budget to ensure that:
15
1.
The schematic designs and outline specifications
16 appropriately interpret the building program, provide functional
17 arrangements and a practical design.
18
2.
The current PROJBCT budget is appropriate to the
19 approved program and to the schematic designs and outline
20 specifications.
17 ) ;) _ 1/ ()
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
California Library Construction
an4 Renovation Bon4 Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD MO: P85-032
1
C.
The STATB LIBRARIAM shall review and approve preliminary
2 plans and specifications and the current PROJECT budget to ensure
3 that:
4
1.
The preliminary plans carry out the approved
5 schematic design concepts without significant change.
6
2.
The support systems are appropriate to meet program
7 requirements, accessible and reasonably laid out.
8
3.
There are no obvious code compliance problems.
9
4.
The current PROJECT budget is appropriate to the
10 approved program and to the preliminary designs.
11
D.
The STATE LIBRARIAM shall review and approve working
12 drawings and specifications, the current PROJECT budget, and
13 contract language to ensure that:
14
1.
The systems and design are compatible with the
15 programmatic needs of the library and the requirements of the state
16 Building Code.
17
2.
The design reflects prudent principles of public
18 works buildings design and good construction practice.
19
3.
The systems in the design documents are well
20 coordinated.
18
) ;} ~ 1/ /
-~-------
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
California Li~rary Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1.88
GRANT AWARD MO: P85-032
1
4.
The current PROJBCT budget is appropriate to the
2 approved program and to the working drawing designs.
3
5.
The construction contract provides for all relevant
4 requirements of the ACT and of the regulations adopted under
5 authority of Education Code Section 19960, and of the PROJECT
6 documents.
7
8
9
A.
RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES
If the GRANT RECIPIENT and the STATE LIBRARIAN cannot
10 agree on disposition of state Building Code (Part 1, Title 24,
11 C.C.R.) comments by the STATE LIBRARIAN at any of the reviews by
12 the STATE LIBRARIAN, the STATE LIBRARIAN shall provide to the GRANT
13 RECIPIENT a list of three experts qualified in the appropriate
14 discipline. The experts shall not have previously been involved
15 wi th the PROJECT. The GRANT RECIPIENT shall choose one of them to
16 decide the issue, and shall pay the expert's costs and customary
17 fees. The expert's decision shall be binding on both parties.
18
1.
If the issue relates to state Building Code
19 interpretation, its disposition shall use the jurisdiction's local
20 code appeals process.
21
19
/A-z/:J
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
Calirornia Library Construction
and aenovation Bond Act or 1988
GRANT AWARD 80: P85-032
1
2
A.
LIMITS OF LIABILITY
Neither party shall be liable to the other nor be deemed
3 to be in breach of this agreement for failure or delay in rendering
4 performance arising out of causes factually beyond its control and
5 without its fault or negligence. Such causes may include, but are
6
not limited to:
Acts of GOD or the public enemy, wars, fires,
7 floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, unforeseen
8 freight embargoes or unusually severe weather, provided that the
9 party whose performance is affected notifies the other within
10 five (5) days from the cause to inform of the existence and nature
11 of delay.
12
B.
It is understood and agreed by all parties that since the
13 performance dates of this agreement are of the essence and"
14 importance to the implementation of the ACT, continued failure to
15 perform for periods aggregating ninety (90) or more calendar days,
16 shall afford the BOARD the right to terminate this agreement and
17 GRANT RECIPIENT shall return that portion of funding which exceeds
18 the cost of the PROJECT at the time of termination to the STATE
19 LIBRARIAN.
20
20
) )~LI)
_. .....-:- - -.. -- -.-....---....-..-.
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
California Li~rary Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1.88
GRANT AWARD .0: P85-032
1
C.
GRANT RECIPIENT indemnifies and holds harmless the BOARD,
2 the STATE and their officers, employees and agents from any and all
3 liability, claims, loss, damages, costs or expenses, from all
4 claims relating to:
5
1.
Labor performed or furnished and materials used or
6 employed for the work as set forth in Exhibit A of this agreement;
7 and,
8
2.
Injuries to any person, corporation, real or
9 tangible personal property, received or sustained by or from the
10 GRANT RECIPIENT and its employees or sub-contractors and their
11 employees in doing the work, or in consequence of any improper
12 materials, implements or labor used or employed therein, as set
13 forth in Exhibit A of this agreement; and,
14
3.
Any act, omission or neglect of the GRANT RECIPIENT
15 or its employees; and,
16
4.
Violations of any California Environmental Quality
17 Act (CEQA) codes or regulations.
18
19 POLITICAL ACTIVITY
20 No funds received under the ACT shall be used for any partisan
21 political activity or to further the election or defeat of any
21
) J- - L/)~
-- -~.'- ~._-_._~----_.~
CALXFORNXA STATE LXSRARY
California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWA1U> BO: P85-032
1 candidate for public office: nor shall they be used to provide
2 services, or for the employment or assignment of personnel in a
3 manner inconsistent with state laws or regulations prohibiting
4 political patronage.
5
6 CONTRACTOR EVALUATXON
7 The GRANT RECIPIENT's performance under this agreement shall be
8
evaluated
within
thirty
(30)
days
after
completion.
9 Contract/Contractor Evaluation Form (std. Form 4) will be completed
10 by the state Library and shall remain on file for a period of
11
thirty-six (36) months.
If the GRANT RECIPIENT did not
12 satisfactorily perform the work or services specified in the
13 contract, the state Library shall place one copy of the evaluation
14 form in the contract file and send one copy of the form to the
15 Department of General Services within five (5) working days of the
16
completion of the evaluation.
Upon filing an unsatisfactory
17 evaluation with the Department of General Service, the State
18 Library shall notify and send a copy of the evaluation to the GRANT
19 RECIPIENT within fifteen (15) days. The GRANT RECIPXZNT shall have
20 thirty (30) days to prepare and send statements to the state
21 Library and the Department of General Services defending the GRANT
22 ) ) -1[(
CALXFORNXA STATE LXBRARY
California Library Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1188
GRANT AWARD NO: P85-032
1 RECXPXENT's performance under the contract. The GRANT RECXPXENT's
2 statement shall be filed with the evaluation in the State Library's
3 file and in the Department of General Services.
4
5 FORCE AND EFFECT OF CONTRACT
6 This agreement shall be of no force or effect until it shall have
7 been approved by the STATE LXBRARXAN, GRANT RECXPXENT and the
8 DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
Funding of this contract is contingent upon availability of funding
through the sale of General Obligation Bonds and/or General Fund
loans requested by the STATE.
In addition, this contract is
subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, or conditions
enacted by the Legislature or any statute enacted by the
Legislature which may affect the provisions, terms or funding of
this contract in any manner.
This contingency will remain in effect during the entire term of
the contract.
23
))-i6
CALIFORNIA STATB LIBRARY
Ca1irornia Li~rary Construction
and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
GRANT AWARD HO: P85-032
ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN:
Exhibit A. Grant application approved by the BOARD on April
23, 1991, will serve as Exhibit A of this agreement for the purpose
of defining the scope of this PROJECT. The application includes
a PROJECT budget. GRANT RECIPIENT shall be reimbursed for 65% of
eligible costs incurred under this agreement in accordance with the
PROJECT budget.
Exhibit B. Budget Change Request form shall be submitted, in
duplicate, to the STATE LIBRARIAN for approval when a change to the
PROJECT budget is requested.
Exhibi t C. Payment Request form as prescribed by the STATE
LIBRARIAN. All payment requests shall be submitted, in triplicate,
on this form.
Exhibit D. statement of Compliance certifying GRANT RECIPIENT
has complied with specific nondiscrimination program requirements.
Exhibit E. Nondiscrimination clause which the GRANT RECIPIENT
must comply with regarding issues of nondiscrimination.
Exhibit F.
RECIPIENT,
workplace.
Drug-free Workplace Certification which the GRANT-
by doing specific things, will provide a drug-free
24 )J-~L/7
-
.
-.....--
,
f' ,
. 1
I
2
3
i 4
5
6
I 7
8
51
10
I 11
12
13
I 14
15
16
17
I 18
19
20
21
I 22
23
24
I 2S
26
27
I 28
29
30
I 31
32
33
34
I 35
36
37
I 38
39
40
I 41
42
43
44
145
'46
47
I:
50
151
52
53
I 54
55
56
57
[58
59
60
APPLICATION
FOR
CALIFOAA'lA LIBRARY CONSTRUcnON AJI.'D RENOVATION BOND ACT F1J]I.'DS
APPDo'D1X Z (To SocIloD ZlJoCZO (e))
Administered by the California State Library: Gal')' E. Strolli. California State Librarian
The application sball be received by the Bond Act Flical Officer, or that officer's desl&nee, at the Ill1Iowin&
location by 3 p.m. on FebnJal')' 15, 1"1 or July 19, 1"1. .
CollI...... s.... Ub,."
Ub,." . c._ BDlIdlD&
FIocaI 50-.. . .8Om 215
'14 CapU.l Moll
SecramoDIo, CollI...... 'Sll~
The applicant local jurisdiction pu".... Ie Ibe Education Code, n,le 1. DiYiaion 1, Pan 11, Clap'''' 11, Sections 19950.19981 and
Tille 3, DivU.ion 2. Chapter I, Se:ctiobl 2.0410..20426 oC !be California Code of RqulatioDl, hereby .pplic:l for a ILlle mat.cb.inl I"nt
for the COnllNction or ftmodtliDa: DC Lbc public libBry Caciliry daaibed herein;
PROJECT IDEJI.'TIFICATION
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
n'PE OF APPlJCAA"T:. City: []
County: 0
City/County: 0
District: 0
N/A
Joint Powers Agreement (JPA): .
(U applicable, apccify Dam.. or pi",..)
GRAJI."T APPlJCAA"T: . CITY OF CHULA V I STA
Lq;al Dame or jurildiClioD lbat will own buiJdina:
Elected Omcial:. LEONARD M. MOORE
Mayor, Cbairper50n of Board of Supervilon., Head DC Special Disuicl, autboriz.ed 10 a.iJ:n the Ipplication
Title: .
MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
Pbone: .
(619) 691 -5044 .
Add~ss: .
27~ FOURTH "AVENUE
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910
For JP A Projects Only
U application ii l>y a JP A applicant, prtoYide the _ official 0( th. _ piny.
Elected om cia I: . N/ A
Mayor, Cllairper10D or Board 0( Superviion, Hcad 0( Special Diitricl, authorized Ie lip the applica.ion
Title: .
Address: .
UMIT COMME.'o"TS 11IROUGHOUT THE DlTlRE . UMIT 1YPE
SIZE TO NO SMALLER 1lIA"i 11 PO","T$, AND 12 PITCH (ELITE) WITH NO MORE 1lIA"i , Ul\'ES PER INCH.
AlTACHME.'o"TS SHAU. NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS REQL1RED BY REGUU'llON OR r..." n\ rOR ON 11IE APPUCA'IlOS
FORM. ClLUU.Y UJlEL ALL SUPPOll'l1NG DOCUME:.\"TS SUllMITI'ED WIT111APPUCA'IlON WITH THE NAME: or
11IE APPUC"-'"T AA'D P1l0JECT. 'J I /
) p - '1 CSLoBA FORM Z (11J1J9O)
I ~
3
4
I :
7
I :
10
( 11
12
13
I 14
15
16
l17
18
19
20
I 21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
29
30
I 31
32
33
l~
36
I~
39
I~
42
I~
45
46
I 47
48
49
ISO
S1
S2
I~
S5
[56
l.
,
ROSEMARY LANE
Project Coordinator: .
Title: ..
Name or iDdMdu.at wilD wi1I UYC adminillntM control 0'iCI' &he project for the local ju.ria.diaion.
LIBRARY DIRECTOR
(619) 691-5167
Phone: ..
36. 5 "F" STREET
Address: ..
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910
DAVID J. PALMER
A1ternau Contact Person: ..
ell the project coordinator is unaYJilablc, the contact perIOD lhat! be luthoriz.ed La act in tbe capacity or &.he project coordinator.)
Title: ..
ASSISTANT LIBRARY DIRECTOR
(619) 691-5170
Phone: ..
365 "F" STREET
Address: .
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910
Head or Planning Department:. ROBERT A. LEITER
(If 1P A. proo.-ide Head or Plannin& Depanmenl for jul'iidiaion PrtMd.lnl the service. U appl.icable . Special Di5tricu ~empl)
Title: .
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
(619) 691-5101
Pbone: .
276 FOURTH AVENUE
Address: .
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910
Head or Public Wor.... Department:. JOHN P. L I PP IT
(U applicable. U JPA, prcMde for jllrisdic:lion prcMdin,lhe oem...)
Title: .
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
(619) 691-5294
Phone: .
707 "F" STREET
Address: .
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT:. SOUTH CHULA
V I ST A LI BRARY
)},-tfC;
P8e< 2
CSL-B... FOIL'" 2 (11I1J9O)
I ~
"
I ~
7
I:
10
I 11
12
13
114
15
16
17
l18
19
20
I 21
22
23
I~
26
I~
29
I 30
31
32
I~
35
36
I~
39
I~
42
I~
45
I~
48
I 49
50
51
Hi
54
I S5
I
I
UBRARY .JURISDICTION: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
Lqa' name DC library Lhat Wrr'ilJ operate the acMcc in the buildini
IJbrary Director Name: .
ROSEMARY LANE
Title: .
LIBRARY DIRECTOR
Phone: .
(619) 691-5167
Address: ~ ,6s "F" STREET
CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910
Alternate Contact Penon: .
DAVID PALMER
Tille: .
ASSISTANT LIBRARY DIRECTOR
Phone: .
(619) 691-5170
365 "F" STREET
Address: .
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910
IJbrary BuildiDi Consultant: .
RAYMOND M. HOLT & ASSOCIATES
(U Ippllcable)
Title: .
LIBRARY BUILDING CONSULTANT
(619) 755-7878
Phone: .
Address:. P.O. BOX 74S
DEL MAR, CALIFORNIA 92014
WHEELER, WIMER, BLACKMAN
Architect: .
CA 13630
license fI: .
(pr'CMdlD& con5l1'Uction budcrl estimate Ii. conceptual plans)
Tille: .
VICE PRESIDENT
(619) 296-9922
Phone: .
Address:. 8989 RIO SAN DIEGO, SUITE 250
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92108
Interior Designer.. MARSHALL BROWN - I NTER I OR DES I GNER, I NC.
(U Ipplicable)
Title: .
PRESIDENT
(619) 291-2171
Phone: .
Address:. 3230 FIFTH AVENUE
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92103
omCIAL NAME or PROJECI':. SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
/ J /~/;;
Plee 3
CSL-BA FORM 2 (I JJlJllO)
----
, I
I ~
3
I :
6
Ii
10
I 11
12
13
I 14
15
16
(17
18
I 19
20
21
I~
24
I~
27
I~
3D
I 31
32
33
I~
I~
38
I:
41
I 42
(3
44
I~
47
48
I 49
SO
51
I 52
I
CHA.1I;GES IN PROJECT ThTORMATION
Were there any changes in the proposed project infonnation from that provide<l during the pre-application
or a previous application?
Yes [!) No 0
If so, were changes made in any of the following?
Project Square Footage _. _ . . . . _ . _ . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ :Yes 0 No []
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . :Yes 0 No []
Distance to Ne.1rest Existing Public Library. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :Yes 0 No EJ
Square Miles in Project Service Area .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :Yes 0 No I[]
Library Project's Service Area 1990 Population ......................:yes m No 0
Library Project's Service Area lO1o Population ......................:yes @ No 0
Age of existing public library building ............................:yes 0 No EJ
Date of most recent renovation or expansion of
existing public library building ............................:yes 0 No I[]
Electronic Information Delivery Units ........................ _ . . _ :Yes IIJ No 0
Meeting Room Space. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :Yes 0 No Ii]
Project Budget ............................................:yes [!J No 0
Needs Assessment ..........................................:yes IIJ No 0
Changing Concepts in Library Service ...... _ _ . . . . . . . . . . _ . _ . _ . . . . . :Yes IIJ No 0
(This information will be utilized by the State Library to update the project database CTeate<l from
information previously provide<l during the pre-application or an earlier application.)
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~ SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
)). >cC;j
Paee ..
I ;
3
4
I ~
7
I:
10
( 11
12
13
114
15
I 16
17
18
119
20
21
22
I~
25
I~
28
I 29
30
I 31
32
33
I~
36
I~
39
I~
42
I~
I.~
49
50
I 51
52
53
I 54
.,
n'PE OF PUBLIC LIBRARY PROJECf & GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE
n'PE OF PROJECT:
A) New Buildin&
B) Addition
"
RemocJelin&
Of Eltisting Ubrary Bldg. for:
Energy Conservation
Disabled Access
Health " Safety
C) Conversion
(Acquilition of . Buildin& to c:onven
into. public library buildinl)
&:
RemocJeling
Of Building for:
Energy Conservation
Disabled Access
Health &: Safety
GROSS PROJECT SOUARE FOOTAGE
. 35.000 SF
N/A
.
. N/A
YesD NoD
YesD NoD
YesD NoD
. N/A
Yes 0 NoD
Yes 0 NoD
YesD NoD
D) RemocJeling of Exlstin& Ubrary Building for:
. N/A
Energy Conservation
Disabled Access
Health &: Safety
YesD NoD
YesD NoD
YesD NoD
N/A
E) RemocJelin& for Shelving" Built.ln Equipment:
(For proje<:" wilh Ihis aClivity only)
MULTIPURPOSE PROJECTS:
Is the project also a multipurpose building?
.
Yes 0 No ID
N/A
Spedfy other uses of multipurpose building: .
SF
SF
SF
SF
SF
CURREJI,j GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE:
The current gross square footage of the existing public Ubrary(s) being replaced is:
(ll lIlere is no Ollislin& laeiJity. aller "OJ
OFFICIAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
.
2.;70
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
c-"
IJ- -;; rpaae !
~.'...."..,.~,r.o..ft1.<< "s..,..........,..,
SF
-
H
)
I :
6
7
I :
10
(11
12
13
I 14
15
16
l 17
18
19
20
I~
23
I~
26
I~
29
30
I 31
32
33
I~
36
I;;
39
40
I 41
42
43
I~
46
47
I:
50
I 51
52
53
I~
56
I 57
.t
PRO.TECf PL\.1>,;?-oLNG Th"FOR\1ATION
UBRARY FAClLlTlES MASTER PLAN:
STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA (SMSA):
Is the proposed site for the project located in a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA)?
Yesm NoD
DISTANCE TO NEAREST EXISTING PUBUC UBRARY FACILI1Y:
(For ~ ot IhiI dilla'ce determiDatiOD ODIy, a "pubU, Ubrary fac:ilil)" m.... a bllildilll 01 1,400 oquan: feet or mon:
prcMdilll din:<! ""bU, Ubrary IClYice.)
Number of miles to the nearest existing public library facility other than the library facility(s) being replaced
by the proposed project: 2 . 2
.
Miles
(p1'OYid' mileace 10 Ibe Dearesl l/lOlb ot a mile by driYinl the dilla'ce ill .. aUlomobile /rom the propooed aite 10 the
oean:al publi' Ubrary fa'ility, "'lard I... 01 wbat jurildietio. the ""bUe Ubrary io located ill.)
Name of Nearest Public Library Facility: . OTAY MESA BRANCH, SAN D J EGO PUBLI C LIBRARY
Square Footage of Nearest Public Library Facility:
10,000
SF
.
NUMBER OF SQUARE MILES IN mE PROJECT SERVICE AREA:
Number of square miles in the project service area:
8.5
SQ Miles
.
REUTIONSIDP OF PROJECT TO NEIGHBORING PUBUC UBRARY FACILITIES:
Dsaibc b"", tbe propoacd facility ~tCl I. ocilbborinl cmlillC and propoacd pubU, Ubrary Iac:i1iliCL U. fa<iJiliCl muter
plan ailu., ~(erence appropriale pilei iD the re:pon 10 luppon ItatemerUI:
Section 10.8 of the Chula Vista Publ ic Library Master Plan calls for the re-
placement of the two small branch libraries located in the southern portion
of the City. Originally operated by San Diego County Library, the City of
Chula Vista took over operations of these facilities in 1989. After con-
struction of the South Chula Vista Library, it is the intention to close the
Castle Park/Otay Library which is located in 1,720 SF of leased space. How-
ever, Library and City officials both agree that closing the 602 SF Woodlawn
Park Library would be politically insensitive. The Woodlawn Park Library,
located in the Community Center of a geographically isolated, lower income,
African-American neighborhood, will continue operations as a satellite of
the South Chula Vista Library.
The San Diego Public Library operates the 10,000 SF Otay Mesa branch 2.2
miles south of the site of the South Chula Vista Library, across a natural
barrier, a river valley, and City boundary. That facility.is designed to
meet the needs of the immediate San Diego neighborhood and does not have the
capabilities to serve the 59,545 existing residents of south Chula Vista. In
fact, the Library's circulation figures show that 15,737 registered patrons
come from the south San Diego area.
If the applicant has completed or updated a jurisdiction.wide library facilities master plan within the last
5 years, the document shall be submitted with the application.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/ )-?~
..L./ -
/'
Pale ,
-.-,..
1 I
I
.-
I
7
I
10
r
13
{:
17
L
20
I
23
r
26
1:
30
L
33
I
36
I:
r
43
f
~
r
19
I:
i3
t
;6
I
I
~ NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR THE UBRARY PROJECT:
UBRAll.Y PROJECI"S SERVICE AREA 1990 POPtJ"lATION:. ~~. S~S
LIBRARY PROJECI"S SERVICE AREA 2010 POPUlATION:. 85.723
AGE OF THE EXISTING PUBIJC LIBRARY:
When was the e:dsting public library building, which will be replaced or improved by the proposed
project, initially built?
.
1'374
Year
(U propooed projOd will repla.. more 1Ila. ooe buildin,. Iiat the oldest or the buildi.p.)
(U then: II DO emtin, faeility, ....... "0")
CONDmON OF THE EXISTING PUlIIJC LIBRARY:
When was the most recent structural renovation or expansion of the e:dsting public library building?
NONE
.
Year
(U propooed projOd will repl... more Ihan ODe bUildi.,. lis. lIIe mOlt recent octMty lor "y DIllie build i.&,. )
(llthen: II DO emtin, facility, ....er "0")
PHYSICAL FACILI1Y llMITATIONS:
Provide statements of deficiencies of the e:dsting public library faciliry(s) for the following:
(II 1Il0re IIlan one facility, oolllplelelllil oecIio. lor each facility ..panteJy, Le., aubmit IWO oopieo of this leCtio. or the form.)
Structural: CASTLE PARK LI BRARY. 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
There are no major structural problems to this 1,720 sq. ft. leased.facility.
There is a minor roof leak.
omclAL NAME OF PROJECT:. SOUTH (HULA V I STA LIBRARY
;;2--/< t/
Pale 7
t
f'
4
I
7
L
e
14
I.
17
b
r
'"'
~4
I
!7
b
[
14
I.
;7
r
.0
f
;j
(
7
I
o
l
r
7
I
I
f
Electrical Power'" Data Distribution: CASTLE PARK LI BRARY. 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
* n,e nu",ber of electrical outlets are inadeauHe. An added power pole
augments the number of electrical outlets near the circulation desk
but cannot accommodate all the needs. Extension cords are taken under
the circulation desk and present safety hazards.
* Future public online catalog terminals will need more outlets.
IJ&hling (natural'" electrical): CASTLE PARK LI BRARY. 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
Adequate.
Mechanical(HVAC}: CASTLE PARK LIBRARY. 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
Adequate.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
~
/ )_C'J
,0< J~
Pale 8
~..
'I
I 2
3
-4
I ~
7
I :
]0
I 11
12
13
]4
I ]5
]6
17
I ]8
19
20
I 21
22
23
24
I~
27
I;:
30
I 31
32
33
34
1~
37
I~
40
I 41
42
43
44
I.:
47
I 48
49
SO
SI
I S2
. S3
S4
I SS
S6
S7
I 58
I
u.:rgy Constn-ation: CASTLE PARr( L I SR/,RY, 1552 TH I flu r,VL:tWE
Acceptable. There are no north, south or west facing windows. Store-
front windows to the east have an overhang.
Health & Sare!)': CASTLE PARK LIBRARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
* There are no smoke alarm or sprinkler systems.
* The publ ic restroom is too small for a wheelchair bound person to
use.
* The night lighting is inadequate in the parking lot especially since
the next door convenience store draws a lot of night customers.
Disabled Access: CASTLE PARK LIBRARY. 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
Wheelchairs cannot enter building over high curb from parking lot.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT:. SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
r/5~
?A . Pale'
~. ...._~.O'll...<<-5t'..' ,.~~
r
3
(
7
I
10
I ~
13
(l
17
, ,
: '
u
w
Z3
..
Z6
'7
-"
10
13
16
:.,
,,,
~
;3
I
I
I
-6
[
,0
I~
3
I
l
6
I"
I
I
.~--,------ .---------
----. "~-_._-'----'--'----- -------
,
Acoustics: CASTLE PARK LIBRARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
Adequate because of carpeting.
Space FlexibiUty/ExpandabiJity: CASTLE PARK LI BRARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
The 1,720 sq. ft. is flexible with no fixed walls except for restrooms.
The space is not expandable unless an adjacent rental space could be
acquired by lease agreement.
Functional Spatial Relationships: CASTLE PARK LIBRARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
Adequate relationships for public use. The only staff work space is
not connected to the public service desk and is without a door so the
public can view staff On a break.
Site: CASTLE PARK LIBRARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
The parking lot, shared by three tenants, has inadequate lighting.
Other/GenenJ:
En,ineerfn&, Enerzy 8< Asbestos Studies:
If the existing library facility will be remodeled, or if an existing building will be convened into a library
building, provide a copy of an engineering study and an asbestos survey with supponing cost figures. If the
existing facility will be remodeled for energy conservation, provide a copy of an energy audit with supponing
cost figures.
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~ SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
/)-,; r;
/c'-- j /
Pale 10
-
1
I f
4
(
L
11
Ii
14
U
G
21
I;
24
f~
27
C
[
34
I,
37
[
[
44
t
47
i:
[
54
t
57
[
L
SERVICE UMITATIONS:
,
Provide a statement of space deficiencies of the existing public library facility(s):
(1! more lhan 000 facilil)', ..."'plelC LIlia oecUOD for each facilil)' ocparalCly, I.c., aubllli' I'M> ...pi.. of LIlia leClioD or lbe form,)
Collections: CASTLE PARK liBRARY, 1592 THIRD AVENUE
The Castle Park library has 14,943 volumes, while the Woodlawn Park library
has 7,201 volumes. The collection at these two branches totals only .37
books per capita for the residents of South Chula Vista. This is far below
the City/library standard of 3 books per capita. Space at both libraries
is totally allocated and there is no room for future collection growth.
Castle Park's 735 linear feet of shelving is at the bursting point. In
some sections every new book means that an older title must be transferred
or discarded. The Castle Park collection is heavily used, even with the
limitations of size, number of readers' seats, and parking. It's annual
turn-over rate of 3.6 compares favorably to the turn-over rate of 4.5 at
the library at 365 F Street. Greatest patron demand is placed on juvenile
and spanish language materials. However, lack of space prevents increasing
the size of these collections, which constitute over 85% of the branch
circulation. The adult non-fiction collection, numbering only 2,978 items
is not large enough to meet the needs of secondary students or adults
attempting to find solutions to daily problems. The small reference col-
lection and the lack of any periodical back files often means that patrons
must travel to the F Street library to complete their work. The lack of
adequate floor space near the door means that a book theft detection
system cannot be instal led, making the collection vulnerable to theft.
Readers' Seating: CASTLE PARK II B RARY. 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
The Castle Park library has only four lounge chairs, three four-passenger
adult tables, and one four-passenger children's table for a total of 20
readers' seats. After school gets out of session at 2:00 PM there are
frequently as many as 6 to 8 students that must do their homework sitting
on the floor because there are no available seats.
.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHUlA VISTA liBRARY
,....-; -'
/2 ~ -/? z: Page 11
,C'l;ldA...woR'y..'.,lun lQIO\
,---
I
I ~ ,
3
I ~
7
I ~
10
111
]2
13
]4
I 15
]6
17
( ]8
19
20
I 21
22
23
24
I~
27
I;:
30
(3]
32
33
34
I~
37
I~
40
14]
42
43
44
I ~
47
1$8
49
50
~1
152
.53
54
pS
56
57
158
L
surr Offices, Workstations .& Su~rvision: CASTlE PARK LI B RARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
The Castle Park Library has one public desk which is the Library's sole
book return, check-out/check-in, and reference desk service point for
the public. The desk must also serve as the only workstation for three
staff members. In order to be used for both functions the desk--lTIust
accomodate two PCs, one printer, a telephone and FAX machine, a calculator,
a pencil sharpener, as well as space for circulation and ILL forms, four
date due guns, necessary supplies, and some desk-top signage relating
to circulation rules. Since there are not enough electrical outlets for
all the equipment, power strips and power poles have been added. The
result is a tangle of cords which is cumbersome and occasionally dangerous.
The branch has created a non-public space of approximately 65 square feet
by arranging book stacks to create an alcove. Since the space is not an
enclosed room it does not provide much privacy. Nevertheless, it is used
as the staff lounge, storage for bulky and desireable equipment such as
the TV monitor and VCR, backroom storage for 503 videotapes, plus
storage for additional suppl ies.
Special Purpose Units: CASTLE PARK LI BRARY, 1592 TH I RO AVENUE
The Castle Park Library has a public photocopier and in the Spring of
1991 wi II receive two OPAC terminals. There is no space for any additional
electronic information delivery units. The lack of microform reader-
printers and accompanying back runs of periodicals on microform is an
especially acute problems. Anyone needing to do more than the most basic
research must travel to the Library at 365 F Street and compete with
sometimes over 500 patrons using that facility at any given moment.
Meeting Room Seating: CASTlE PARK LIBRARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
There is no designed meeting room space at the Castle Park Library.
Story hours are accomodated only by moving furniture from the center of
the library. Since story hours attract over 90 children per session,
use of the 1,720 square foot facility for other purposes (such as studying
reading the newspaper, even browsing) is severly limited, if not impos-
sible during the hour. Because of local demand, the Library has offered
VITA tax assistance, but since there is no meeting room all consultations
must occur at one of the tables in public view and earshot. Only one
adult program has been held at the branch in the last two years due to
lack of appropriate space.
omClAL NAME or PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/:2 - C:-<}
/Ipageu
re, ........I:QP.Y_.'.11.H1JDrl\
-']'
.2
I ~
5
I ~
8
I. 9
10
1]
12
I B
14
1S
I 16
17
]f;
I 19
20
21
22
123
24
2S
I~
:u
29
130
3]
32
I 33
3-:
3S
I ;~
3S
39
lID
1I
<12
113
~
<IS
P
4f;
<19
L~
52
I ~
SS
r~
~8
I
I
,
'1)pes of Service.> fOl "'hieh space: is hc}jn~: CASTLE PARK liBRARY, 1592 TH I RD AVENUE
{t 1.720 s~uare feet, the Castle Park Library can only provide the most
basic level of public services. Lack of space results in a collection
that by design must be primarily popular and browsing in nature. lack of
space means that even this goal cannot be satisfactorily met since there
is no room for audiocassettes or compact discs. Lack of space means that
reference needs go almost entirely unmet due to the small size of the non-
fiction collection and the inability to provide electronic delivery units.
lack of space means that additional staff cannot be provided to assist the
public, provide programs, or deliver outreach. lack of space results in
only one story hour for a community with 5,000 children under the aoe of
5. lack of space means few bilingual services to a population that is
that is almost 37% Hispanic. lack of space prevents any group from using
the library for meeting purposes. lack of space means no cultural or
educational displays. With only 1,720 square feet at the Castle Park
library, lack of space means that the present per capita ratio of library
space in the services area will remain at .04 square feet. lack of space
ultimately means that the Chula Vista Public library will never be able
to adequately meet the needs of 59,545 existing residents of South Chula
Vista, not to mention the thousands that will come in the future.
Describe the depee to ~,hieh ciliuns, communily 01E2Diutions and local aEencies panicipated in the
deterrnin.tion of the Deed 101 a nev'/improved lacililY:CASTlE PARK LIBRARY, 1952 TH I RD AVE
On Dtee~ber 31, 1985, the City of Chula Vista annexed the former Montgomery
Fire District and instantly acquired 23,3000 new residents in South
Chula Vista. The Hontgo~ery Planning Com~ittee, a citizens' advisory
bo.rd a~pointed by the City Council, h.s lobbied strongly for a library
c~ the focal point of their ne'., comc;unity identity. A total of five
co~~unitr sroups has been involved in over 100 meetings in arrivins at
the concept of the South Chula Vista library. These are the library
K.ster Plan Co~~ittee, the Site Selection Coc;mittee, the Mont90~ery
Planning COr.l':littee, the Library Board of Trustees, and the Chula Vista
2000 Task Force, a citizens strategic planning group. The latter held
a public meeting outlining 4~ proposed civic improvements. Two hundred
citizens voted and new libraries took the top two spots. Three documents
support the need for new libraries: The Chula Vista Public library
M.ster Plan, (t.pril ]987); Site Selection for Two tiel" Public Libraries,
(Janu.ry 1588); and Sum~.ry Report of Chula Vista 2000 Comounity Task
Force (Apr i I 1990).
Jf belpful in dcmonstratinE the facility limitations, rro\ide rhOIOGraphs Dr a \idw upe of the cmtinr
1i~rliT) buildinr(s) a.s suppon documentation. ubel all ph010paph! 01 video upes "ilt, name of applicant
and proje<:l. This submittal is optional.
If the applicant bas completed Dr Updated a jurudietion."oide Dr proje<:l specific libraf)' meeds assessment
"ithin the last S )'C<lfS, the document shall be submitted ".ith tht application.
omCl.oU- K....'l[ or J'RO.n:cr: .
SOUTH CHUlA VISTA lleRARY
)). -j; () Page 13
CSL,BA fOI<.M 2 (11/\."")
.
( ~
3
I :
6
I i
10
(11
12
13
114
15
16
I 17
18
19
20
I~
23
I~
26
I~
29
30
I 31
32
33
I~
36
I~
39
40
I 41
42
43
I~
46
47
48
49
SO
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
.
l'lE~DS ASSESSME.\7 FOR THE UBRA.R}' PROJECT:
UBRAltY PROJECT'S SERVICE A.JU:A 1990 POPUlATION: ~
Sg.S4S
UBRARY PROJEcrS SERVICE AREA :UllO POPUlAnON: ~
85,723
AGE OF THE EXISTING PUllUC UBRAlty:
When was the existing public library building. which will be replaced or improved by the proposed
project, initially built? 1921
~ Yur
(\! propoocd project trill replJC% IDO,.. lhan on. buildin&, lilt lb. oldest or lb. buildinp.)
(\! Ib.... U DO aUtin& fac:ility. alter "0")
cmmmON OF mE EXISTING PUllUC UBRAltY:
When was the most recent structural renovation or expansion of the existing public libraI')' building?
NONE
~
Yur
(U propos.ed projcd will replace mort than one buiJdin" lis1 the mOIl f'eCenl aetMty Cor Iny of lbe bUildin",.)
(If lb.,.. U DO aUtinl facility, eot... "0")
PHYSICAL FACIUlY UMlTATIONS:
Provide statements of deficiencies of the existing public library faciliry(s) for the follo\\'ing:
(If more than one facility. complete this section Cor acb facility separately, Le., submit ftt'O copies DC lh.i5 lCC'lion 'oC the Corm.)
Structural: LI TERACY TEAM OFF ICE. 210 LAND J S STREET
There are no major structural problems in this leased ho~se
used by the Chula Vista Library team to tutor adults who are
functionally il literate, The house is seventy years old.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~ SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/)'/p/
Paet ,
H
3
P
6
Ii
10
(11
12
13
I 14
15
]6
17
l1S
]9
20
121
22
23
I~
16
27
I~
30
1 ,]
32
33
34
l~
37
I~
40
In
12
43
44
l~
47
I~
50
I ~]
"2
~3
54
I is
';6
57
I is
I.
.
Electrical Power &. Data Distribution: LITERACY TEAM OFF I CE, 210 LAND I S STREET
~iring is inadequate for learning lab terminals.
Ughting (natural &. electrical): LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
Adequate.
Mechanical(HVAC): LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
Adequate.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~ SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
/)-~~
PaKe 8
c.'U.JU_,~OIY_1..ILtn ,0'9(1\
. ,
I 1
2
3
I 4
5
6
I 7
8
9
10
I 11
12
13
I 14
15
16
I 17
18
19
20
I 21
22
23
I 24
2S
26
I 27
28
29
30
I 31
32
33
34
I 35
36
37
38
39
40
I 41
42
43
44
145
46
47
I:
50
I 51
52
53
54
1 55
56
57
158
I
EnOl1:l Conservation: LITERACY TEP.M OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
Single pane glass is not energy conserving. Glassed in front porch
used as office has heat loss in winter and heat gain in summer.
Health & Sare!)": LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
* No smoke alarm or sprinklers are provided.
* There is a trip hazard due to settling at edge of the parking lot in
the rear of the building.
Disabled Access: LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
* Stairs at front and rear entrances preclude handicapped access.
No ramps are provided.
* Restrooms are no large enough for handicapped.
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/c2.'(;,) Pa&e'
-"
I ~
3
I ~
6
I i
10
I 11
12
13
114
15
16
l17
18
19
20
I 21
22
23
I~
26
27
I;:
30
I 31
32
33
34
I 35
36
37
I~
40
1 41
42
43
44
145
46
47
I::
50
I 51
52
53
54'
I 55
56
57
1 S8
I
"
Acoustics: LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDiS STREET
Adequate.
Space F1exlbilil)'/Expandabilil)': LITERACY TEAM OFF I CE, 210 LAND I S STREET
The space is not flexible because it has fixed walls and installations
that define a residence, i.e. bedrooms, kitchen, bathrooms. Lot
restrictions do not make the house expandable.
Functional Spatial Relationships: LI TERACY TEAM OFF I CE, 210 LAND I S STREET
Poor. Some of the needed tutoring spaces are not separated enough from
the ringing telephones and conversations related to the office. The
literacy 1 ibrary is in a tutoring room so it is unavai lable when the
room is in use.
Sile: LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
Settl ing problem in parking lot.
Other/General:
Engineerlfl&, Enel"&Y " Asbestos Studies:
If the existing library facility will be remodeled, or if an existing building will be con\'ened into a library
building. provide a copy of an enginuring study and an asbestos survey with supponing cost figures, If the
existing facility ..ill be remodeled for energy conservation, provide a copy of an energy audit with supponing
cost figures,
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
OmClAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~
/;( & '-I
Plllle 10
.1
I ;
4
I ~
,
8
I ~O
11
I 12
13
14
I 15
16
17
I 18
19
20
21
I;;
24
I~
27
28
I;;
31
I 32
33
34
I~
37
38
I~
41
I 42
43
44
I~
47
48
I 49
50
51
I 52
53
54
! 55
56
57
58
I
,
SERVlCE UMITATIONS:
PrO\i6e a Stale~ent of space defjcienci~ of the existing public library facility(s):
(U more than on. facWty. ""mpl'" 'hil aection for oac:b facility "'pintoI)'. i.e., lubmil _ ""pi.. of lhia aection of 'h. form.)
Collections: LI TERACY TEAM OFF ICE, 210 LAND I S STREET
The Chula Vista Literacy Team currently has 4,500 volumes of instructional
and resource materials. The Team has identified the need for an ultimate
collection of 6,000 items which the current rented bungalow of 8S0 square
feet cannot accomodate. The existing collection is divided between two
former bedrooms which are used as tutoring space. This results in there
being no logical shelving sequence for the materials and much of the
collection is inaccessible much of the time whenever tutoring is in ses-
s ion.
Readers'Seating: LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
The Literacy Team bungalow can only accomodate four tutor/learner pairs
at anyone time. Since this does not nearly begin to accomodate.the
over 100 matched pairs .which need tutoring space, the Team is forced to
solicit donated tutoring space. Because this space is frequently not
forthcoming, an average of 5-8 tutor/learner pairs are on hold at any
given time waiting for tutoring space to become available. The need to
find more space also means that the Team Coordinator must spend as much
as 15% of her time each month attempting to locate free tutoring locations.
The new South Chula Vista Library will include 16 tutoring stations in
the Literacy Center.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/2 -?'(geu
CSLol4 FORM 2 (tllll9O)
---.--
I ') I
:z
.;
I 4
5
6
7
I 8
9
10
( 11
]2
)3
14
I 15
16
)7
I 18
19
20
I 21
22
23
24
I 25
26
27
I 28
29
30
I 31
32
33
34
I 35
36
37
I 38
39
40
I 41
42
43
44
I 45
46
47
I 48
49
50
I 51
52
53
54
I 55
56
57
58
Sun-Offices, Workst.lltions & Supervision: LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
The Literacy Team office is located in an 850 square foot rented bungalow
where space is inefficiently designed for use as an office.. The Coordina-
tor's office is the former front porch. Not only is. it poorly insulated,
it is also the site of the bungalow's front door. This means the Coordina-
tor has no privacy in which to interview perspective tutors, evaluate
learners, make appropriate matches of tutors to learners, or do neces-
sary paperwork. The Team's reception area is in the former living room and
there is room for only one desk which must be shared by 14 staff members
and volunteers.
Special Purpose Units: LITERACY TEAM OFFICE, 210 LANDIS STREET
The Literacy Team currently has room for only 2 public access computers
at the bungalow. Both PCs are in the middle of the former living room
(reception area) which results in users having no privacy. Because of
the demand to use PCs in the course of literacy training, arrangements
have been made to uti) ize the Chula Vista Adult School's Computer Lab.
However, this lab is available only two nights a week and effective
util ization of the lab requires the Coordinator to be away from the
office on many evenings.
As there is no room for additional equipment at the Team's office, no plans
have been made for an OPAC at this facility, making access to the resource
collection and other appropriate library materials extremely difficult.
Also, there is no room for a new PC which was recently given to t~e Team
and it will have to be located off site, further compounding logistical
and coordination problems.
Meeting Room Seating: LI TERACY TEAM OFF I CE, 210 LAND I S STREET
There is no meeting room space at the bungalow. The lack of meeting
room space has meant that the monthly tutor training sessions must be
held off site. Likewise, all inservice workshops for staff and volunteers
must be held away from the Team's office. Because of the logistical
problems only four inservices have been held during the past year.
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
OmCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~
jd--/'?
Page 1:1
~-
I i
3
I ~
7
I :
10
(11
12
13
14
115
16
17
I 18
19
20
I 21
22
23
24
I~
27
I~
30
f 31
32
33
34
I~
37
I~
40
I 41
42
43
44
I~
47
f:
50
51
I 52
.53
54
t 55
56
57
I 58
I
,
Types ofSen';ces forwhicb spce ii lacking: LITERACY TEA!', OFFICE, 210 lAK~15 STREET
The Chula Vista Literacy Team must carefully control the size of its
program and monitor the number of tutors and learners because of the
lack of tutoring sites at its home office. Because of the lack of
meeting room space tutor training must be held off site, away from
the resource collection, electronic delivery units, and support staff.
The fact that the bungalow is a rented space has contributed to some
of the perceptions that the service is a temporary one and its location
away from the public library has prevented its overall integration into
the Library's service plan.
Describe the degree to which citizens, community organizations and local agencies panicipated in tbe
determination of the need for a new/improved facility: LI TERACY TEAM OFF I CE,
210 LANDIS STREET
The Chula Vista Literacy Team is a joint project of the Altrusa Club. of
Chula Vista, the Chula Vista Adult School, and the Chula Vista Public
Library. The Altrusa Club, a business and professional women's service
organization with 25 members, has made literacy and the Literacy Team its
primary commitment. As the original founders of the Team, they have
campaigned long and hard for permanent, larger quarters. Their efforts
have been supported by the Sweetwater Union School District, the Chula
Vista City School District, by Rohr Industries (the region's only Fortune
500 company) and by the Library Board of Trustees.
If belpful in demonstrating the facility limitations, provide photographs Dr a video tape of the existing
library building(s) as suppan documentation. Label all photographs Dr video tapes with name of applicant
and project. This submittal is optional.
If the applicant has completed Dr updated a jurisdiction-wide or projec'l specific library Deeds assessment
within the last 5 years, the document shall be submined witb the application.
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~ SOUTH CHULA V I STA LI BRARY
ic2 - {; 7
Paet 13
1':4>:,._....torI..u...,_.J~~ tll 8ilrII'I\
l
..
I
7
t
r
14
J~
r
21
J
24
r
27
r
31
t
J4
r
37
[
r
$4
J
.7
(
1:
)4
I
;7
L
I
lIBRARY BUILDING PROGRAM:
Fo: n~ collStruction, conversion and addition/renoYation projectS, a final building program document shall
be submilled with the application. The library building program shall meet the requirements shown in
Appendix 3.
DemD&J'8phlcs:
Brielly dac:ribe bow Ibe propooed tibrary projeet ..w mee. Ibe _ or Ibe ..,..,;= arc:a populo.ion bued CD Ibe exis.inl Ind
projeeted demorraphic cbanClwtico, lDc1udillC. bUI IIOC IiIIliled to faClon IUeIl u "ce. ra... ClbDicity. eduCllion Ind
aoc:io-eamomic considerations;
The South Chula Vista library service area consists of the nine south-
ern census tracts in the City. SANDAG (San Diego Association of Government)
estimates that the 1990 population of the service area is 59.545 and wil I
grow by 44.0% to 85.723 by 2010.
Ethnic groups traditionally defined as minorities are on the verge
of constituting a majority within the service area. While whites make up
51.1% of the total population, Asians comprise 9.0%, and Hispanics a dramatic
36.7%. The percentage of Hispanic residents is higher than local, state, or
national patterns:
% of Hi span i cs
Service Area
36.7%
USA
12.6%
Chula Vista
25%
Cal if.
24.8%
S. o. Co
19.9%
Analysis of enrollment at schools within the service area provides an even
more tell ing picture of a bi-cultural mix. In the six elementary schools
and six secondary schools nearest the library site, Hispanic students are
in the majority. In addition, the elementary school district reports that
just over 25.3% of the children in the schools nearest the library site
speak either no English or very limited English. In comparison, district
wide figures show that only 13.9% of total enrollment speaks limited or
no English.
In terms of age, the service area is demographically similar to the
rest of the city, county, state, and nation. However, the elementary school
district reports that it considers the area immediately surrounding the
library site to be of a very low socio-economic level. They indicate that
based on the California Assessment Program, students at the six schools
have a rating of 1.66 on a scale of 1.0 to 3.0. This means that 80% of all
California schools have higher socio-economic levels. Further, the school
district reports that 42.5% of the students come from skil led or semi-
skilled households and 43.8% come from households classed as unskil led.
The demographics show that Chula Vista has a unique opportunity to
create a major I ibrary facility dedicated to a bi-national, bi-cultural
perspective. To meet these needs the Library will insure a relevant mix
of resources and services with a special emphasis on providing Spanish speak-
ing. staff and having 30% of the collection in Spanish. The Library sees a
special obligation to help new immigrants residing in the community transi-
tion as needed, into American society/culture and possibly into American
citizenship. On the other hand the Library intends to provide Anglos with
the opportunity to better understand and appreciate Hispanic culture, history
and language. The Library will be a vital component in linking two cultures
and creating a vibrant community.
ornClAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/) -b ~
Pale 14
--~~ -- -----~----...---
r .
1
2
3
I 4
5
6
I 7
8
9
10
I 11
12
13
I ]4
IS
16
I ]7
18
19
20
I 21
22
23
I 24
2S
26
I 27
28
29
30
I 31
32
33
34
3S
36
I 37
38
39
40
I 41
42
43
I 44
4S
46
I 47
4S
49
50
I 51
52
53
I 54
5S
56.
I
I
Changing CcnrrpLS In Public libraI')' Srr->irr:
I\Q..."';:lx hO'llo lhe pro~ projecl ...uJ Telpond' to Cutinl a:>n:epu in public library ICMce:
Located four miles from the Mexican border, the South Chula Vista Library will
be a facility conceived and dedicated to a bi-national, bi-cultural, concept of
library service. The prominent location of the library, adequate parking, and a
design that incorporates the best elements of contemporary Mexican architecture will
signal a new era in I ibrary service for the residents of the newly annexed area. A
bi-lingua) staff will greet visitors, extending an invitation to use the resources
of the library. Patrons will have access to the latest media and electronic infor-
mation resources, as wel I as a materials collection ultimately numbering 178,000
items, 30% of which will be in Spanish.
A special commitment will be made by the library to help residents with practi-
cal solutions to daily problems. A trained staff of professionals will not only
utilize the bi-lingual materials collection, but will also use computer and CO-ROM
databases to help those wishing to improve job skills, develop career ladders, or
advance their education. As the home of the Chula Vista Literacy Team the library
will also provide one-on-one assistance to those wishing to improve their reading
and writing skills. A six station computer-interactive video lab will provide free
and convenient access to PCs and allow many in the community to become computer
literate. FAX machines and dial-up access to the Library's automated catalog, will
insure swift delivery of information, especially for businesses, industries, and the
border region maquiladoras (twin manufacturing plants). Much of the activity will
Occur in the Technology User's Center, which can aptly be described as the nerve
center for public access to electronic information.
Children will benefit enormously by their ability to easily access the out-
standing collections and services which have long been a hallmark of the Library.
The children's area will be of a unique design, melding the best of children's lit-
erature with the most useful AV, computer, and CO-ROM technology. A story time area
will provide a special place for the bilingual staff to assist the mostly Spanish
speaking children with English language skills.
Similarly, young adults wil I enjoy an attractive browsing area of their own
with collections recognizing current youth interests and presented in a variety of
languages matching the area's ethnic diversity. Besides AV materials, the YA area
will have a video kiosk to present informational and entertainment videos. .
Youth of all ages will ,benefit from the relationship between the South Chula
Vista Library and the Olympic Training Center to be built in the City. Programs
and field trips will highlight sports as a viable alternative to drugs and gangs.
Meeting room facilities wil I include a 100 seat multipurpose room with tele-
conferencing capabilities, a twenty five seat conference room, and three group
study rooms. An exhibition hall will provide space for the library to present
qual ity displays of contemporary Mexican and American arts, crafts, archeological
artifacts, plus educational and informational displays from such sources as the
Centro Cultural in Tijuana, the Smithsonian and local museums. In addition, a
Friends of the Library run bookshop wil I include a 12 seat cafe off the exhibit hall
where patrons can enjoy the displays or read a book while sipping a cup of coffee.
The creation of the South Chula Vista Library will be a unique opportunity to
draw from the rich cultural heritage of the large Hispanic-American population re-
siding in the service area. This objective will drive the building of relevant
collections and services which will be networked on regional,-state, and inter-
national levels and significantly benefit bi-cultural communities throughout the
state.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT:. SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
/;2 ~ /c, I Pair IS
CSl,.1A FORM 2 (11J1I9O)
('
I
9
I:
13
( :
16
r
20
[
24
r
28
f
31
r
3S
[
39
[
43
l
47
I
50
[
54
r
58
[
52
r
~
i6
I
I.
"
Building Components Allocation ror the Proposed IJbrary Project:
Pr<Mde . 'um","" or I;' prt?O'~ ;:mo;cet', bOldi"" ,: co".:;!)' IS rc!le<,C<i in the lien')' buildUl. pro(l'2111, '" pl't'Yidin& lb. propooed aUoc:alion.s
for the fol!a;,r.u:a lJbTary tll.lllcilr.t; co.Qponenl.S.:
ColJectilJflS
Books
Adult ..............................................................................................
Fiction .................................................................................. ..
Non-Fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
Reference .............................................................................. ..
Special .. (L,I :r~~~~~). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
Young Adult (if applicable) ................................ ..
Children. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
EasylPicture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
Juvenile ........................................ ..
Fiction .................................... ..
Non.Fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
Reference .................................. ..
TOLaI Books ........................................... ..
Audio-Visual
Video Tapes ........................................... ..
Compact Discs ......................................... ..
Audio Cassette Tapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
Phonodiscs ............................................ ..
Talking Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
Computer Software ...................................... ..
Other (slides, photographs, realia etc.) ..c! ~'I~~A.C.T.' YL Y 1.~E.o). . . . . .. ..
TOLaI Audio. Visual Materials .................................
Periodicals TItles
Adult . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
Young Adult (if applicable) ................................ ..
Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
Number or VolslUni15
106,317
32.666
61,180
6.11]1
6,000
4,000
54,844
19.790
,5.054
13,152
21,311
591
165,161
6.500
2,300
3.150
II/A
?OO
75
20
12.245
Number or titles
240
30
30
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/) r 7P
Pale l'
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: ..
C!L-~.~I~"'U.!!,I&"O)
-
{'
(
{
c
C
I:
[
r
2S
I
28
I
31
I
~
I
37
J
40
J
43
1
46
J
49
I
52
r
I
Rta.tIus' S~tUinv
Number of Seats
Adult Reference Services. . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...
54
General Book Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
62
Browsing Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
28
Young Adults (if applicable) ............................................ .
16
47
Children's Services ................................................... .
Periodicals Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .PART OF BROWS' NG
. . (TECHNOLOGY USERS CENTER) 20
Speaal Collections ................................................ ~ .. .
Other (Miscellaneous) . .t~~~~)........................................... . 12
Staff Worutaticns:
Number of
Public Service
Workstations
Number of
Oro'Workroom
Workstations
Circulation ............................ .
4
6
.
Adult Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
2
.
10
.
6
Children's ............................. .
2
Young Adult (if applicable) ................. .
N/A
.
N/A
Spedal Collections ....................... .
N/A
.
N/A
Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
1
.
Technical Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
N/A
.
N/A
N/A
Extension ............................. .
N/A
.
Custodial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
TECHNICAL USERS'
Other (Specify CENTER ). . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
Other (Specify LI TE RACY ) ............... .
N/A
.
1
1
.
N/A
4
.
OFFICIAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
I') rt
/7v - I f Pale 17
CSL-IIA rOIL\! 2 (1Il119O)
r---
.
I
2
r
9
L Table or Contents
11
I.. Overriew and Intl"Oductlon
15
[
19
[
23
r
27
r
31
r:
l
10
I~
14
r-
I
8
I"
,
OUTLINE
OF
REQUIR.E!-.rE?\"TS FOR A LmRARY BUILDlliG PROGRAM:
APPENDIX 3
(To SodIoD 10410 (It) .. Soc:IIoD 2GUO (e) 0\0 appUcaIloD form)
Provide a general introduction to the project with an overview or the need ror the project along with a time
Khedule ror the project. Discuss the relationship of the library building program to the architectural design
process, as well as tile roles of the library building team members.
CommuniI)' Analysis
Provide an in-depth understanding of the panicular community by descn"bing and analyzing all relevant factors
which will have an effect upon the library'S roles and plan of service.
Go>rmmenlal APf!/ldes
Identify all governmental agencies which will have an influence on the planning of the new facility and
describe the nature of the relationship. Identify key individuals and define thelT roles in the proJect.
Locatio/l
Provide general information locating the project within the library service area and local jurisdiction. An
area map showing the location of the proposed project site shall be included, if a site has been identified.
Funher site analysis is optional.
DtmowaDhv
Provide information about the size, projected growth and demographic characteristics of the population
within the library service area. ThIS information shall include, but not be limited to, the composition
of the population by age, race, ethnicity, education and other socio-economic factors. This information
shall be analyzed and compared to the norm of larger populations such as the special district, city, county,
state and nation. This data shall be used in developing the library's plan of service to ilS community.
lJbrary Institutional Analysis
Describe the mission of the public library and the library plan of service providing any information which will
be necessary to determine the allocation of space for the proposed library bUIlding in tenns of COllections, reader's
sealS, staff workstations, special purpose unllS and meel1ng room space.
I.
2
~
Histo,.., of 1M LiJJrtU"'I
Provide a brief history of the development of the library.
LiJJra,.., Plan of Srrvja
Define any applicable roles of the pro~sed public library and describe any specific goals and objectives
for library service to the community. Provide a detailed analysis of the types of services to be offered
as well as how the plan will be implemented in tbe proposed facility. Provide any applicable use statistics,
service standards or guidelines. Provide a citation and brief description if there IS a Jurisdiction.wide plan
of service that has lleen officially adopted. Provide a citation and summary analysis if there is a user
survey to suppon the library's plan of service.
LiJJrar. CD1Jeclio/lS
Describe the current status or tbe lI"brary COllections and project tbe capacity of future boldings for tbe
proposed facility. Discuss collection development and provide justification for the size ana types of
COllections based on demographics, previous as well as anticipated purcbasing p'anerns, verifiable- library
use statistics, and any apphcable standards or guidelines. Provide a summary of all projected collections
to be housed in the library, as well as the conversion factors used to calculate the required shelving units
to store tbe holdings.
..
5
.
)
I
I
,
/ J.-7 ')
(,...-:;>( ~7'
Pale 1
,------
l" ·
3
l
7
L
11
C
IS
C
19
r
23
C
28
I:
.H
32
I Facility Space Analysis
.!>.>
36
[
40
[
44
r
~
r
52
r
56
57
L
il
I
I
I
I
Readtl'$' StIllS
Describe the number
proposed facility. J
IppJ.icable conversir
seating.
~ and allocation of the patron seating needed to meet the r~uirements of the
!lllCy Iny stancl.arcls utilized in determining tbe amount of seating as well as any
factors use to calculate the square footage needed to bouse the various types of
SD<<ia11"umon UlIilslSDaJ:e;
Identify Ind describe the various Idncls of special purpoK units (CD-ROM readers, microform readers,
pbotocopy machines etc.) wbicb will be required in order to suppo" the operation of the proposed
facility. Describe tbe significance of this equiJlment in meeting ihe challenge of changing concepts in
public library service. Provide an allocation of Ute units as well as any applicaole conversion factors used
10 calculate the square footage needed to !louse the special purpose UDIts.
Staff Worl:rrariolU'
Describe the projected staff organization and provide any applicable standarcls used in determining the
size of the projected staff. Provide the resulting number of staff workstations (public, .office and
workroom) needed to provide the desired service level in the proposed facility, and indIcate the proposed
allocation of staff workstations. Provide conversion factors used to calculate the square footage needed
to !louse the various types of staff workstations.
M..ti,,~ Room Requirrme1llS
Describe tbe number and capacity of meeting rooms for the propOSed library. Indicate how this space
supports the library's plan of service and provide an allocation o( the space. Provide conversion faCtors
u.se.:l to calculate the square footage needed for the various types of meeting room seats.
Sum1nlU't of Fadlitv SrKlCt RtCTlIirrme1llS
Provide a summary page(s) of the various spaces in the proposed library showing tbe name of the spaces
witb the respeaive square footage, collections and reaaer's seats reqUITed. .
StxlIial RtlatiolU'hiDS
Describe the relationships of the various spaces in the proposed library either through tbe use of
narrative, a spatial diagram or a matrix.
SrKlCt Dt:scriDtWlU'
Provide a description of eacb individual space as well as a general narrative for the wbole library wbich
addresses, as appropriate, the following items:
Square footage, oc:cupancv by staff and patrons, type and size of collections, functional activity
description, spatial relationships, flexibility, expandabiliry, staff efficiency, energy efficiency,
fenestration..!'!pace finishes, building materials, access for the disabled, acoustics, environmental
conditions (HV AC), electrical power supply, illumination, communications, computer applications,
security systems, signs, audio-visual aspecu, visual supervision and layout of furnllure and
equipment.
Financial Analysis
Provide a pre1iminary capital outlay project budget Cor the proposed facility with cost justifications.
)J - 7 ;
Paee 2
-
.A __._____...__.__._____.__~._____
----------------
L
3
I
6
I
9
r~
12
I :
1S
I;
18
I ~
21
I :
24
I :
27
I :
30
L
33
,.
36
I
39
r
42
I:
46
L
49
I
52
I
I
Sr><<ilI1 hrrxm Units
<""",.. for both ...r. ond p.bli. _.)
Computer Terminals .................................................. .
CO-ROM Readers ...................................................................................................... ..
MicrOC()mputers .......................................................................................................... ..
Minicomputers .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... ..
Computer Printers ................................................... .
Microform Readers and ReaderlPrinters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
Microform Cabinets .................................................. .
LateraWertical Files. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
Photocopy Machines .................................................. .
Facsimile Machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
A V Listening/Viewing Stations .. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
Map Files ......................................................... .
Atlas Cases ........................................................ .
Card Catalog Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
Workstations for the Oisabled (IDO" etc.) .................................. .
Other (Speci1)': TYPEWR I TERS ).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
INTERACTIVE
Other (Specify: v I n,n ) ........................................ .
. Telecommunication Oevice for the Oeaf (IDO)
Electronic Information Deliver,- Units: (public use units only.)
NumMr or Units
19
15
30
N/A
11
8
6
12
5
2
7
2
N/A
9
2
For the purposes of this section, "electronic information delivery units" means computer terminals, CD.ROM readers,
microcomputers, computer printers, photocopy machines, facsimile machines, minicomputers, audio.yjsuallistening or
yjewing units, microform readers and readerlprinters, TOO units, downlinJc satellite dishes, and CATV monltor/luners
dedicated for the use of the public.
Number of electronic information delivery IInits dedicated to public use to be housed in the proposed project, and
specified in the project's building program and furnishings and equipment budget:
61
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
Units
/J ~ '7 L-1.
v I faee 18
.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: .
CSL-.... FOR-\! 2 (11/1190)
-- ------.....-.....---------
I
3
1
6
I
10
[
13
I
16
[
r
r
r
r
r
r
[
(
(
7
I
o
r
I
Q:P..k 1t~is'.r;n l'rr>C!.l::twn Car>a1>ili1L'1
.cac-:b: tbc cabie Ldr-.'Won prr..al.lttio.ll ClpabiJjtia o( the proposed project (uplink dish, cable :::hanne1, production atudio etc.):
The South Chula Vista Library will provide limited production with camcorder/
editing capabilities.
MtttitlP SIXUt (prDYidt for.laf[ .od pubUt U&t)
Community Meeting Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ~
Conference Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ~
Quiet Study Space ................................................... ~
Literacy Training Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ~
Staff Training Space .................................................. ~
Administrative Conference Space ......................................... ~
Children's Story Hour Space ............................................ ~
Multipurpose Space .................................................. ~
Theatres .......................................................... ~
EXHIBIT HALL
Other (Specify
) ................................... ~
Other (Specify
Other (Specify
) ................................... ~
) ................................... ~
Momng SJKl<<: (PubUt.... .pate only.)
Number or Seats
100
2~
16
39
N/A
8
80
N/A
N/A
N/A
For purposes of this section, 'meeting space' means community meeting space, conference space, quiet study space,
literacy training space, children's story hour space, theatres, and multipurpose space dedieated for the use of the public.
Number of square feet of meeting space dedicated to public use to be housed in the proposed project, and Specified
in the project's building program:
4.880
~
SQ.Fr.
OFFICIAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
,/
/1''1'7
, (. Pale 19
CSL-BA 'OR.\! 2 (ttItJ90)
-- -' - ----
I
2
I
6
I
9
I:
r
16
I
19
[
[
Z6
I
~9
r
12
[
16
L
19
I
12
[
[
.9
I
2
r
5
r
I
Service & Space Con,oersion Slllndaros Ind Guide;ines:
Provide information 1"egardin& any ILlDdards or ,uide1ine:s utiliz.ed in the buildin& provam for the roHaMna_ The use 0( aund.ards or
JIIidoliDes iI DOl IIIIndalory, bUI if 1IIOd, pn:Mdo lbo mDYmion faOlon for lbo foUov.Ull:
C#1I<<tions
PnMdo IOd dlO lbo 1Oun:e for IOY IIIndanl or JIIideUno 1IIOd, IUch u IIIllIl per eapila, IIIllIl per aquare foo~ o,e.:
The ChuTa Vista Public Library Master Plan and the City of Chula Vista
General Plan call for three books per capita. The Library interprets
books to mean hardcover/paperback books, videotapes, audio cassettes,
records, compact discs, periodical, and newspaper titles.
Books
The Library Master Plan provides the square footage conversion formulas.
Videotapes
Audio Cassettes
Compact Discs
Talking Books
Interactive
Videos
Newspapers 1.5 sf/title .5 title/If
RttUfer's SealS Periodicals 1.5 sfltitle I title/lf
PrDYide aDd dte tbe source Cor any standard or cuidelinc wed, IUch II reader'1 seall per capita or per 1,000 people, etc.:
The Library Master Plan calls for .0075 reader's seats per square foot.
The Library's seating square foot conversion factors are derived from the
Library Master Plan, and recommendations of I ibrary consultants and from
professional I ibrary design books.
Lounge Chairs
Carrels
4-Person Tables (Adult)
2-Person Tables (Adult)
4-Person Table (Juvenile)
Electronic workstations (PCs, CD-ROM)
Audio-visual
Reference
Adult Fiction
J Fiction
Adult Non-Fiction
J Non-Fiction
Picture Books
Large Print
Paperbacks
Li teracy
Periodicals
Square Footage
10 vols/sf
15 vols/sf
20 voTs/sf
15 vols/sf
20 vols/sf
30 vols/sf
10 vols/sf
20 vols/sf
50 vols/sf
Linear Footage
6 vols/1f
8 vols/lf
14 vols/lf
8 vols/lf
14 vols/lf
24 voTs/lf
8 vols/lf
14 vols/lf
35 vols/lf
20
30
30
13
20
vols/sf
vols/sf
voT s/sf
vols/sf
vols/sf
vol s/1 f
vo I s/1 f
vols/lf
vols/lf
vol s/1 f
8
14
24
10
20
35 sf
35 sf
100 sf
50 sf
80 sf
45 sf
Slaff Wor.l:starions
Provide IOd OLe Lbe IOUrce for any IlIDdanl or JIIideUno 1IIOd, IlICb u number ollila or iliff worblatiODl per eapila or per 1,000, ole.:
The ChuTa Vista Public Library Master Plan outlines staffing guidelines:
1 Public services librarian/5,000-7.500 residents
1 Clerical support person/51 ibrarians
1 Circulation staff member/60,000-75,OOO circulations
1 Shelver/70,000-80,000 circulations.
OFFICIAL NAME OF PROJECI': ~
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/2 - 7 ~paae 20
4"":lIi:'_t .'.n..D.I\.I.!l.l.l..l_I':I.__~
-- -=-- -.-------.-... --....
f
I
15
I
!l
r
12
r
115
l
19
I
22
[
r
Z9
I
12
,:
[
19
I
12
r
IS
[
9
l
2
I
s
r
S:uJ:1't FOO,fCP!
If ~!ion.l (,;.g. V,'heeler &: Goldhor or AL\ 1962) or local quantitative space convmicn l.tandards were utilized to
~lan this project, s~'ify the level and cite the source:
. .5 to'. 7 SF I Capita Source:. CHULA V I STA PUBL I C LIBRARY MASTER PLAN
If the Ubrary faciUty is Dot being planned to provide at least .5 square foot per capita, explain why this is Dot
DCGCSSary to meet the local service needs of the project's projected population:
The Chula Vista City Council on April 30, 1987 "approved the concept of .5 to .7
sq. ft. as an adequate planning standard for future library services in the City
of Chula Vista." The Montgomery/Otay Planning area, as outlined in the original
Master Plan, gave a current population of just over 50,000 persons with little
growth potential. In order to simplify, the Library arbitrarily multiplied .7
sq. ft. per capita, the higher end of the sq. ft. scale, by 50,000 population and
in the subsequent four years campaigned for a 35,000 sq. ft. building. Commit-
ments to this size building were made by the Site Selection Committee, in the
Negative Declaration, by the Montgomery Planning Committee and the Chula Vista
2000 Task Force in their many public meetings. When the South Chula Vista Library
service area was adjusted to include a portion of the "Eastern Territories", total
service area population also grew. The 35,000 sq. ft. South Chu1a Vista Library
will provide the 1990 estimated population of 59,545 with .59 sq. ft. of library
per capita. This falls to .41 by the year 2010 when the service area population is
estimated to grow to 85,723. However, the site can accommodate a 10,000 sq. ft.
addition which would raise the 2010 sq. ft. per capita to .52. In addition, the
.5 to .7 range was always intended to be a City-wide standard. Therefore, the
current 55,000 sq. ft. library at 365 F Street, coupled with the 35,000 sq. ft.
South Chula Vista Library, and two planned libraries in the far eastern portion
of the City wi 11 raise the total overall City per capita rate to well over ,.5
in 2010.
If the proposed project's square footage becomes inadequate to effectively serve the populatioR of the
service area within twenty years, what is the current plan to meet the library facility needs of the service area?
The proposed project identifies an expansion of 10,000 GSF. This increase in
building square footages will displace a portion of the east parking lot. The
site plan graphically depicts how we would intend increasing our parking to
the east commensurate with the increase in square footage.
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT': .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
1.2 - '7 7 Paae 21
~J_..l ..nlt~..1.J.llll!trn
- - - -----_._---~-
11
2
3
I ~
6
I ~
9
110
11
12
113
14
15
l 16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Summery or the UbMlry Facility Space Requi~ctr;t_':
Provide a summary of tbe spaces, collections, readers sealS Ind square footage in the program:
(Auaeh additional pa.cc:a it Dcc:eu.ary.)
Name or Sneee/Area
Volumes In
Collections
~
LOBBY
N/A
Readers
Seats
12
SO, FT.
BROWSING
17,251
6,471
28
54
805
1,841
~
REFERENCE
~
3,197
~
ADULT SERVICES
86,666
4,830
62
YOUNG ADULT
16
5,962
831
~
CHILDREN'S WORKROOM
N/A
56,424
N/A
N/A
760
4,352
590
.
47
N/A
~
TECHNOLOGY USERS' CENTER
~
775
20
1,221
.
CIRCULATION DESK
N/A
N/A
740
~ C I RCULAT I ON WORKROOM
LITERACY TEAM OFFICE
.
N/A
N/A
1 ;290
1,650
400
.
STUDY ROOMS
6,000
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2,850
370
~
N/A
N/A
DELIVERY AREA
N/A
N/A
100
.
Nel Assignable Sub-total:
~ 178,417
239
26,959
CONTIHUED
Non-Assignable Space": . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~
(Non.Assignable Square Footage is ~
'Ii> of the Gross Square Footage)
Total Facility Gross Square Footage: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~
. -""on-Agirnable- means utility areas of. buiJdin& required for lhe fUhetion or the buildin& 'uch as 'fairwaY', elevatOR, dedicated CDTridorl
and waU."WI)'S, public lobbis, ratrooms, duct ,hlru., mechanical rooms, electrical cJOIeU, janitor', dcKu. r~pJlea, interior and c:rtcrior...1I thictn5S,
Ctterior Imeniliea Which art pan of the buiJdin& but not enclClled. IUch u patjOl. ClDOpis, porcbes, c::D\Icred walkways ctc..
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY P ~~
age ...
).J - 7 ~CSL-'A 'OIL\! 2 (ttJ1J9O)
a....-.___.__. _... __.-..-'~
l'~
3
I 4
5
6
I 7
8
9
I 10
]1
]2
I 13
]4
]5
l ]6
]7
]8
]9
I 20
2]
22
I 23
24
25
I 26
27
28
I 29
:;0
31
I 32
33
3-l
I 35
36
37
I 38
39
40
I 41
42
43
I 44
45
46
I 47
4S
49
I 50
51
52
I
L
SU::lmB"j or the Ubn,,' TBdli~ Spilt:< Requirrments:
PrO\ide a summa!)' of the spaces, c:olJections, readers seal.! and square footage in the program:
(AIUlch additional pa,es if Dec:e:r.s.al')',)
Name of SOBce/Area
STAFF LOUNGE/LOCKERS
~
CUSTODIAL SERVICES
~
Volumes In Ruders
Collections Seals SO. IT.
N/A N/A 430
N/A N/A 205
N/A N/A .400
27,99.4
Non-Assignable Space': . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~
~
STORAGE
7,006
35,000
Total Facility Gross Square Footage: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~
~
. ~on'Auirnable. lDeans utility a.re.u of I buildin, required for the funt'tion of lhe buildin, lueh IS Itlif'Wl)", elMton., dediC3ted conidon
and 1lo'31i.-v.'a)'S, public lobbiC$, RStrtlOau, duet IhJfLl, mechanical rDOma, de:ctria.! da5e1ol,janilof" dCKU, ru-epJICIC$, inu:rior and c:rlerior wall lhictneu,
merior Imenities Which a~ pan of lhe buildin& but nOI cnclOloed, sucb IS patjOl., canopics, ponhcs, Q7.-cr= .'IIMY' etc.
~
~
~
~
~
.
.
~
.
~
~
~
Net Assignable Sub.total:
(Non-Assignable Square Footage is ~
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~
~
178,417
239
20.02
% of the Gross Square Footage)
SOUTH (HULA VISTA LIBRARY
);{' 7/
Paz. 22
CSI,BA FOR.\! 2 (1I.l119O)
,-
l
3
I
6
I
[
13
L
I:
[
[
r
~
I-
iI
I
4
SITE DATA:
For new construction, conversion and additioD/renovation projects, provide all of the following data for evaluation or
the proposed library site: .
Ownership and Availability
(p",..;de for mDodelinc pn>jecu u O<ell.)
Silt
Is the library site currently owned by the applicant?
Yes D No []
Yes[I] NoD
Yes 0 No UJ
Will the library site be owned by the applicant?
Is the library site currently leased by the applicant?
If the library site is leased, provide the name and address of the owner:
NAME: ~
N/A
ADDRESS: ~
N/A
If the library sile is nOI already owned by the applicant:
,c
(a)
A legally executed option to purchase agreement for the site shall be submitted with the application; or
.,
II
(b)
A legally executed lease or lease-purchase agreement for the site shall be submitted with the application.
(See Section 20414 (f))
v
1
Bujldjn~
4 (For ~ion Projecu Only)
7
~
Is the building to be convened currently owned by the applicant?
N/A
)
YesD No D
If the building to be convened is not already owned by the applicant, a legally executed option to purchase agreement
for the building shall be submitted with the application (even if the building will be donated to the applicant).
OFFICIAL NAME OF PROJECJ': ~ SOLlTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
Cy" I)
II- Z5 (/ Pale 23
--. .- ----------
I
3
I
15
I
!l
I:
I:
r
[
I:
zs
I
28
I:
[
[
r
I~
r
17 Boundary SUI"\'e)'
I
;0
{
r
I
TItle CoI1siderations
(l'nMdt (or n:mocl<iina projOCll U ....U.)
Silt
Provide a preliminary title repon for tbe proposed library site witb the application (See Section 20424 (b)).
ROGER KAHELIN
Name or TItle Company Officer: .
Name of Title Company: .
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE
Address: .
P.O. BOX 808
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA q2112
Telephone: .
231-4623
Axe there any exceptions to marketable record title?
(Su Section 20424 (b))
Yes 0 No [!]
U 50, the applicant shall provide legal counsel's written opinion regarding exceptions in the title repon.
BuiLIinp
(For Convenion Projecu Only.)
Provide a preliminary title repan for the building to be convened into a library with the application.
(Su Section 20424 (b)).
Name of Title Company Officer: .
N/A
Name of Title Company: .
N/A
Address: .
N/A
Telephone: .
N/A
Axe there any exceptions to marketable record title?
(Su Section 20424 (b))
Yes 0 No ILl
U so, the applicant shall provide legal counsel's written opinion regarding exceptions in the title repan.
(prDYide (or n:moclt1ina projecu U ....n.)
(For lIIultipUlJlClK projOCll, prDYidt (or the libra!)' panicn ol projecl 0DJy.)
Provide a boundary survey showing the metes and bounds of the proposed library site upon which the proposed library
facility and site improvements are to reside. The survey shall be stamped and signed by a licensed land surveyor.
OFFICIAL NAME OF PROJECT:. SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY /) ~S) Pale:4
CSkBA .rOIt~u...ll1ll.1Ill)
.__.~---------- ~----_._---
h
2
H
6
I ~
9
r 10
11
12
I~
IS
I 16
17
18
I 19
20
21
22
I~
lS
I~
28
I~
31
1'32
!3
34
I~
37
J8
I !9
40
<41
112
t3
44
I:
<47
L:
SO
III
Appralw
(For ..wupwp:llC projecu. p<"OYid. for lilc lllnry ponioc of projcd oaJy.)
Sill.
What is/Was the purc:lwe price of the library site?
1,865,000
.$
(prooidc \he ~.. llBIy It appnioal iI nquired.)
What is the appraised value of the library site? . $ 1,734,000
Name of appraiser wbo performed appraisal:. GREG LIMBACH AND THOMAS O. MARSHALL
Telepbone: .
259-4900
232-2801
BOTH HAVE MAl
(Shall have MAl or SREA)
Enclose a copy of the appraisal for the propeny (See Section 20416 (d)).
Credentials: .
BuildinP
What is,lllllS tbe purcbase price of the building to be convened?
.$
N/A
(prtJOIid. lb. foUowin, oaJy it Ippraiul iI '"'I"ired.)
What is the appraised value of tbe building?
.$
N/A
Name of appraiser who performed appraisal: .
N/A
Telephone: .
N/A
Credentials: .
N/A
(Shall bave MAl or SREA)
Enclose a copy of tbe appraisal for the propeny (See Section 20416 (d)).
Site Use Potential
k=ribilitv
Is the site strategically located in a geograpbically central pan of the library service area?
Yes CiI No 0
Yes 0 No II]
Yes II] No 0
Is the site located in a retail commercial business district (eitber downtown or suburban)?
Is the site generally acx:essible to aU pans of the service area?
omCL\L NAME OF PROJECT: .
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/ J -75 JPaae 2!
CSl,BA FORM 2 (ltl1M)
.....- . - - ...----.
I.
.
3
l
6
r
9
p
.2
13
U
16
j :
19
r~
22
r~
2S
C
28
~
r
""
r
37
L
40
L
43
t
46
L
49
I
52
I
Dcscril:le any natural or aniticia! barriers which may impede access to the site:
There are no natural or artificial barriers which may impede access to the site.
List the major anerial routes in the proximity of the site with traffic count (number of vehicles per day) information:
Street Name
~ 4TH AVENUE
~ ORANGE AVENUE. EAST OF 4TH
ORANGE AVENUE. WEST OF 4TH
~
Number
or Blocks
from Sile
Tnmc Count
~ J2!tt
11 .0Bo MAY 19B"
B.9BO FEBRUARY 1990
10,B70 FEBRUARY 1990
1
~
Is sile located on a pedestrian circulation pallem?
Yes l!J No 0
Yes l!J No 0
Yes ill No 0
Can curb CUIS be Obtained to provide access to site?
Is site located on or near a mass transit line?
Number of mass transit lines stopping within 1/4 mile of site: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ~
Lib1TU'V ParkinJ~
Number of spaces available off street. on site: ........................... ~
17C;
spaces
Number of spaces available off street. off site: ........................... ~
(1rilbin 500 lee' 01 Iron' door)
o
spaces
Number of spaces available on street: ................................. ~
(1ritbin 500 lee' 01 Ironl door))
n
spaces
TOTAL NUMBER OF SPACES AVAll...ABLE FOR PARKING: . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ~
175
150
spaces
Number of parking spaces required by zoning: ........................... ~
spaces
Calculate the number of parking spaces required, if 1.5 square foot of parking space is Deeded for every 1.0 square foot
of library building (assume an average parking space equals 350 SF/Space):
Building Gross SF X 1.5 divided by 350 _ ......................... ~
150
spaces
OffiCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
j)-l7,
/ Pqe 26
I
--,.
- ~-- -'~-"'----------- --. ---
- ..~.,._-------_._-~~-_._--_.._- .---
I .
..
3
I
6
r
9
G
13
U
16
f;
19
C
r
26
I:
29
r
r:
r
r
L
I:
r
;1
l
i4
I
l.
U proposed proj~1 provides less parking than 1.5 SF of parking space to 1 SF of building space, prO\ide
jus:ifica:ion of wby the tibral)' Iiw;!s less parking:
Project does not provide less than the minimum parking required.
Site Description
~
The total square footage of the library site should equal the square footage shown in 1 through 7 below:
(U tbe project iI all addition to an e:risliD& library, complete thiI section for the eDtin' aile. i..c.. the Cltistinllitc plus any newt)' acquired land.)
(U lb. project ill ",ultipurpooe buildin,. "'",pl.,. Ibis aection only lor lb. library portion 01 lb. project.)
1. PROPOSED LIBRARY BUll.DING FOOTPRINT"
. 3~.OOO. SF
. 75.730 SF
. 10.000 SF
. 38.650 SF
. 30,035 SF
. 30,600 SF
. 59.328 SF
. 27'l.336 SF
2. PROPOSED LIBRARY PARKING LOT
3. FUTURE LIBRARY EXPANSION OF BUILDING"
4. FUTURE LIBRARY EXPANSION OF PARKING"
5. REQUIRED LOCAL ZONING SET-BACKS
6. DESIRED AESTHETIC SET-BACKS &. AMENITIES
7. MISCELLANEOUS &. UNUSABLE SPACE
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF LIBRARY PROJECT SITE:
.
"FOOtprint' means !be square footage of surface area of !be site that !be building occupies.
.. U expansion for !be building or parking will not take additional space on !be site, please explain method to be
used:
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: . SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
tl(
/ ) ./ Pille 27
CSL-1lA FORM 2 (tl/lJ9O)
......--..-
r
3
l
(
(;
[}
C
18
l~
21
r
24
I:
28
L
31
j
34
I~
r
[
44
L
r
49
[
52
I
I
ZLJninS!
Vibat is tile current zoning classification or the site? ...
R-2
Will the site have to be rezoned to build the project?
Yes 0 Nom
Yes 0 Nom
Will a variance be needed to build the project?
If so, when can the variance be obtained? ...
N/A
Solar O'*TI1atil",
(Date)
Will the orientation or the site and placement or the building on the site allow solar access from a westerly direction
inlo the library building through windows or doors?
If yes, how will this problem be addressed:
Yes 0 Nom
N/A
TOOOvrtlllhv
Describe the general tOpography or the site. Is the site generally level or will it require extensive rough grading?
Provide cstimatcs on the amount and cost of cut and fill that may be ncccssarv:
Site is generally level with a slight slope from north to south of approximately 1 '-0"
per 200'-0" of length.
Has a topographical survey been completed?
Yesm NoD
Draiflllpt
(pn:JYide Cor remodelin. projects u weD.)
Is the site in the 100 Year Flood Plain?
YesD Nom
YesD Nom
Yes 0 NoUJ
Do any water courses drain onto the site which require control?
Do any water .courses drain off the site which require conlrol?
Is the storm sewer system adequate to prevent localized flooding or the site during intense Storms? Yes ill No D
OFFICIAL NAME OF PROJECT:... SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
/
, "j "'i
./ J... '''<'5 / Pille 28
f"'~IU_"'" .mJUd'._'. .ll..1 1].1""
-
I" California EllviTollmtl'ltal Oualirv Act (CEOA'
J
I
I
10
f
13
l~
I:
!O
[
(Sa !':.hI.';<aoW'CC ::..,Qt, Sectior.l :Jooo. 21177 lIlJ C&li!cmU COOe of Re,ul1tions, Tnlel., Sections 13000 .1538;)
(J'nMd. for romodo1iD, projoell u ...U.)
The applicant, as the lead agency, shall provide evidence that the necessary environmental impact documentation (EID)
IS required by the provisions of CEQA has b<<n fully completed:
1)
U the applicant bas determined that there is no possibility the project will result in an adverse environmental
impact, or that the project qualifies for a specific statutory or regulatory exemption, and therefore is not subject
to the provisions of the act, provide an explanation and appropriate citations:
Refer to CEQA document attached.
~
I'
,
,
~
,.,
.'J1
o
3
II an exemption is claimed for the project, provide a statement of the basis for the claim, and if completed, a
copy of the Notice of Exemption with the application.
6
.,
2)
U a negative declaration was adopted for the project, provide a final copy of the negative declaration, as well
as a conformed (stamped by the County Clerk) copy of the Notice of Determination which has been signed by
the lead agency and filed with the County Clerk with the application.
II the project was the subject of an Environmental Impact Repon (EIR), provide a final copy of the EIR and
a conformed (stamped by the County Clerk) copy of the Notice of Determination which has been signed by the
lead agency and filed with the County Clerk with the application.
~
o
3)
.
!
Before adopting a Negative Declaration, or a final Environmental Impact Repon, the applicant shall submit the draft
5 environmen tal documen ts to the:
State Clearinghouse
I Office of Planning and Research
I 1400 10th Succt
Sacramento, California 95814
The applicant shall take into consideration timely comments made by state agencies on the project before adopting final
environmental documents and approving the project. The applicant shall provide either the compliance letter or the
comments from state agencies provided by the State Clearinghouse with the application. After project approval, a
Notice of Determination shall be filed with the County Clerk before it is submitted with the application.
J)..- g r?' Pale n
, .
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: . SOUTH CHULA VISTA L' BRARY
CSL-IIA FOIL\! 2 (11/1J9O)
;--- .
,.
3
(
7
I
10
I
13
[
I:
20
I
23
L
[
30
I
53
r
56
[
10
t
13
~
16
r
r
;3
1
[
l
.
Sl:i.:.mar.LZ.e the pctent:a~ significant adve:s: effcc~ to the environment of the proposej proje.ct and any
DlUStlfes that have b<<n adopted to mitigate or reduce these effects:
None noted in negative declaration.
Ne there any unresolved legal actions pending against the project regarding CEQA compliance? If so,
provide the case name, coun number and a brief explanation:
N/A
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: . SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/) ''D ( PaKe 30
C$L.BA FORM 2 (11111'0)
t-
-: -"--------
I
3
I
6
J
9
r
12
L
15
t
1:
r
r
!7
I
10
[
r
,7
I
o
r
3
[
HistorU: dist:':'::.s
(l'l'OYid. Cor .....oddins projecu u weu.)
Was the existing library building, if it is being renovated or expanded as pan of the project, or any buildings on
adjacent propenies, bullt prior to 1941?
Yes 0 No [l]
Is the existing library building, or any buildings on adjacent propenies:
On the National Register of Historic Places?
YesD N00
Yes 0 No Ii]
Yes 0 No [l]
Yes 0 No []
A National Historic Landmark?
A National Monument?
On County or Municipal Historic Designation list?
Is there a local historic preservation ordinance that applies to the proposed project site or any adjacent propenies?
Yes 0 No []
If yes, briefly specify any applicable requirements or restrictions, such as height limits etc.:
N/A
!
)
If yes, is the proposed project conceptual design substantially in compliance with the loal historic preservation
ordinance?
N/A
YesD NoD
ornclAL NAME OF PROJECT: . SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
} ') /y;i
f Palc 31
rct.__ A.Rl'\IU.I.. ~.n..I.."'-_
l'
3
(
6
(
&o1w..:lJ:Q! R<:>o11
Identify and summarize any spedal geologic conditions, including, but not limited to, compressible and
expansive soils, tunnels and mine shafts, unstable slopes, active seismic zones, excessive grollnd water
and areas prone to liquefaction. Indicate if these conditions will prevent the use, or significantly
increase the cost of developing the site for a public library building:
G
13
I:
16
C
rn
;..,:
23
I'
26
r
29
[
33
L
36
)
39
1:
[
46
f
49
I:
I:
>6
I
I
From a geotechnical engineering standpoint the site is suitable for construction of
the proposed building. The materials encountered in the borings consisted of firm
to stiff sandy clay and loose to medium dense clayey sand topsoils to a maximum
depth of 3-1/2 feet. Loose silty sand fill soils were encountered in boring 1 to a
cepth of approximately 8 inches. Residual soils comprised of very stiff sandy clay
and medium dense clayey sand were encountered in boring 4 between depths of 1-1/2
to 5 feet. The surficial soils were underlain by Pleistocene age terrace deposits
comprised predominantly of hard sandy clay and clayey to sandy silt and medium dense
to dense clayey to silty sand. Near surface clayey soils possess a low expansion
potential. No tunnels or mineshafts are know to be present on-site or in the
vicinity. Free ground water was not encountered at the site and no surface seeps
observed. No faults are known to pass through the site. The faults generally
considered to have the most potential for earthquake damage in the vicinty of the
site are approximately 41 to 60 miles northeast of the site. Available information
indicates that the location of and geotechnical conditions are not conductive to
seismically induced waves, inundation due to dam or embankment failure, landsliding,
lateral spreading, differential compaction, ground cracking and liquefaction.
Provide a copy of the geotechnical repon performed by a licensed engineer with the application.
Dtmolition costs
Describe any demolition costs involved with the site:
Preparation of the site will involve demolition of several one-story wood frame
structures consisting of several residences as well as a church and several small
outlying sheds. Located on the church grounds is an additional one-story wood
frame building with basement and trellis. The demolition costs of these structures
is estimated at $59,700. The existing paving, hardscape, and landscape at each of
the residences wi II be demolished, as well as the parking lot and drive on the
church grounds. Cost for this work is estimated at $4,500. General cleaning of
accumulated is estimated at $88,827 including general conditions, escalation, and
contingencies.
ornClAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
).,.1~
r Pale 32
CSL-I.A FORM 2 (11ltl9O)
..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
-------. - -------------
P8S--03 ~
Oe5aibe utilities availability and associated COSts if any utilities are not cunentl)' located within 100 rut or a propeny
line of the site:
(All 011";1< 00011 beyODd 100 roo< utili!)' .;,,-w .... lac:al i.oeliJibl<". .- bu.wll be iden.iliCll I.d iIldudCll iIllh. bud,.. .'UZlII< lIDdcr
iDeli(lblc aile deYCbpIDeDl caal.l,)
-
.$
Cost to BriM Service to Site
N/A
omCLU NAME or PROJECT: . SOUTH CHUL~ V I STA L I B'~.Y
~;Ot~RoMT~~?pOo~EE ~'.. f1A~
.
REVlSE~ ~~D APPROVED MPY-CH 6, 1991
L'riWil:s
l!!lli!.1: Avallabilit\'
Electricity Yes ro No D
Telephone Yes ro No D
Gas Yesro NoD
Cable TV Yes!iJ No D
Storm Sewer Yes EJ No D
5.aniLary Sewer Yes GJ No D
Water Yes I:J No D
.$ N/A
.$ N/A
.$ N/A
. S N/A
. $ N/A
. $ N/A
L"t.l
a
I
,
,
Ii.
(
f
"',
Z ,
< ,
-' >
,
~
..::
g ~
en ,
0>
..: .
t!~
.....
,
.-:
Silt Dr>.IlID""'1II Costs
Utilities ....................................... . S
Cut, Fill '" Rough Grading
Spuial FoundJIlion Suppon
(p1hnrs etc.)
............... eo.........
......................... .
Paving, Clubs, gutters '" sid~alks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ReLaining Walls ..................................
Landscaping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sign age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lighling ... _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Removal of underground Lanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ .
Removal of toxic malerials . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rock removal ...................................
Other (Spuif))
~ISCELLANEOUS FEATURES - pedestrian gateways
. ...................
tower structures
. orr SIT( \IORK - Grading, pav~n.g... ~~7~~.~ .I!~~t.e.r.s . $
. $
EIi.ible
124.523.00
137,445.00
. $
N/A
. S 253,624.00
. $ N/A
. S 329.428.00
. $ 11.345.00
. S 82,186.00
. S N/A
. $ N/A
. $ N/A
. S
201,189.00
TOTAL SITE DEVELOPMENT COSTS: ................ . $ 1,139.740.00
;,
'~
.-
III"tli.ibl<
. $
. $
. $
. $
. S
. $
. $
. $
\
" '
~
\"
'-..
'\
,\
'~
,
. s
. s
. $
. s
. $
~
t
.
..: ~
'" .
i-' .
.... ,
'"
-',
(
262,217.00
. S
262.217.00
.
< ,
(
i-' f
..: ,
'" ,
"',
0'
..:
0,0
/ ;).. / I Pac< 33
est.-a" FOIL'" 2 (llI1J'O)
,.
------------------
M.i!iz:gfinr Cimmrstances:
,.
"
4
I,
8
l1'
12
[
16
...
L
20
...
I
24
.,~
L
[
33
L
37
L
41
l
45
l
49
t
53
I
56
...
L
50
r
i4
.p
I
is
I
I
If thcre arc l'rcbJerns v.ith the proooseJj sitc, 1tt'hat mitigatlrtg ci!C1Jms:allce.5 lessen the negative imFact?
Oc$aibe the proposed design solutlofJ.\ which mooerate the site's drawbacks. Provide infotmation on alternative
liles coll.Sidered, and why we proposed site is the best location for a public library in the acrvice area:
The site is very suitable for a library. There are no drawbacks to the site that
are known at this time. Adequate acreage for proposed library, landscaping. and
on site parking which exceeds the state formula standard.
V'&nlQ1 RtCord:
Provide photographs and/or a video tape of the site and surrounding area. Show several views of the site and a 360
degree perspective around the site of tlie surrounding buildings. Label all photographs and video tapes with the name
of the applicant and project
Mw.:
Provide a map showing the location of the proposed library sile in the community. This map (or another with a larger
$Cale) shall sliow the service area of the proposed project, and if possible, the nearest exisung library (other than the
one being replaced). ,
PROjECf TIME."I'ABLE'
Provide the timetable for the proposed project Show estimated dates of almpletion, as well as actual ~tcs of
completion:
TIMETABLE
DATE
February 5. 1991
.
. February 15. 1991
. Noyembe r 29. ]991
. March 6. 1992
. Auqust 30. 1992
. Noyembe r 15, 1993
Site Purchaseil.ease Agreement Executed
Schematic Plans & Cost Estimate
Design Development Plall.S & Cost Estimate
Working Drawings & Final Cost Estimate
Stan of Construction
Completion of Coll.Struction
Calculate the number of months from the month of application until the estimated ltan of alll.Struction:
18.5
.
Months
Calculate the number of months for the coll.Struction of Ihc project from stan to finish:
.
16
Months
omCIAL NAME OF PROJEC"I': . SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
)),-1/
C$L..... fOL" 2 (1111190)
Pale 34
f'-' --
,
! ,.
. I
,...
;3
i1
.7
L
11
r
15
r
19
r
23 (a)
f: ~)
r (c)
!2
L
16 (d)
[ (e)
10
[ (f)
14
r
IS (g)
10
(h)
;2
;~
f
~
l
,
5
l
9
I
I
CONCEPTUAL ARLHUJ:;CI1JRAL PLANS
New construction, convenlons and addlllonlrenoVIIllons:
For new construction, conversion and addition/renovation projects, a set of conceptual plans (no less than 22 X 34
inches for paper size) prepared by an architect licensed to practice in the State of California shall be submitted with
the application. Mulupurpose projects shall submit the required conceptual plans for both the total multipurpose
project, as well as the library ponion of the projea.
The conceptual plans shall consist of the following:
,
An area plan showing the library site in context with the surrounding 'neighborhood buildings, parking and
streets.
A site plan showing the library building, parking lot and access roads, as well as any anticipated future expansion
of the building and parking 101. The site plan shall also indicate the direction of nonh.
A floor plan (single line) showing, and identifying by name on the plan, the major programmed areas for the
library. Each area shall show the square footage called for in the library building program and the actual square
footage allocated on the plan. .
Two sections through the building, one longitudinal and one latitudinal.
Two elevations, with one elevation being the front of the library building.
Outline specifications describing the type of construction by identifying the basic building components (structural,
mechanical etc.), and the type of occupancy. The archllect shall reference any applicable Sections OeState
Statutes and State Building Codes. .
For the remodeling ponion of the project, a floor plan which identifies the extent and limits of the remodeling.
For projects which involve rehabilitation for health and safety purposes, the architect shall cite the specific
Sections of State Statutes, State Building Codes or local codes whicn demonstrate that the existing building is
in need of rehabilitation for health and safety purposes. If local codes are cited, provide a copy of any CIted
sections of the local code.
Remodelin& of existing libraries only:
For projects which involve remodeling of existing libraries exclusively, only outline s~fications with a floor plan which
identifies the extent and limits of remodeling shall be submitted with the application. If the remodeling project involves
rehabilitation for health and safety purposes, the architect shall cite the sllCCific Sections of State Statutes, State
Building Standards Codes or local codes which demonstrate that the existing library building is in need of rehabilitation
for heafth and safety purposes. Provide a copy of any sections of the local code which have been cited.
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT: ~ SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
/c2 - idZ
Pale 35
l'"Sl........__'ROR.l.(,_~..I,u_n18f)\
. - ---- --.--------
"
"
3
4
"
8
t?
12
G
16
P
.)
20
o
24
G
28
n
JJ
32
[]
36
P
_J
40
C
44
(}
48
(~
-.
52
r
JJ
56
[
60
[
64
[
68
f
L
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Normal Construction Costs in the Applicant's Area:
(Su Section 20418 (c))
(For pn>jecu wil!l _ CODltnlctiOD oDly.)
In order to jllStify the eligible projected construction cost estimate for new construction, the following information is
required:
The current (1990) cost of public library buildings figure of S115.20 per square foot multiplied by the following locality
adjllStment factor:
1) County:.
San Diego
Multiplier Factor: .
1. 18
2) Locally AdjllSted Cost Per 5!tuare Foot (SISF):
(S115.20 X Multiplier Factor)
. S
135.94
I SF
This figure is increased by 113 percent for every month from the State Librarian's deadline for application until the
anticipated bid date which prOVIdes the eligible projected construction cost per square foot estimate.
3) Number of Months:
14
X .33 ..
.
4.62
% Inflation Factor
4) Locally AdjllSted SISF X Innation Factor % ..
. S
6.28
I SF
The locally adjllSted cost per ~uare foot figure added to the innation factor cost per square foot figure (line 2 pIllS
line 4) equals the normal public construction cost in the applicant's area:
5) Eligible projected construction SISF:
. S
142.12
I SF
The eligible projected construction cost is calculated by multiplying the eligible projected construction cost per square
foot figure tunes the square footage of new construcuon:
Eligible projected construction SISF:
(re-enter line S)
142.22 X 35,000
. S
142.22
I SF
The Square Footage of New Construction:
.
35,000
SF
Equals:
6) The eligible projected construction COSt:
. S 4,977,700.00
If the projected construction COSt estimated !'Y the project architect is lower than the .figure in line 6, the applicant
shall IISe the lower figure as the normal public construction cost in the applicant's area.
If the optional modification below is not utilized, the eligible projected construction COSt may be increased by fifteen
percent to allow for a contingency at this point:
746,655.00
Eligible Contingency:
(15 % of line 6)
.S
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT: . SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
i2-;} Paae36
CSL-BA FORM 2 1I1J1J9O)
(
I
'3
..
I,
8
(1
i:
15
(1
19
C
23
[1
27
P
~J
31
r~
35
[]
19
r"
Optional moditicatlon,
The appliC:lnl ma." at its option, employ a local cost comparison approach to increase the eligible projected
construction cost figure. List a minimum of three comparable public construction projects which have been bId within
two yurs of the SUI te Librarian's dudline for application:
Contract
CostlSF
Proiect
N/A
N/A
Date Bid
A) .
B) .
C).
D) .
E) .
F).
$
$
$
$
$
$
I SF
I SF
I SF
I SF
I SF
I SF
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Comparable public construction projects are post offices, museutns, counhouses, city halls, auditoriums, community
college and public libraries, senior cllizens centers, public schools and recrution centers.
The costs per square foot of the above recently bid comparable projects are averaged to obUlin the:
7) Locally Determined Comparable SISF:
(average of A through F)
The average of this locally determined comparable cost per square foot figure (line 7) and the eligible projected
construction cost per square foot figure (line 3) equals the reviseil eligible projected construction cost per square foot:
.$
N/A
I SF
Locally Determined Comparable SISF:
(reenter line 7)
. $
N/A
I SF
Plus
Eligible Projected Construction SISF:
(reenter line 5)
. $
N/A
I SF
.~
13
Divided by 2, Equals
..
N/A .
8) Revised Eligible Projected Construction SISF: . $ I SF
The revised eligible projected construction cost is calculated by multiplying the eligible projected construction cost per
square foot figure ltmes the square fooUlge of new constructIon: .
'"
17
,,,
'v Revised eligible projected construction SISF:
il (reenter line 8)
. $
N/A
I SF
x
"+ The Square Footage of New Construction:
5
.
N/A
SF
Equals:
"
9
9) The revised eligible projected construction cost: . $
The revised eligible projected construction cost may be incrused by fifteen percent to allow for a contingency:
N/A
..
3
Eligible Contingency:
(15% of line 9)
.$
N/A
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECT, . SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
/-1 ~ 7'1 rale 37
rr..,. .....,~.'DA......_.u...........__.
r -
r
3
f
8
t
12
I
IS
l~
r
..
!2
f
:s
t"
8
Q
IHuiled Projected Construction Cost Estimate
For new construction, tbe architect sball provide the applicant, and the applicant sball submit witb the application, a
conceptual phase estimate of the projected construction COSIS for the proposed project. The estinrate shaH be organized
using eitber A or B. as follows, or a similar estimating format. Tlie rootnoted citations below are provided only as
a reference. Applicants are not required to use the external documents footnoted by asterisks in order to comply with
the COSt estimate requirements.
A.
General Requirements
Site Work
Concrete
Masonry
Metals
Wood and Plastics
Thermal and Moisture Protection
Doors and Windows
rlDisbes
Specialties
Equipment
Furnishings
Special Conditions
Conveying Systems
Mechanical
Electrical
B...
Foundations
Substructures
Superstructures
Exterior Closure
Roofing
In terior Construction
Conveying
Mechanical
Electrical
General Conditions
Special
Site Work
1
2
. Construction Specifications Institute (C.S.I.) Masterformat Divisions
.. R.S. Means Assemblies Cost Data Manual
5 For remodeling work, tbe architect sball provide the applicant, and the applicant shall submit witb the application, a
conceptual plans estimate of the projected construction costs for the proposed project. The estimate shall be organized
by the three types of eligible project expenditures for remodeling work:
A Energy Conservation
B. Access for the Disabled
C. Compliance with Current Health and Safety Requirements for Public Facilities
For remodeling work, the architect shall also provide a lump sum estimate for the remaining .general" remodeling work
included in the project.
Multipurpose Cost Comparison:
(For multipurpose projects Only.)
The architect shall provide the applicant, and the applicant shall submit with the application, a COSt analysis comparing
the budget of the multipurpose. project as a whole witb the budget of tbe library ponion of the project, using tbe same
formats as above.
omClAL NAME OF PROJECT:. SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
);). - '7'tj
Pqe 38
"
f
- - --_._---- ---- ----~-------
~ - ------------
,. REhst:'1 A:\D APPROVED MARCH 6. 1991
LiLrary Proje-rt Bud.<t
(pro'ide for all projecu. Pro,ide for library ponion onl)' of multipurpose projens,)
ll1lRUlY PROJECT COSTS IUGTBLE
1) Purchase Price or Appraise4 Value of Building. . . . . . . . . . . . . S N I A
Coll5truction Contract for:
2) Nt:<J" ConstruClioD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S
(Including additioll5)
Remodeling for:
3)
4)
S)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
]2)
13)
14)
IS)
16)
17)
18)
]9)
20)
2])
22)
Energy Coll5e",..tiOD ......................... S
Disabled Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. S
H...lth &: Safety ............................ s
General (Other)
.. ...... _0.. ...............
Contingency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s
Sile Deyelopment CoSts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. S
Site DemOlition Costs ............................. . s
Fastened SheMng &: Built.in Equipment ................. S
Works of An . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. s
FlIrnishinp ..................................... $
MovaNe Equipment ..............................
Geotechnical Reports ............................... $
Archileclural &: Engin~ring F= ..................... . $
Construction Cost Estimator F= . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Asbestos Consultant F= . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Libra!)' Consultant F= . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $
Interior Desij;ncr F= . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. S
Local Project Administration Com ....................
Other {Specify
Othcr (Specify
Relocation Costs
) ....$
) ..... $
Project Manager
ornn..L """'E or PROJECT: ..
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
LEONARD M. MOORE . ~ ill
MAYOR PRO TEMPORE w:m." . ~
4.394.564
NIl.
NIl.
NIl.
N/A
659.185
1.139.741
88.827
748.380
43.946
628.490
N/A
2.965
~27.348
10.000
o
20.000
]00.000
N/A
NIl.
110.000
J
INEUGlBLE
N/A
.$ 0
..
c
f-
"'L
N/A ~g
....l..
><~
N/A '" >
ffi~
N/A
"'''
0..
NIl. P<:..
.. S
.$ 0
.. S 262.217
. s.
. s
. s
N/A
N/A
o
o
521.000
N/A
o
.s
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
. S 0
.s "0.000
.s 0
PMgr ~9
CSL.a" FOR.\! Z (11Ili9Oi
/ ) - 9/
c?'- . G;"
~
,~
~
~
'~
t:
rz
..
rz
or::rz
"'<
t-<..
......
'"
....l~
C
.
<..
c
t-<f-
'" L
"'u
'" <
o
or::
REVISeD AND APPROVED MARCH 6, 1991
ElJGTBLE
,
23) Subtotal .................................. ... S 8 ,473 ,446
(Add lines 1 through 22)
24) Sute Projea Administration Fee .................... .. $
(1/2% of line 23 eligible c:osts)
42,367
25)
26)
1,865,000
N/A
Purchase Price of Land ........................... .. $
~ppraised Value of Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. $
(NO lease or lease-purchase)
..$
N/A
27) Credit for Architeaural &. Engineering (A &. E) Fees
(paid for prior to 2/15/88 for 1st funding cycle,
and prior to 7/19/88 for 2nd funding cycle)
28) TOTAL COSTS: .................................$ 10,380,813
I1'ElJG!BLE
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
.. $ 1,203,217
SOURCES or PROJECT INCOME:
29) Sute Matching Funds............................ .. $ 6.747.528
(65% of line 28 eligible costs)
30) Local Matching Funds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. $ 3.633,285
(35% of line 28 eligible costs)
31) City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. $
3.633.285
o
32) County. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. $
33)
Special District ..................................... .. $
o
34)
o
Private .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. $
35)
o
Other (Specify:
).....$
36) Local Credits (Land, A&E Fees and Furnishings) ................... .. $ . 0
(Enter total of figures on lines 25 through 27 and only
furnishings from line 12 which have already been acquired
prior to the State Librarian's deadline for application)
(No credit for land which will be acquired)
(The addition of lines 31 through 36 must ~ual line 30)
37) Adjusted Local Match ...................................... .. $ 3,633,285
(Line 30 minus line 36)
38) Supplemental Local Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. $
(The same as line 28 ineligible)
1,203,217
39) TOTAL PROJECT INCOME: ................................ .. $ 1l,584,030
(Add lines 29, 30 and 38)
OffiCIAL NAME or PROJECT: ..
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY
~~~~R~'T:~~;E L..o /iJ, YUmnn
);J JJ 7
CSL-BA fOR!'1 % (I UlJ9())
N/A
N/A
Page 40
'"
o
H
"'u
Z'"
<'"
0-11-<
'"
><
"'><
~~
"'''''
01-<
"'0-1
J
~
~
~
~
Z
I-<
"'~
~:J
1-<1>0
'"
o-1ro.
o
.
<'"
o
HH
"'u
"''''
""'"
01-<
"''''
r
1
2
3
4
5
P
8
9
110
11
12
I 13
14
15
I 16
17
18
119
20
21
22
I~
25
126
27
28
129
30
,31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
1.Dca! Fundln& Commitment:
'Provide the D=ry resolution 1>)' the governing body of the applicant require4 to suppon the application,
(See 5<<tion 20416 (a))
SIGNATURES
The panies below anest to and cenify the accuracy and tnIthfulness of the application for California Library
Construction and Renovation Bond Act funds. U the application is succ:e:ssful, the applicant agrees to cx=te the
project on the basis of the application data provide herein. .
LIBRARY DIRECTOR
I hereby affirm that the library jurisdiction, for which I am the administrative agent, approves of the application and
will operate the facility IS a library after ilS completion.
. VJ 1
I - a \ ~
SIcDo,J
-
.
February 7, 1991
Do..
.
ROSEMARY LANE
.
LIBRARY DIRECTOR
Tille (1)pc)
N__ (1)pc)
HEAD OF PlAmoLNG DEPARTMEJI"
(U applicable, Spe=! Oist,;clI exempl)
I hereby cenify the accuracy of the 1990 and 2010 population figures contained in the application for' the jurisdiction
which I represent.
v--/d LL-
.
.
February 7, 1991
SIcDo'''"
Dole
.
ROBERT A. LEITER
.
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
N__ (1)pc)
Tille (1)pc)
ELECTED OrnCIAL
Signature or Mayor, Chairperson or Board or Supervisors, or Head or District, authorized to make application for the
local jurisdic!ion
/'
'---// (
. v(' nt(. "" f,,( til.orL",:"
.
-:p;: t.1i'<.Jt<IJ 1. /p P /
5....',,"
.
, Qa..
MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
.
LEONARD M. MOORE
N__ (1)pc)
Tille (1)pc)
ornCIAL NA.\1E OF PROJECT: . SOUTH CHULA V I STA LI BRARY
/) -/~.I. 41
C$L.IA roR.\! 2 (tl/tJ9O)
f
, .
3
(
7
1
10
r
13
p
16
(]
L
I'
25
r
28
[
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
..c. _~._"_..
.
JPA projects only.
.
(If zppli..:atioll is by a JP A applicant, provide the elected official and h~d of planning of the second parry.)
ELECTED OmCIAL
Signature of Mayor, Chairperson of Board of Supervisors, or H~d of District, authorized to make application for the
local jurisdiction
.
N/A
.
Ilpol,,",
Dale
.
.
TIIIt ('/)po)
N_ ('/)po)
HEAD OF PlANNING DEPARTMENT
(If applicable. Speeil' Disuiell o:rempl)
I hereby cenify the accuracy of the 1990 and 2010 population figures contained in the application for the jurisdiction
which I represent.
.
N/A
..
Dale
Slpal,,",
.
.
TIIIt ('/)po)
N_ ('/)po)
omCIAL NAME OF PROJECl': . SOUTH CHULA V I STA LIBRARY
/.}. - 9 '7 Pallt 42
C$L.BA FORM 2 (111l19O)
-~~.._-,..---_.-
i
:p
~
'"
~
~
:;
!!l
~
"
"
~.
(/)"'O"l'I C"llXl
D>' -. ec 0
Clolll _.:>
;" aco.
31X1 ~ >
00:>
Cll>< -iii'~
:><D~ "l'I
S "" @ :a -.
. '" III ~
("')CD - ~
>'" Cll_
-.j CO
f ~:;:
'" IllCl
'" ~Cll
-.j '< ~
b
8
-
(/)
-
III
m
~
6'
~
~
iii'
:>
~
&
~
!1
~
=
l'J'
~
C
III
m
C
III
is
~ ~ ~ ~ ~I!~i!~ p ~ ::
~ Q 2 ~ !~!~ ~.~ ~
Q.J ,=- 'e =: l~ )'; It'l II'll c::
S ~ = ~ i ~ ~l~ 3
~ f i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ . . ~ ~ ~ , I i
i.-i~~s:?~j
i i:;~~5~
~ llit;;_.I"
CD III I i 8
~ "T\
i !
o
~
iii
g'
:>
Q.
(')
o
3
'i
CD
Q.
61
3
~
-l
2
!!.
..
"tl
~
o
CC
~
~
~
'l5
-
f
o
l
~. ~
I. ~
~ ~
c
11\
i
!(
c
;
(')
~
(/)
i
..
i
I
~
C5"
~
o
:>
CD
~
(')
i
EXHIBIT B
o ~ ~ :""l ~
iF. ::n g; .~ 1{
9' !: I'" ". "
t~~i5
'" ~ S ~ 1
- 2'"
~~g:~"
t :5 3
- s:? !
6 i -
: .. ~
5: ell
7'
:;
B1
"
~.
i
-I
i
i
f
e.
i
!
i
"
c
S
1
CD
~ ?" !>>
:: in .m
f; . ~
_ ~ Ii
:T .. Cl
'" ll. ..
~ ~ S
~ m !
III
~.
~ ~ ~
:c l ?
g ~ "
~ "
I lol ~
~'~~ll'
~ g I f
I -
< ~
1 ~
Sl. i6'
~ In
/ J- - / !)O
-
"tl
-
o
o'
!:l
z
i
..' ..
..
.
i<
i.
........
'..
ll'g'>
c=~
Q.Q....
i~l
tEl
c
>::cc%
3.852-
g c (")
al~
.'C
...
ll'~f
ih
Sl ~
"tl
-
o
_...1
16 ~
....
~
a ~.
I~
II
. ~ fIl
iH
-I
.; II CJl
. '~~
~-!
'. ~ ~
~
';Ij
!
.'. .
.'
.'.
.
".
".
.... . .'.
i........
[.'. ..' .
': ....
I
L
f....................
. .
.
.
i
i ......
}p
:~
ti; ,i~
,l..:
'..
':~
;,::"
).~
F-
.il;;
t.;~i
..r
..-
.. . .. ..
Exhibit C
gT~,!EOFCALlF,?RNIA .... ~.... .......i.....?<i..,.... I~ST~~ELlBRA~Y
El'.w$d Consln;ctlon . . . -1'~II?ii[J' L'J w<1llbraf). r.;on.c;tructlon
. -?? i .... ..... - .
. Payme~t.... ,. .ii <<....i.??<and;_ Bond t:.M nf 1988
1. OffICial Project Name: 3. Payment Request #: ". " . .
,
2. Project #; 4. Report Period: __L-1_ to ---1---1_
. . .... ..... .. .. .... .........<{C) ......... .(0). ...(E)
tA) i (B) Expenditures Expenditures Cumulative
I Budget . Previous' <this Period this Period State
I ..
Category Amount Expenditures State Share Local Share Expenditures
5. Purchase Price/Appraised Value of Land
6. New Construction
7. Remodeling for:
.. Energy Conservation
b. Disabled Access
t. Health & Safety
8. Contingency
9. Site Development Costs
10. Site Demolition Costs
11. Fastened Shelving & Built-In Equipment
12- Works 01 Art
13. Furnishings
14. Geotechnical Reports
15. ArchitecturallEngineering Fees & Credits
16. Construction Cost Estimator Fees
17. Asbestos Consultant Fees
18. library Consultant Fees
19. Interior Designer Fees
20. OIher (Specify)
21. State Administrative Fee
22. Totals
23. Less 10'l0 Retention ( )
24. Tota'PaymentRequ~
Additiona' r.,!ormation;
See Reverse Side lor Instructions Page 1 01 2 ).;1 -/()/ P85-INV (REV. 3191)
." .... ........)iP"'U5()FlNI"'..~I"'I:E LIBRARY
. . Cat'ifofnia Library Construction
and Renovalior 30nd Act of 1988
"""':TEOFCAllFORNIA' '. '. .
) I_ft'.,. , . ,,' ",', _,' ," ",....,..>:)>,('\H:::::r,~:::::\n/}(t.l"":(<:,::::::.-..
>etailed Construction Progress Report
md Payment Request
Project Status
1. Construction activities (summarize the construction activities that took place
during this reporting period, including percentage of work completed
and schedules that were or were not met):
2. Problem areas (summarize any problems that occurred during the reporting
period, including work stoppages, weather conditions, or any other occurrence
that delayed or caused a change in work):
A
I certify that this report is accurate and in accordance with California Ubrary Construction and Renovation Bond Act
laws and regulations, I further certify that these are actual expenditures or credits allowed under the Act and that
all funds were expended for the purpose of liquidating obligations legally incurred.
13. Person Preparing Report 4. Project Fiscal Officer 5. Project Coordinator
I I
ate
Signature
Name
I I
Date
Ignature
I I
ate
ame
Title
Telephone
e
6:J.4~ILPAYMENTTO:'."'" .
"{~1~1!+~ijyg!.~f9f'li;; ..,.,.....,.,.,....
Bond ACtFiSCai bfficer"~
California State Library
Library & Courts Building
Fiscal Services - Room 215
914 Capitol Mall
Sacramento, CA 95814-4877
/d -) 0,).,
PS5-INV (REV. 3/91)
See Reverse Side for Instructions
Page 2 of 2
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
California Library Construction
and aenovation Bond Act of 1'88
GRANT AWARD .01 P85-032
EXHIBIT D
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
The prospective contractor's signature affixed hereon and dated
shall constitute a certification under the penalty of perjury under
the laws of the state of California that the contractor has, unless
exempted, complied with the nondiscrimination program requirements
of Government Code Section 12990 and Title 2, California Code of
Regulations, Section 8103.
Oet II (r11
DAT
fU
SIGNATURE AND TITLE
MAYOR
1
/;l-)i/3
/
CALXFORNXA STATB LXBRARY
Calirornia Li~rary Con.truction
and aenovation Bond Act or 1'88
GRANT AWARD NO: P85-032
BBlBlT B
NONOISCRXKXNATION CLAUSE
1. During the performance of this contract, the recipient,
contractor and its subcontractors shall not deny the
contract's benefits to any person on the basis of religion,
color, ethnic group identification, sex, age, physical or
mental disability, nor shall they discriminate unlawfully
against any employee or application for employment because of
race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical
handicap, mental disability, medical condition, marital
status, age (over 40) or sex. Contractor shall insure that
the evaluation and treatment of employees and applicants for
employment are free of such discrimination.
2. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of the Fair
Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code, Section 12900 et seg.),
the regulations promulgated thereunder (California Code of
Regulations, Title 2, Sections 7285.0 et seg.), the provisions
of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 3, Title 2 of the
Government Code (Gov. Code, sections 11135-11139.5), and the
regulations or standards adopted by the awarding state agency.
to implement such article.
3. Contractor or recipient shall permit access by representatives
of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the
awarding state agency upon reasonable notice at any time
during the normal business hours, but in no case less than 24
hours notice, to such of its books, records, accounts, other
sources of information and its facilities as said Department
or Agency shall require to ascertain compliance with this
clause.
4. Recipient, contractor and its subcontractors shall give
written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor
organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or
other agreement.
5.
The contractor shall include the
compliance provisions of this clause
perform work under the contract.
nondiscrimination and
in all subcontracts to
1
j,}-){)L(
,
r..-...-------~' .. ..---,----.-.
SiAn 0: t:A...~.A
DRUG.FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION
Ii:. II ~~ n ~ HIe;
Exhibit F
COMDANYIO~I\IIZA.TIC>><oi NAWE
Chula Vista Public Library
The contTactor or grant recipient named above hereby certifies compliance with Government Code
Section 8355 in matters relating to providing a drug-free workplace. The above named contTactor or
grant recipient will:
1. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, di3tribution, dispensation,
possession, or use of a contTolled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against
employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a).
2. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355(b), to
inform employees about all of the following:
(a) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace.
(b) The person's or organization's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace,
(c) Any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs, and
(d) Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. .
3. Provide as required by Government Code Section 8355(c), that every employee who works. on the
proposed conn-act or grant:
(a) Will receive a copy of the company's drug-free policy statement, and
(b) Will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on
the contTact or grant.
CERTIFICATION
1. the official nanled below, hereby swear that I am duly authorized legally to bind the conrractor or
grant recipient to the above described cenification. I am fully aware that this cenification, executed on
the date and in the county below, is made under penalty of perjul)' under the laws of the State of
California.
t)F"FCI......S NAME
Tim Nader
OATE EXECUTEO
Oct. 3, 1991
EXECUTED IN THE COUNTY OF
San Diego County
CONTRACTOR 01' GRANT RECIPIENT SIGNATURE
- (-
-
./2,4~
)/-J/)C
7- / V -.-/
T1T\..E
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
FEDERAl.. LO. NUWSER
q~00('y;h 9 ()
--~',- -~-'-----
It
,
RESOLUTION NO. 16351
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY Of CHULA
YISTA APPROVING AH AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA STATE
LIBRARY FOR LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION, GRANT AWARD NUMBER
P85-032 UNDER THE CALIFORNIA LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION AHD
RENOVATION 80ND ACT OF "liBS (PROPOSITION 85)
.
The City Council of the City of Chula Yist. does hereby nsohe as foHows:
WHEREAS, on April 23. 1991. thee.liforni. Library Construction and
Renovation Bond Board approved State funds in the amount of $6.747.528 for the
South Chula Yista Library project. grant award P8S-032l and,
WHEREAS, in June, 1991, the California State Library ~lled the City of
Chul. Vista a draft contract for the award of funds provided by the California
Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 1988l and.
WHEREAS, said contract was reviewed and amended by the City Attorney's
office and resubmitted to the State LibrarYl and.
WHEREAS, a joint meeting of the Library Board of Trustees, the Montgomery
Planning Committee and the Parks and Recreation Commission was held September 4,
1991, to review the aireementl and,
WHEREAS, in order to proceed with the Library project, a resolution
approving the contract is necessary to receive the California Library
Construction and Renovation Bond Act Funds required.
NOW, THEREFORE. BE JT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approved an Agreement with the California State Library for'
library construction, grant award number P85-032 under the California Library
Construction and Renovation 80nd Grant of 1988 (Proposition 85). known as
document number C091-182, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Yista is hereby
directed and authorized to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City
of Chula Yista.
Presented by
Approyed as to fOTll by
\J.';r/':,; ....
Library Director
\ ,
"\
~
Jp(."l~
. Richa Rud
Assistant City Attorney
.
I}. -.Iv 0
/-;-----,-- --
Resolution No. 16351
Page 2
e
- PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Yista, California, this 24th day of September, 1991, by the following yot.:
YEs: Couneillllelllbers: Grasser Horton, Moore, Nader, Rindone
NOES: Councilllember: None
ABSENT: Council..mbers: None
ABSTAIN: Couneil..mbers: Matcot.
-tr::~,l.--
fi. Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
.
Autheltt, City Clerk
,STATE OF CALIFORNIA l
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
$S.
.
I, Beverly A,Authelet. City Clerk of the City of Chul. Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 16351 was duly passed. approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 24th day of September, 1991.
Executed this 24th day of September, 1991,
t
)L~) -)t;7
TOTAL P.03
PROCEDURES FOR COMPLXANCE WXTH TXTLE 24
for the
PUBLXC LXBRARY CONSTRUCTXON BOND ACT
INTRODUCTION:
Once the grant recipient has successfully executed a contract with
the California state Library, the process of plans reviews begins.
This document is a procedural guide written to assist local
jurisdictions (grantees) in complying with Title 24 of the
California Code of Regulations (C.C.R.) including Part 1 Chapter
16 and Part 2, Section 3802, Table 23A 8.a., and Table 23P. In
part, the regulations define the state and local roles regarding
the administration of the projects funded with Bond Act funds.
LOCAL RESPONSXBXLITY FOR PLAN CHECKXNG AND INSPECTION:
The local building official of the jurisdiction responsible for the
site upon which the facility is located is responsible for routine
plan checking and on-site inspections for compliance with, local
building codes, regulations and requirements.
REQUIRED SUBMISSIONS TO THE STATE LIBRARIAN:
No project shall receive Bond Act funds if it has been put to bid
before the State Librarian has reviewed and approved the required
submissions for schematic plans, preliminary plans and working
drawings. This pertains to anv and all portions of the project,
inclUding, but not limited to any site development or demolition,
remodeling work or new construction.
Projects, which at the time of approval of their application by
the Board, have completed any of the preceding design documents,
shall after the execution of a grant contract with the State
Library submit the building program and the most current set of
design documents to the State Librarian for the required review.
Earlier versions need not be submitted, however the grant recipient
may find it helpful to VOluntarily submit the most recently
completed phase in order to avOid costly design revisions which
might be uncovered by the state's review of the earlier version of
the plans.
1
Ji - ) t! ?/
I 0'-
In other words, if the grantee has completed schematic plans by the
time of grant approval by the Board and has already started on
preliminary plans, the grantee shall start the Title 24 review
process by submitting a building program along with a set of the
preliminary plans. The submission of the schematic plans is not
required since this stage has already been completed, however it
mav be to the arant recioient's advantaae to submit the comoleted
schematic olans for State review in order to obtain the State's
comments at this earlv staae if the develooment of the oreliminarv
clans is not advanced.
This approach may avoid the frustration, on the part of the grant
recipient, of submitting plans that are well along the way in terms
of development and receiving comments from the State which effect
the functional layout of spaces that will require the grant
recipient to make major revisions in plans at a relatively late
stage. When this happens, the revisions will not only be costly,
but also time consuming. In most cases, this problem can be
avoided by simply submitting the most recently completed phase of
plans rather than waiting until the next phase is completed by the
architect. Therefore. arant recioients are encouraaed to submit
the most recentlv comoleted ohase of clans as soon as the arant
contract with the State is sianed.
Notification of Submission Dates
The first step after a grant contract has been executed between the
grantee and the State Library is for the grantee to submit a
"Schedule of Plans Review Submission Dates" to the State Library.
The schedule should specify the anticipated date for each
submission (schematic, preliminary plans and working drawings) and
should allow for an adequate amount of time for plans development
at the local level and possible revisions based upon the State.
reviews. The grantee shall periOdically provide the State Library
with updated and amended schedules as needed to match the progress
of the project's development.
Plans submissions, which are received within twenty-two (22)
working days of the date specified on the most recently amended
schedule received from the grantee at least thirty (30) working
days prior to the submission, shall be reviewed within the time
periOds specified in Title 24. In other words, if the time periods
for State review are to be in effect, the grantee must provide a
schedule (or amended schedule) at least thirty (3D) working days
prior to any of the anticipated plans review submissions. The time
periods will then be in effect as long as the plans required for
submission are received within twenty-two (22) working days of the
specified date for each schedule. This may be 22 days prior to or
after the specified date. If the grantee fails to observe the
above schedule requirements, the State Library may extend the
review period for a submission by ten (lD) additional working days.
2
IJ-/[(
Time Periods for state Review of Submissions
Schematic plans: Fifteen (15) working days after receipt.
Preliminary plans: Fifteen (15) working days after receipt.
Working drawings: Thirty (30) working days after receipt.
The State Library shall review any required resubmissions or any
changes to approved submissions within five (5) working days after
receipt.
PLANS REVIEWS SUBMISSIONS:
In order to assist the grantee with expediting the State review
process, it is important for the grantee to know precisely what is
expected by the State Library in terms of the plans review
documents that should be submitted at each phase. The following
sections define for the grantee what is expected, and what should
be provided by the project architect and the grantee at each
submission. Failure to provide any part of the submission may
result in non-approval of the plans and unnecessarily extend the
State review process. In order to expedite the State review
process, the grantee should provide the following:
Schematic Plans Review
The grantee should provide the following:
1) A Final Building Program
(send one copy to the library consultant and bhe state
Library only, not to OSA)
2) schematic Plans
(send two copies to the library consultant, one copy to
the state Library and three copies to OSA)
a) A site plan showing the library building, parking lot and
access roads, as well as any anticipated future expansion
of the building and parking lot. The site plan shall
also indicate the direction of north.
b) A floor plan of the space designated in. the library
building program and identified by the area/space name
assigned in the building program. This plan shall also
provide a comolete furnishings and equipment layout (hard
lined and to scale).
3
)cJ~//iJ
c) A tabulation of the square footage for each area called
for in the final building program compared to the square
footage shown on the floor plan.
d) A tabulation of the number of books, magazines, and
audio-visual materials called for in the building program
compared to the number of books, magazines, and aUdio-
visual materials which can be housed given the proposed
furnishings and equipment plan. The tabulation should
also provide the conversion factors utilized (books per
double faced unit, or books per linear foot, etc).
e) A tabulation of the number of readers seats by area
called for in the building program compared to the number
of readers seats shown on the furnishings and equipment
plan.
f) Elevations of all four sides of the building showing
general locations of openings, roof lines, grade lines,
etc.
g) Two sections through the building, one longitudinal and
one latitudinal.
3) Outline specifications describing the type of construction by
identifying the basic building components (structural,
mechanical, etc.), and the type of occupancy. The architect
shall reference any applicable Sections of State statutes and
State and local building codes.
4) An updated construction cost estimate using the format
submitted with the application.
.
Preliminary Plans and Specifications Review (Design Development)
1) Preliminary Plans
(send two copies to the library consultant, one copy to
the State Library and three copies to OSA)
a) site plan showing all buildings on the site, access
roads, parking, topography, survey control points,
bench marks, drainage, roads and sidewalks, routing
of sewer, water, gas and other utilities.
b) Architectural floor plans showing complete
functional layout, room designations, all major
dimensions, all critical dimensions, all columns,
and all furnishings, equipment and interior signs.
c) A tabulation of the square footage for each area
called for in the final building program compared
4
/)~ / / /
to the square footage shown on the floor plan. Any
changes from the approved schematic plans shall be
highlighted.
d) Lighting system plan overlaid on the furnishings,
equipment and signage plan (both plans printed on
the same plan is best, but transparent overlays are
acceptable). Show all sources of artificial
illumination with a legend that indicates the type
of light fixture.
e) Electrical and data distribution systems plan
overlaid on the furnishings, equipment and signage
plan (both plans printed on the same plan is best,
but overlays are acceptable). Show all power
outlets, telephone, data communications (computer)
outlets and audio-visual outlets with a legend that
indicates the type of outlets.
f) Elevations showing all openings, type and extent of
building exterior finishes and the finish grade at
the building.
g) Two building sections (one longitudinal and one
latitudinal) indicating the relationship of various
levels, floor to ceiling heights, construction
systems and materials.
h) Preliminary finish schedule indicating types of
materials to be used on floors, ceilings and walls
for all of the interior spaces.
i) signage schedule indicating the size, type and
nomenclature of all interior signs.
2) Draft specifications. Use CSI format with a narrative non-
technical text.
3) A detailed construction cost estimate using the C.S.I format.
working Drawings , specifications Review (Contract Documents)
(send two copies of plans and specifications to library
consultant (may be optional), one copy to the State Library
and three copies to OSA - contact State Library to determine
if library consultant review is necessary)
1) A complete set of construction documents. including all
drawings, specifications and contract language along with all
other documentation required as part of the bid package. All
building systems must be descriptively diagrammed to fully
illustrate their proposed scope and functions.
5
);) / / /;L
2)
A detailed construction cost estimate in C.S.I. format with
individual line items including unit costs, quantities,-and
total quantity costs.
BASIS FOR STATE REVIEW:
Schematic Plans
The state review at the schematic stage is primarily to determine
compliance of the plans with the building program and generally
accepted principles of library planning. In short, this is a
technical review to determine the functionality of the proposed
building as a public library. Emphasis shall be given particularly
to the furnishings and equipment layout in addition to the general
spatial relationships for the proposed building.
The plans and outline specifications will also be reviewed to make
certain that the design reflects prudent principles of public works
building design and good construction practice. Finally, the
current project budget will be evaluated to determine if it is
appropriate to the building program, the architectural plans and
outline specifications provided.
Preliminary Plans
The state review at this stage is to insure that the preliminary
plans are continuing to carry out the approved schematic design
concepts without significant changes. Further, the review focuses
on the integration of the support systems, such as the lighting,
electrical and data distribution systems, with the library's
furnishings and equipment layout. Good coordination of these.
systems is essential and will be carefully reviewed.
Again, the plans and specifications will be reviewed for prudent
public works design and good construction practice. In addition,
the plans and specifications will be reviewed to determine that
there are no obvious code compliance problems. Finally, the
current project budget will be evaluated to determine if it is
appropriate to the building program, the architectural plans and
specifications provided.
Working Drawings and Specifications
The state review at this stage is primarily to insure that the
building systems and design are compatible with the programmatic
needs of the library, the requirements of the Sta~e Building Code
and the Bond Act. In addition to insuring prudent public works
design and good construction practice, the review will make sure
that building systems are well coordinated in the design documents,
and that the project is within the cost estimate.
6
)}--)/3
ARBITRATION:
If the grantee and the state Librarian cannot agree on the
disposition of comments by the state Librarian at any of the
reviews by the state Librarian, the state Librarian shall provide
to the grantee a list of three experts qualified in the appropriate
discipline. The experts shall not have previously been involved
with the project. The grantee shall choose one of them to decide
the issue, and shall pay the expert's costs and customary fees.
The expert's decision shall be binding on both parties. If the
issue relates to code interpretation, its disposition shall use the
jurisdiction's local code appeals process.
DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS FOR THE PLANS REVIEWS
In order to expedite each plans submission, the grantee should take
the following steps after the grant contract has been executed with
the state Library:
1. Thoroughly review the "Procedures for Compliance with Title
24 for the Public Library Construction Bond Act."
2. Upon review of this document, the grantee should contact the
program manager if there are any questions regarding the
procedures.
3. Further, the grantee should discuss with the program manager
the assignment of a library building planning consultant to
the project. The state Library will very likely assign a.
library consultant to the project to assist with the plans
review process.
4. The grantee should transmit to the program manager the
"Schedule of Plans Review Submission Dates" which specifies
the submission dates for each of the three submissions
(schematic plans, preliminary plans and working drawings).
Dates for submission of any changes in the furnishings and
equipment layout and the dates for the required submissions
for bookstacks (specifications and local review of
contractor's calculations) may be made as amendments to the
schedule at the appropriate time.
5. Three working days prior to the transmission of the necessary
documents for any given plans review submission, the project
coordinator should contact the State Library, preferably by
telephone to alert the program manager or his secretary of the
approximate transmission date of the design documents.
7
/;).-1/1
6. At that time, the grantee should verify the mailing addresses
for all parties of the review team:
The Program Manager
The Library Consultant
The Office of State Architect's (OSA) Review Officer
7. When the necessary review documents are ready for submission,
they should be transmitted by overniaht courier service
directly to each of the review team members (above). The time
period for each review submission does not start until the
design documents have been received by the State Library's
program manager as well as the library consultant and OSA.
8. The State Library will be responsible for coordinating the
review of the plans and responding to the grantee by either
approving the submission, or notifying the grantee of the
deficiencies that are to be corrected. This determination
will be transmitted from the State Library to the grantee no
later than the last day of the time period allocated (5, 15
or 30 days) for each submission.
9. If the grantee's submission is not approved at any phase, the
grantee shall resubmit the revised design documents based upon
the State Librarian's comments which will be a compilation of
the comments (including marked-up plans) by the program
manager, library consultant and the State architect's office.
The same process is in effect for resubmission as for a
regular submission except that the State Library shall only
have five (5) days to respond.
10. In some cases, either due to lack of approval, the desire to
expedite the project or simply the complexity of the project, .
it may be beneficial to all parties to schedule a .sit-down
face-to-face plans review session between one or more of the
parties. If this is the case, the grantee or the State
Library may request this procedure and if acceptable to the
State Librarian, a meeting time and location will be
established by the State Library I s program manager. This
process is possible, but because of limited administration
funds may have to be used sparingly because of the costs of
travel etc.
11. Once the State Librarian has approved the working drawings and
all of the local code compliance reviews have been completed,
the grantee should transmit to the State Library's program
manager two final copies of the construction documents which
will be used by contractors in providing their bids. These
copies will be kept on file as control documents by the State
Library and for construction inspections.
8
~/
I)-I!};'
PROJECT CHANGE ORDERS:
Following the local award of the construction contract for the
project, the grantee shall submit to the state Library's program
manager a copy of each initiator (sometimes referred to as a
"bulletin"), regardless of its nature, no later than the same time
it is forwarded to the contractor. An "initiator" means a
description of a proposed change order together with a request for
a cost estimate for the change order, prepared for transmission to
the contractor by the project architect or similar official
representing the owner.
The state Library'S program manager shall, within three working
days of receipt of the initiator (use of telefacsimile will
expedite the process), review all initiators that if issued as
change orders would:
1. Affect library operations, including but not limited to
work that affects the location or number of any
bookstacks, storage shelving, doorways or direction of
swing of doors, paths of travel and circulation, access
to any library equipment, materials and services, or use
of spaces, i.e., functional considerations.
Any such initiators shall be accompanied by a statement
by the local library director describing how the change
will be accommodated in the operational program following
completion of the construction: or,
2. Change the scope of the project, including the project
budget if the change would reduce the local contribution
to the project.
Upon receipt of any initiator requiring review in accordance with
the preceding, the program manager shall:
1. Approve the change order; or,
2. Return the initiator for resubmission, for a specified
reason, in which case the resubmission will be reviewed
within three working days of its receipt; or,
3. Notify the submitter that an additional period not to
exceed five (5) days will be required to gather specified
additional information. No further additional time shall
be taken for this reason.
If the state Library program manager does not _ feel that the
proposed change order meets the requirements of review, the program
manager will attempt to notify the grant recipient by telephone
within three days of receipt of the initiator.
9
/;2-//?/
If the state Library program manager does not act in accordance
with the preceding time limitations, or if the change order does
not affect library operations or the scope of the project, the
change order may be issued as submitted.
ACCESS TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE AND RECORDS:
The grantee shall provide the state Librarian reasonable access to
the construction site and the project records. It is likely
through the duration of the project that the state Librarian shall
send representatives to the site to monitor the. construction
project. The representatives may be from the state Library staff
or from the Office of the state Architect (OSA). The grantee and
contractors must, through reasonable accommodation, allow access
to the site and any project records requested by the state
Librarian's representatives.
SPECIAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS:
Floor Loads
If any floor areas in a project are adjacent to bookstacks and are
potentially available for future installation of bookstacks, even
if not originally so intended, those areas shall conform to the
same floor load standards as required for the bookstacks.
Part 2 (Table 23-A) category 8.a. "Public Libraries" of the. state
Building Code specifies the uniform and concentrated load standards
which are applicable for bookstacks.
Fire Extinguishing systems
Public libraries built with Bond Act funds shall conform with
Chapter 38 entitled "fire extinguishing systems" (See Section 3802
(i) et. al.) . The local fire marshall is responsible for plans
checking and compliance with fire safety codes.
Bookstacks:
No bookstacks may be installed, remodeled or moved until the State
Librarian has reviewed and approved in sequence the following:
1. The specifications for the bookstacks which must
implement the seismic horizontal force standards in Part
2 (Table 23-P) of the State Building Code.
2. The local review of the contractor's calculations showing
that the installation meets the specification.
10
1;1'//7
This requirement applies to bookstacks to be installed, remodeled
or moved in any project receiving Bond Act funds. It also applies
both to bookstacks included in the local construction contract and
to bookstacks contracted for separately from the local construction
contract, but installed within one year of the completion of the
local construction contract.
Grant recipients will submit a calendar of projected dates
specifying the time when the specifications for the bookstacks will
be submitted to the state Library for review as well as the time
of the local review of the contractor's calculations.
Further, the grantee or its successor in interest, shall ensure
that any bookstacks installed, moved or remodeled in any project
during the twenty (20) years following acceptance of the project
by the local jurisdiction having title to the facility conform to
the specifications for library bookstacks in the state Building
Code applicable to the project at the time of project completion.
Changes in the Layout of Furnishings , Equipment
If there are any changes in the layout of furnishings and equipment
from the approved plans, the grant recipient will need to submit
the revised floor plan showing the proposed changes. If the
changes are significant, the grant recipient may also have to
submit revised electrical and lighting overlays in order to
determine the impact of the proposed changes on these building
systems. The state Librarian will have to approve all changes in
the plans which were originally approved.
Procurement of Art Work
The procurement of works of art shall follow the applicable local'
codes, policies and procedures in force at the time of proqurement.
Remodeling
Prior to 1973
Remodeling and renovation of public library facilities construction
prior to 1973 shall conform to the Uniform Building Code
requirements for remodeling, except that:
Historical Buildings
1. Remodeling and renovation of facilities classified as
qualified historical buildings or structures under Health
and Safety Code Section 18955 shall meet the requirements
of the State Historical Building Code instead of the
requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
11
!)-//J'/
Unreinforced Masonry
2. Remodeling or renovation projects that include
unreinforced masonry shall conform to Chapter 1 of
Appendix to the Uniform Code for Building Conservation,
1987. If a jurisdiction with a remodeling or renovation
project that includes unreinforced masonry has adopted
a local earthquake hazard mitigation program that
requires strengthening such structures, the jurisdiction
may instead follow its local program.
1973 or Later
Remodeling and renovation of public library facilities constructed
in 1973 or later, or parts of public library facilities, shall for
the facility, or each respective part of a facility, conform to the
codes in effect at the time of original construction for the
facility or for the respective part.
Previous remodeling
If the remodeling and renovation is for a facility that had
previously been remodeled, or for one or more parts that had
previously been remodeled, and such previous remodeling required
that the facility or respective parts of the facility were brought
up to the code in effect at the time of previous remodeling, then
the remodeling funded by Bond Act moneys shall conform to the code
in effect at the time of previous remodeling rather than the code
in effect at the time of original construction of the respective
parts of the facility.
- finis -
12
)J- ~// 7
ATTACHllENT C
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
~~51
Resolution) Approving an agreement with the
California State Library for library construction,
grant award number P85-032 under the California
Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 1988
(Proposition 85)
Library Director~
ITEM
MEETING DATE 9/24/91
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-)
On February 15, 1991 the city of Chula Vista made final application
for funds available from the California Library Construction and
Renovation Bond Act for the construction of a new library at Orange
and Fourth Avenues. On April 23, 1991 the California Library
Construction and Renovation Bond Board approved State funds in the
amount of $6,747>,528 for the South Chula Vista Library project,
(grant award P85-032). In June, 1991 the California State Library
mailed the City of Chula vista a draft contract for the award of
funds provided by the California Library Construction and
Renovation Bond Act of 1988. A Council resolution which approves
this agreement is required by the California State Library.
RECOMMENDATION:
resolution.
It is recommended that Council adopt the
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At a joint meeting on September
4, 1991:
The Montgomery Planning Committee voted to approve the original
application (Alternative #1) and get the contract with the State
for the grant money signed and move the project forward with all
deliberate speed.
The Parks and Recreation Commission voted to approve the original
application (Alternative #1), but keep looking forward to
Alternative #2 as the ultimate development plan for the site.
The Library
application
contract.
Alternative
Board of Trustees voted. to approve the
(Alternative #1) and move forward with the
Once the contract is signed, move forward
#2 plan at the detailed design stage.
original
original
with the
BACKGROUND
The State Library held an orientation meeting to review the draft
contract on June 17, 1991. David Price, Assistant State Librarian,
Michael Ferguson, State Bond Act Fiscal Officer, City Library staff
and City Finance Department staff were in attendance. The draft
contract was then submitted to Assistant City Attorney, Rich
/ :l ~ / J(j
PAGE -L, ITEM
MEETING DATE 9/24/91
Rudolf. His comments returned to the State Library included more.
appropriate language and clarification in some sections and a
change from Mayor Pro Tempore to Mayor for the contract
authorization. The State Library sent corrected copies of sections
on which they concurred. The contract, as agreed upon, is
attached. (ATTACHMENT I)
In the meanwhile, the possibility of withdrawing 1.25 acres from
the site to be developed as a recreation center/gymnasium was
explored. The State Library staff indicated this was possible, but
warned it would reduce the grant amount. They also stipulated the
City would have to re-apply, and the new grant would have to be
found competitive. The cost of re-application was estimated at
$15,000.
A joint meeting of the Library Board of Trustees, the Montgomery
Planning Committee and the Parks and Recreation commission was held
September 4, 199~. (ATTACHMENT II) Although the loss of a site
for a gymnasium was regrettable, the Library Board, Parks and
Recreation commission and Montgomery Planning Committee all agreed
the Library should not reapply and reduce the grant by the removal
of the 1.25 acres. As discussed by staff at this meeting, at least
three other possible gymnasium sites are available, including Lorna
Verde, Otay and the future Otay Valley Regional Park. The minutes
of this Joint meeting are attached (ATTACHMENT III).
The development of the 1.25 acres into a park-like setting with an
outdoor performing arts area and walkways connecting it to grassy
areas under the SDG&E power lines was supported by the Parks and
Recreation Commission and the Library Board. These ideas are
expressed in Alternative #2 (See ATTACHMENT III, section G), as
presented to the Boards and Commissions and to Council in an
information item. Alternative #2 will be pursued during the design,
process since it is not inconsistent with the contract with the
State.
DISCUSSION
In order to proceed with the Library project, a resolution
approving the enclosed agreement with the California State Library
for Project Number P85-032, the South Chula vista Library, to
receive California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act
Funds is required.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City will receive $6,747,528, the 65% State match of the total
eligible costs ($10,380,812). The remaining 35% ($3,633,284), or.
Chula Vista I s local match, can be partially met by the land
acquisition costs, architectural fees and the geotechnical report~
amounting to $1,982,465 already expended. The remainder of the.
local matching funds needed can be covered by a combination of the
ci ty' s Development Impact Fee share in the proj ect plus DIF
credits.
)) )2 /
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION NO. 16351
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA STATE
LIBRARY FOR LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION, GRANT AWARD NUMBER
P85-032 UNDER THE CALIFORNIA LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION AND
RENOVATION BOND ACT OF 1988 (PROPOSITION 85)
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, on April 23, 1991, the California Library Construction and
Renovation Bond Board approved State funds in the amount of $6,747,528 for the
South Chula Vista Library project, 9rant award P85-032; and,
WHEREAS, in June, 1991, the California State Library mailed the City of
Chula Vista a draft contract for the award of funds provided by the California
Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 1988; and,
WHEREAS, said contract was reviewed and amended by the City Attorney's
office and resubmitted to the State Library; and,
WHEREAS, a joint meeting of the Library Board of Trustees, the Montgomery
Planning Committee and the Parks and Recreation Commission was held September 4,
1991, to review the agreement; and,
WHEREAS, in order to proceed with the Library project, a resolution
approving the contract is necessary to receive the California Library
Construction and Renovation Bond Act Funds required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approved an Agreement with the California State Library for
library construction, grant award number P85-032 under the California Library
Construct i on and Renovation Bond Grant of 1988 (Propos it i on 85). known as
document number C091-182, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby
directed and authorized to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City
of Chula Vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~
_........ ~ II.....-
\
-
-
1, ,I \ ii".
" .
, ,
D. Richard Rudlilf
Assistant City Attorney
Rosemary Lane
Library Director
"'
I
} ',I 'J "1
/' / ,
, r- ./-
Resolution No. 16351
Page 2
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the Ci ty of Chul a
Vista, California, this 24th day of September, 1991, by the following vote:
YES:
Councilmembers: Grasser Horton, Moore, Nader, Rindone
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmember: None
Councilmembers: None
Council members: Malcolm
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
)
" ,'/ /
<....11".~. . I . L{ r
-A..l..U~ l {. (./A.Acb:J
Beverly A, Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A.Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 16351 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 24th day of September, 1991.
Executed this 24th day of September, 1991.
'--
)J~/J-)
~\~
~~_.:::
...........................
........~......""-
~~~....,...
ATTACHHENT D
clTlm
CHULA VISTA
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
city of Chula Vista
Request for Qualifications
GOAL:
"\
The City of Chula Vista is .eeking architectural,
engineering and interior design work for a 35,000
square foot regional public library to be constructed
on a 6.1 acre site to aeet the requirements of a
California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act
grant.
DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTAL: If your firm is interested in being
considered for this project, please submit eight copies
of your qualifications by 5:00 PM, Friday, January 31,
1992. Qualifications received after this hour and date
will not be considered.
Questions Regarding this RFQ Should be Made in Writing to:
Rosemary Lane, Library Director
Chula Vista Public Library
ATTN: RFQ Library
365 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Submit RFQ Responses to:
Rosemary Lane, Library Director
Chula Vista Public Library
ATTN: RFQ Library
365 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Chula Vista Public Library was recently awarded a $6.7
million dollar grant from the state of California toward
funding a project to construct a 35,000 square foot
library. Located four miles from the Mexican border, the
library will be a facility dedicated to a bi~national, bi-
cultural, concept of library service. The prominent
location of the library, and a design that incorporates
the best elements of contemporary Mexican architecture
will signal a new era in library service for the residents
of the recently annexed area of the City.
/,) - / )J!
3C~ ~ 51CE.r~ C~'~'.:. '.'S:-', C;'.!~TIP:~I"'e19'J ,(~foI6g~-:'Gf
Preparation of the site will involve demolition of several
one-story wood frame structures consisting of several
residences as well as a church and several small outlying
sheds. Located on the church grounds is an additional
one-story wood frame building with basement and trellis.
III. CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
The construction budget for this project is $4,394,500.
Another $3,308,500 is budgeted for site development,
furnishings, equipment and contingency.
IV. PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE
The following tentative schedule has been established by
the City of Chula Vista for the South Chula Vista Library
project:
January 13, 1992 Any questions regarding the project
should be submitted to the Library in
writing.
January 17, 1992 A conference will be held at 10 AM in
the library auditorium at 365 F Street
for all interested parties. At that
time the project will be explained and
all questions submitted in writing will
be answered.
January 31, 1992 Response to RFQ due.
February 14, 1992 Develop short list of 3-5 firms selected
for interviews.
February 21, 1992 Interviews scheduled for short-listed
firms.
March 31, 1992
Contract with selected firm negotiated
and implemented.
Per the California Library Construction and Renovation
Bond Act grant, construction of the South Chula Vista
Library must begin no later than August 30, 1993.
3
/--
/1 - / .2__'7
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Architect responsible for design of building;
Interior designer;
Structural engineer;
Mechanical engineer;
Electrical engineer;
Landscape architect;
Special engineer for lighting, acoustics, energy
conservation, etc.;
Cost estimator;
Any sub-consultants you propose to use.
5. Office location and space availability where work is
to be performed.
6. Detailed information on the firm's experience in
other libraries and public buildings.
7. Interior and exterior photographs or other
illustrative material related to project which you
deem typical of your firm's work.
8. Estimated schedule for design development and
construction drawings.
9. Description of any major commitment which might affect
your firm's scheduling of key personnel indicated
above.
10. A list of references with names, titles, addresses and
telephone numbers of those to be contacted.
11. A written response to the questions listed in section
VII.
VII. QUESTIONS REQUIRING A WRITTEN RESPONSE
1. What do you consider to be your firm's major
strengths, especially as they relate to this project?
2. How does your firm anticipate incorporating the
bi-cultural, bi-national theme of this library into
its design?
5
/c2 -!:2 (p
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2. Demonstrated experience in dealing with projects of
similar scope;
3. Past record of performance including team management,
quality of design, cost control, and ability to meet
schedules;
4. Qualifications of lead personnel and level of
commitment to the project;
5. Experience in dealing with municipal government
agencies in projects of similar scope;
6. Design philosophy and approach to solving
architectural and interior issues;
7. Willingness to contract on our standard form.
X. FEE SCHEDULE
Please provide the fee schedule you offer to your best
clients and if you propose a basis for compensation
different from said schedule, please set forth same in
your qualifications.
XI. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The City of Chula Vista reserves the right to reject any
or all qualifications submitted. No representation is
made hereby that any contract will be awarded pursuant to
the Request for Qualifications, or otherwise. All costs
incurred in the preparation of the qualifications, in
submission of additional information, travel expense,
and/or in any other aspect of the qualifications prior to
the award of a written contract will be borne by the
respondent. The City will provide only the staff
assistance and documentation specifically referred to
herein and will not be responsible for any other cost or
obligation of any kind which may be incurred by the
respondent. All qualifications submitted to the City in
response to this Request for Qualifications shall become
the property of the City.
7
/d---/:l7
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Obligatory provisions Pages
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant
do hereby autually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all
the attached" Exhibit A, Paragraph
,and,
of the .ervic85 described on
7, entitled "General Duties";
-
B. scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General
Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services
described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled " Scope of Work and
schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according
to, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph
8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein,
time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties
and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and
Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Oefined Services".
Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated
does not, except at the option of the city, operate to terminate
this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
city may independently, or upon request from Consultant,
from time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by
the consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, city and
Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose
of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation
associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set
forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional
conSUlting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional
Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the
scope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform
same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the
"Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (e), unless a separate
fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for
Additional Services shall be paid aonthly as billed.
2pty5.wp
December 1, 1991
Standard Form Two Party Aqreement
P"ge 2
/J/)J-t
Coverage, Primary coverage and cross-liability Covarage required
under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy,
Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City
demonstrating same, which ahall be reviewed and approved by the
R.isk Manager.
2. Duties of the City
A. consultation and Cooperation
city shall reqularly consult the Consultant for the purpose
ef reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule
therein contained, and to provide direction and quidance to
achieve the objectives of this aqreement. The City shall permit
access to its office facilities, files and records by Consultant
throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City
agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set
forth on Exhibit A, Paraqraph 10, and with the further
understanding that delay in the provision of these .aterials
beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, .hall constitute a
basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance
of this agreement.
B. Compensation
City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered
by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 adjacent to the governing compensation
relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate
arrangement, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket
expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract
Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said
party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have
complied with all executory provisions hereof.
s. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages
Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the
2pty5.wp
December 1, 1991
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 4
J) ~ /2 (
economic interests, as the term is used in the requlations
promulgated by the Fair Political Practices commission, and has
determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have en economic interest which would conflict with
Consultant's duties under this agreement.
D. Promiee Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated es an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will not acqUire, obtain, or .ssume an economic interest during
the term of this Agreement which would cons~itute a conflict of
interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as en FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that consultant
will immediately advise the City Attorney of city if Consultant
learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result
in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political
Practices Act, and requlations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant,
nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant1s
employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any
interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property
which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in
any property within 2 radial .i1es from the exterior boundaries
of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined
Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 15.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise
of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or
other reward or gain has been .ade to Consultant or Consultant
Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this
Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such
promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 aonths thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates ahall not
acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this
Agreement, or for 12 aonths after the expiration of this
Aqreement, except with the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any
party to this Agreement, or for eny third party which may be in
2pty5.wp
December 1, 1991
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 6
/ J -! JO
is inten~e~ to limit City's rights un~er other provisions of this
agreement.
9. Termination of Agree.ent for Convenience of City
City aay terminate this Agreement st any time an~ for any
reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such
termination and .pecifying the effective date thereof, at least
thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination.
In that event, all finishe~ an~ unfinishe~ ~ocuaents an~ other
aaterials d.kcribe~ hereinabove shall, at the option of the City,
become City'S sole .n~ exclusive property.~f the Agreement 1.
terminate~ by City a. provi~e~ 1n this paragraph, Consultant
shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for
any satisfactory vork completed on such documents and other
.aterials to the .ffective date of such termination. Consultant
hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or
compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth
herein.
10. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the city, and
Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and
shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City,
which City may not unreasonably deny.
11. Ownership, PUblication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms,
designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such aaterials or properties
pro~uce~ in whole or in part un~er this Agreement shall be
subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant
in the United States or in any other country without the express
written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority
to pUbliSh, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions
of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use,
copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports,
studies, data, statistics, forms or other a.terials or properties
produced under this Agreement.
12. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and
Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole
control of the manner and means of performing the services
re~ired under this Agreement. City maintains the riqht only to
2pty5.vp
December 1, 1991
Standard For=- Two Party A9reement
Page 8
IJ -/ 3)
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 ia marked, the
Consultant and/or their principala ia/are licanaed with the State
of California or aome other state a. a licensed real ..tate
broker Dr aalesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that
neither Consultant, nor their principal. are lieeneed real ..tate
brokers or a.le.peraons.
c. Notices
All not~ces, demands or requeats provided tbr or permitted
to be qiven pursuant to this Aqreement mus~be in writinq. All
notices, demands and requests to be .ent to any party ahall be
deemed to have been properly qiven or .erved if personally aerved
Dr deposited in the united states aail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of
business for each of the designated parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Aqreement, toqether with any other written document
referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement
and understanding between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof
may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an
instrument in writing executed by the party against which
enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge i5 sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and
represents to the other party that it has legal authority and
capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been
taken so as to enable it to enter into this Aqreement.
F. Governing Law/Venue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the state of California. Any action
arisinq under or relating to this Aqreement ahall be brouqht only
in the federal or atate courts located in San Oieqo County, State
of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as
close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
[end of paqe. next paqe is siqnature paqe.]
2pty5.wp
December 1, 1991
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Paqe 10
/;)-)]2
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Viata
and
[Name of Consultant]
1. Effective Date of Agreement:
2. City-Related Entity:
-
( Ci ty of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of
the State of California
Redevelopment Agency of the city of Chula Vista, .
political aubdiviaion of the State of California
Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula
Vista, a
Other:
[insert bU&lneSS form]
a
("City")
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant:
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
( ) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
[Address]
[City], California 9
Voice Phone (619)
Fax Phone (619)
7. General Duties:
2PTY5-A.vp
December 1, 1991
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 1
);1-/]J
11. compensation:
A. () Single Fixed re. Arrangement.z
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant
as herein required, City shall pay s single fixed fee in the
amounts and at the times or ailestones or for the Deliverable. aet
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount:
follows: I
, payable as
-
Milestone Dr Event Dr Deliverable Amount Dr Percent of Fixed Fee
B.
Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined
Services by consultant a. are .eparately identified below, City
shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of services, in
the amounts and at the times or 1IIilestones or Deliverables set
forth . Consultant shall not commence Services under any Phase, and
shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless city
shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said
Phase.
Phase Fee for Said Phase
1. $
2. $
3. $
C. () Hourly Rate Arrangement
2. The difference between a single fixed fee amount with phased
payments and a phased fixed fee amount is that, in a single fixed
fee amount all of the work is required for all of the compensation.
Payments are phased to help with consultant cash flow. In a phased
fixed fee arrangement, the City has the authority to cancel or
require performance under aubsequent phases, aD that the
compensation is due just for the phase of work required, and not
for the total amount.
2P'l'Y5-A. wp
December 1, 1991
Exhibit A to Stsndard Form Agreement
Page 3
);2 - (J'-I
.ervices i. caused by City.
12. Materials Reimbursement Arranqement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant
in the performance of .ervices herein required, City .hall pay
Consultant at the rates or amounts aet forth below:
None, the compensation includes all co~ts.
_ Cost Dr Rate
Reports, not to exceed $
Copies, not to exceed $
Travel, not to exceed $
Printing, not to exceed $
Postage, not to exceed $
Delivery, not to exceed $ .
Long Distance Telephone Charges,
other Actual Identifiable Direct
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
not to exceed $
Costs:
13. Contract Administrators:
City:'
Consul tant: 5
14. Liquidated Damages Rate: $_____ per day.
15. statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting
Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code:
) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.'
4
Sample Completion:
Douglas Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator, Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010, (619)
691-5104.
5
Same as edress etc. on Exh. A, p.l, plus name of lead contact.
6
If Consultant, in the performance of its .ervices under this
agreement: 1) conducts research and arrives at conclusions with
2PTY5-A. wp
December 1, 1991
Exhibit A to Standard Form Aqreement
paqe 5
/ ~') - / J ~
~~~
~~.::.~
...............-.~--
......~~......
...............................
CllY OF
CHUlA VISfA
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
ADDENDUM
JANUARY 29, 1992
city of Chula Vista
Request for Qualifications
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DEADLINE FOR SUBMI'l"l'AL:
The deadline for submittal is extended one week. If your firm is
interested in being considered for this project, please submit
eight copies of your qualifications by 5:00 PM, Friday, February
7, 1992. Qualifications received after this hour and date will not
be considered.
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING RFQ RESPONSES:
The following item should appear as Number 8 on the list of
"Criteria for Evaluating RFQ Responses" on Page 7 of the Chula
Vista Public Library's Request for Qualifications.
8. Prices or fees, as permited by Section 45/26 of the
California Government Code..
/;1-/30
36:. F STREET CHU:"'A ViSTA CALIFORr~'... \?~,(! 1('9 6Sl,.:.168
ATTACHNENT E
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
REQUEST POR QUALIPICATIONS
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS
January 17, 1992
Below are the written questions received by the Library, as of
January 13, 1992. The questions, with the Library's responses, are
grouped together by like topics.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THESE WRITTEN QUESTIONS:
Q. Will a list of firms represented by those either attending the
January 17 conference or those submitting questions be made
available to all interested parties?
A. The Library received written questions from the following
firms: IBI Group of Newport Beach, Oremen Architecture and
Planning Associates of San Diego, Anthony and Langford of
Huntington Beach, The Stichler Design Group of San Diego, Martinez
cutri and McArdle of San Diego, BSHA of San Diego, and Design Haus
Architectural Associates of Fallbrook.
Those attending the January 17 conference will be asked to sign in
at the door. This list will be available for perusal.
Q. will these questions which are being submitted and answered at
the "conference" also be compiled and given written responses by
the library; and thereafter made available to all parties
submitting questions?
A. Yes, the questions have been compiled and written responses are
being provided. The responses will be made available to all
parties attending the January 17 conference and to all parties
submitting questions.
QUESTIONS REGARDING AVAILABILITY OF
COPIES OF THE APPLICATION, PROGRAM,
SCHEMATICS, ETC.:
Q. Can we obtain a copy of the Library Building Program? If it
is a very large document, an executive summary and space list would
be fine.
Q. Is the preliminary schematic design program available for
review prior to proposal submission?
1)-/J'1
CHUU. VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
Request for Qualifications
Responses to written Questions
Page 2.
January 17, 1992
Q. Are the program, preliminary Bchematic drawings, and .ite plan
available for review?
Q. Can we obtain copies of the conceptual architectural plans
submitted with the proposition 85 Application? These do not have
to be at the original full scale - reductions to llx17 would be
fine.
Q. Can we obtain copies of the following sections of the
Proposition 85 Application: Changing Concepts, Building Components
Allocation, Summary of the Library Facility Space Requirements,
Library Parking, site Description.
Q. Will copies of the existing program and scbematic design
drawings be available at tbe meeting January 17?
Q. will copies of tbe scbematic design drawings, program and
geotechnical report previously completed be available for review
prior to submittal?
Q. Wben and How? may copies of tbe "detailed" building program"
and tbe "preliminary scbematic design drawings, site plan, EIR and
geotecbnical report be obtained.
A. Copies of the Library's Proposition 85 Application form and
schematic design sheets will be distributed to parties attending
the January 17 meeting or parties submitting written questions.
The complete application, with the full Building Program, EIR and
geotechnical reports is available for review at this meeting or
available for review in the Library's Administration offices Monday
through Friday, 8am to 5pm.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN WORK:
Q. Was all of tbe design work and reports prepared by "Ray Holt
and Assoc."? And, what is or was this firm's full responsibility
to this project. Are they "paid in full to date"? And, does this
firm have anyon-going contracted responsibility or relationship
to tbis project, the Library or tbe City of Cbula Vista? Is Ray
Holt and Associates an arcbitectural or otber wise design firm, and
if so, is it possible tbat tbis firm migbt cbose_ to purse an
interest in tbe upcoming pbases of this project?
A. Ray Holt and Associates is a Library Building Consultant. The
State Library required that such a consultant be hired to assist
in the development of the grant application. Specifically, Ray
/,;2 -L3Y
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
Request for Qualifications
Responses to Written Questions
Page 3.
January 17, 1992
Holt and Associates assisted in the writing of the Building
Program. The firm was subcontracted through the architectural firm
of Wheeler Wimer Blackman and Associates. Wheeler Wimer Blackman
and Associates were hired by the Library to oversee the development
of the Proposition 85 application, including the schematic design
as required by the state. Both Ray Holt and Associates and Wheeler
Wimer Blackman have been paid in full and have no on-going
contracted responsibility or relationship with the Library.
Q. Is the firm that prepared the preliainary work to date eligible
for the design commission?
A. Yes.
QUESTIONS REGARDING COKMUNITY RESPONSE:
Q. Is there a great deal of enthusiasm, 8upport, opposition, or
controversy which either exists presently, or could be anticipated
in the future for the project? And, if 80 from what "groups" or
sources?
A. There is a great deal of enthusiasm and support for the project
at all levels. No opposition to the project has come forth as yet.
Q. How was this initial work (in particular the schematic design
work) received by: 1. the Library Board, 2. the "Community" and,
3. by the Office of the state Architect, etc.
A. The Library and the Community reacted favorably to the
preliminary schematic design. The Office of the State Architect
has not yet reviewed the project.
QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE PINAL SCHEMATIC DESIGN:
Q. Is the schematic design and site plan fixed, or will further
consideration be required of the selected firm?
Q. Is the schematic design development for the state bond open
for improvement if deemed necessary?
Q. How closely is it anticipated that the consultant now being
selected be directed to "adhere" not only to the "detailed building
program", but also to the "preliminary schematic design drawings"
1)-13;
'.
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
Request for Qualifications
Responses to written Questions
Page 4.
January 17, 1992
previously prepared by others? And, was there any actual
"architectural design statement" aade as part of this worlt?
A. The project must be designed and built according to
specifications in the Building Program. However, the preliminary
schematic design and site plans are flexible.
Wheeler Wimer Blaclcman has produced an "archi tectural design
statement" through a color architectural rendering.
SPECIFIC DESIGN RELATED QUESTIONS:
Q. As it relates to "a concept of Library service" what exactly
is meant by the terms "bi-cultural and bi-national": 1. to the
operation of the Library?, 2. to the Community?, 3. to the State
of California? and, 4. to the tax-payers? Is the aeaning and
"interpretation" felt to be the same to all qroups?
A. The Changing Concepts of Public Library Service statement on
page 15 of the Library'S Proposition 85 Application gives further
definition to the "bi-cultural and bi-national" theme. One of the
major goals of the California state Librarian is to encourage
Libraries to take an active role in dealing with the sweeping
demographic changes occurring throughout the state. The Library
expects that further interpretation of this theme will evolve
throughout the planning process and understands that the theme may
have varying interpretations.
Q. The building is described in your invitation as needing to be
"functional/flexible, energy efficient/yet healthful, discourages
graffiti, easy to maintain and be cost effective." Are there
specific ideas or features that have been already discussed or the
staff has "in mind" related to these points? Has either the City
or the Library developed a vocabulary for that "which discourages
graffiti"? And, is it felt that this is successful and is an
appropriate approach?
A. The Library has no preconceived notion as to how the above
issues might be addressed by the design team and is willing to
seriously consider any option proposed.
Q. Is flexibility for future expansion important to the design?
A. Yes.
/;2 -)t/?J
CHOLA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
Request for Qualifications
Responses to Written Questions
paqe 5.
January 17, 1992
Q. What are the P.T.E. staffinq projects for the new library?
A. Between 30 and 31 FTE, includinq the Literacy Staff, but not
counting custodians or groundkeepers.
Q. Do you anticipate establisbinq or workinq witb an e:dstinq "Art
in Public Places" proqram for tbe library?
A. No.
Q. What is envisioned to be included in tbe "performinq arts
area"? Is there a sound system, a stage (covered?), what type of
seating area, how many people, special lightinq, etc? Is there
associated with this area also picnic area(s), playqround
equipment, or other types of active recreation provisions (field
or game areas, etc.)
A. The outdoor performing arts area is not defined in the Building
Program and the Library will work with the design team on
developing this facility. The area will not be associated with
any active parklike uses.
Q. What other, if any, Bnvironmental Reviews or studies are
anticipated to be required?
A. No other environmental reviews or studies are anticipated.
Q. As to "Desiqn statement", as best as possibl., please fuHy
describe and explain the thouqht, the vision, and what is aeant by
a "design which incorporates the best elements of contemporary
Mexican architecture".
A. The Library is not interested in replicating the Mission or
Spanish Colonial style of architecture found throughout the county.
Instead it wants a building which reflects the Mexican influence
on the international style, with simple sculptural forms and
contrasting bright colors.
Q. Are there any specific requirements as to plan preparation and
submittal as to CAD disk copies, format, Auto-Cad, etc.
A. Although CAD is preferred, there are no specific requirements.
/,:2 - / L//
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
Request for Qualifications
Responses to written Questions
Page 7.
January 17, 1992
public input has not been determined. Final construction drawings
will be presented to the City's Design Review Board, the Planning
Department, and Building and Housing Department for approval.
Q. Who are the bodies vith responsibility for design review of the
new building? (e.g. Library Board, City Council, neighborhood
groups, "bi-national design team, aedevelopment Agency)
Q. Will the project be reviewed by tbe city of Cbula vista Building
Inspection Department?
Q. Will this building be checked by both OSA and the local building
department?
A. The Library Board, the City's Design Review Board, the
Montgomery Planning Committee, the Planning Department, the
Building and Housing Department and the Engineering Department all
have some level of responsibility for design review. The project
will also be subject to the approval of the Office of the state
Architect.
Q. What level of review viII be performed by the Office of the
state Architect? At vhat pbases viII this review occur?
A. It is the Library's understanding that the OSA will review the
final construction drawings. The State Library indicates that they
have made special arrangements with the OSA to insure speedy
review.
Q. How will the source of contact for the city be handled, i.e,
single source, committee?
A. The Library will act as the lead agency for the city on this
project. The Assistant Library Director will serve as project
manager.
Q. What other City of Chula vista agencies will have jurisdiction
over the project?
A. Although other agencies will be involved, the Library will serve
as the lead agency and will have jurisdiction.
Q. How does tbe city of Cbula vista administer construction?
A. In the past, construction management has been administered by
the City's Building Superintendent. Although he will continue to
play an active role, the grant provides funds to hire a
professional construction management firm.
1;2- ) L/c2
CRULA VISTA PUELIC LIERARY
Request for Qualifications
Responses to Written Questions
Page 8.
January 17, 1992
QUESTIONS REGARDING ~BE BUDGET:
o. ~here appears to be aore .oney needed to complete the project
than that available by the '.7 .illion dollar qrant as awarded.
Where will additional funds come from, and are they available at
this time?
A. Under the terms of the grant, the state will provide 65\ of the
funding for the project. The remaining 35\ match has been
cOInlllitted by the City of Chula Vista. The lIloney for the 35\
match, as well as various ineligible costs, has been allocated in
the City's Capital Improvements Program. .
Q. Is there any fprtber detail or breakdown of tbe budget for eite
development, furnlshings, equipment and contingency?
A. Pages 39 and 40 of the Library'S Proposition 85 application
provide lIlore detailed budget infonation. For example, site
development is projected to cost $1,490,790, while equipment and
furnishings are projected to total $1,917,000. The contingency is
$659,190.
CONTRACT AND FEE RELATED QUESTIONS:
Q. Given that this project has a value of $7.7 aillion
the architect be required to have one million
professional liability insurance?
A. The City's Risk Analyst reports that the successful firm will
need the following:
dollar, will
dollars in
a) $1,000,000 for general commercial liability.
b) $500,000 for errors and omissions.
c) Statutory Worker's Compensation insurance and employees'
liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.
Q. Clarification regarding Article 5 Liquidated damages for
architectural services per City'S sample standard Form Agreement.
A. The specific elements of the liquidated damages clause (time
frames for specific work products and the liquidated damages rate)
will be determined during contract negotiations.
/;1-/0/]
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
Request ror Qualirications
Responses to Written Questions
Page 9.
January 17, 1992
Q. Regarding the request for providing information relative to the
fee 8chedule, does this aean bourly rateB or compenBation aB a
percentage or construction cost?
A. Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (Page J) of the standard form agreement,
shows that the city normally negotiates a single fixed fee, a
phased fixed fee or hourly rate arrangement. However, a firm may
propose a "percentage of construction" as another basis of
compensation and the final basis of compensation will be determined
during contract negotiation.
Q. It appears that fees may be a basis of selection. ThiB is not
standard proceduf~ for municipalitieB. Can this requirement be
negotiated after selection?
A. Fees are not a basis for selection and will be negotiated after
the selection.*
* An addendum to the RFQ was issued January 29 1992 correcting an answer
to this question. The addendum reads as follows:
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING RFQ RESPONSES
The following item should appear &s Number 8 on the list of "Criteria for
Evaluating RFQ Responses" on Page 7 of the Chula Vista Public Library.s
Rp.quest for Qualifications:
8. Prices or fee~ as permitted by Section 4526 of the CAlifonria Government
Code,
/) - JiIL/
ATTACHMENT F
QUALIFICATIONS EVALUATION
Date:
Project Description: South cbula vista Library
Architectural Firm Name:
Highest Number: Most Value/Rating Column: 1-5 points/Weight Column:
1-10 depending on importance of the project.
RATING SCALE: RATING X WEIGHT - TOTAL
1) Firm's history and resource
capabil i ty to perform
required services: X 10 =
2) Evaluation.o'f assigned personnel
including sub-contractors: X 10 =
3) Related experience (as appropriate):
. Design services
. Library & Government Building X 10 =
4) Budget, cost controls experience,
and results: X 5 =
5) Abi li ty to relate to project
requirements i.e. following building
program and interpreting schematic
design: X 10 =
6) Analysis of questions requiring
response in the RFQ: X 10 =
---------------------
GRAND TOTAL:
(h~ :\IP~lX '!ill i!.c \f crtr..IH 0)
1/ //
/ ! - / L,
( c>,'. ./
ATTACHMENT G
ARCHITECT SELECTION COMMITTEE
POINTS PER COMPANY
MARCH 5, 1992
COMPANY
Total
Points
LPA, Inc.
Wheeler Wimer Blackman & Assoc
George Miers & Assoc.
Rob Quigley
Stichler Design Group
Mosher Drew Waton Ferguson
Charles Walton Assoc.
Brown Gimber Rodriguez Park
Martinez Cutri McArdle
CWKim
Delawie Wilkes
Cardwell McGraw
HMC
Ralph Allen & Partners'
Thirtieth St.
AnthonyLangford
Deems Lewis
Conwell Marshall
BSHA
Wolf Lang Christopher
Tucker Sadler
Lorimer Case
Keniston Mosher
Villanueva
IBI Group
Manuel Oncina
Oremen Assoc.
Ant.Predock
Coombs Mesquita
Warnecke Ladowi
Rochlin Baron
Bissell
Visions
Frye Gillan
(Ref:SORTWQ1 )
1240
1205
1165
1145
1145
1125
1080
1060
1037.5
1028
1022.5
1022
1015
1005
1005
995
985
975
975
962.5
962
960
950
948
915
910
870
865
860
860
855
830
755
515
/;J - II/It
ATTACHMENT H
ARCHITECT SELECTION COMMITTEE
MARCH 9, 1992
QUESTIONS
1. What is your firm's experience in designing public libraries
and the experience of .your key personnel?
2. Please describe the existing building program and how your
firm plans to implement it?
3. How would your firm's approach to the bi-national/bi-cultural
theme result in a unique expression of these concepts?
4. What is the process your firm uses to evaluate and implement
change orders?
5. Describe your firm I s use of consultants that will work on this
project, both in-house and outside sources.
6. The final contract with the architectural firm may not be
finalized until the end of May. This means that the selected
firm will only have fourteen months before the state mandated
date to begin construction or lose the grant monies of
$6,750,000. with certain givens such as time of state review,
construction drawing and the bid process, how would you
compress the design stage?
7. What is your firm's proposed fee schedule?
(Ref:WPDoc\Misc\Question.ASC)
/J - /1/7
ATTACHMENT I
SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY PROJECT
INTERVIEW SCORE SHEET
CATEGORIES
RATING (1-10 points)
TOTAL
1) Related project experience.
* Public Libraries
* Project Manager experience.
* Involvement of principals.
2) Grasp of the project
requirements.
* Program
* Design
* Bi-culturaljbi-national
3) Management approach for
technical requirements.
For example:
* Cost Controls
* Design & Construction
phase involvement.
* Change Orders.
4) Use of consultants that
may work on the project.
* Discuss in-house
resources.
* Outside sources.
* Experience working together.
5) Time schedule planned for
this project.
* Accessibility.
* Ability to meet deadlines.
6) Firm's experience and
methods used for:
* Budgeting & Financial
controls.
* Determining fee and
compensation.
GRAND TOTAL:
(Ref:~oc\Misc\tnter.One)
/,) ~)tj!{
ATTACHMENT J
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 27, 1992
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Hayor and city Couneil
John Goss, city Manager~
Rosemary Lans, Librar~rector~
Architect Selection Process For
South Chula vista Library
'I'o:
VIA:
FROM:
In late Decembe~, 1991, the Library issued a request for
Qualifications (RFQ) seeking architectural, engineer1ng and
interior design work for the 35,000 square foot regional public
library to be constructed on the 6.1 acre site at 4th and Orange
Avenues 'to meet the requirements of the California Library
Construction and Renovation Bond Act grant. sixty-five (65) firms
requested copies of the RFQ. The project description in the RFQ
stated:
"Located four miles from the Mexican border, the
library will be a facility dedicated to a bi-
national, bi-cultural concept of library service.
The prominent location of the library, and a design
that incorporates the best elements of contemporary
Mexican architecture will signal a new era in
library service for the residents of the recently
annexed area of the city."
Interested parties were invited to attend a conference, on January
17, 1992 to answer any written questions received by the Library
regarding the project in general and the RFQ specifically. By the
5:00 P.M., February 7th deadline, the Library had received thirty-
four formal responses to the Request for Qualifications. The
responses were from very strong and outstanding firms from within
california and out-of-state.
A five member Architect Selection Committee was then established
by the city Manager. The members of the Committee were Rosemary
Lane, Library Director; George Krempl, Deputy City Manager; Gregg
Hanson, Building Superintendent; Jose Viesca, a member of the
Library Board of Trustees; and Douglas ChildS, a local architect
who was not related in any manner to the responding firms.
J,., 1,/;
. / '/ ""
/ (7'-'
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
2.
March 26, 1992
The five committee members each carefully read each response from
the thirty-four firms. The members were asked to fill out a
standard evaluation form which rated the firms on (1) Firm's
history and resources available to perform required services; (2)
Evaluation of assigned personnel including sub-contractors; (3)
Related experience (as appropriate) in design services and library
and government buildings; (4) Budget, cost controls experience, and
results; (5) Ability to relate to project requirements i.e.
following building program and interpreting schematic design; (6)
Analysis of questions requiring written responses in the RFQ.
After privately reading, evaluating and scoring the firms, the
Committee convened as a group and determined a composite score for
each firm. LPA, Inc. ranked first out of thirty-four.
Eventually, eight (8) firms were invited to be interviewed by the
Selection Committee. During the interview, each firm was asked to
make a brief presentation, which was followed by a set of questions
from the Committee members. The information provided in the
interview was used to rank the firms on (1) related project
experience, including public libraries, project manager experience,
and the involvement of the principal, (2) grasp of the project
requirements, including the program, preliminary design, and the
bi-cultural/bi-national concept, (3) the firm's management approach
to technical requirements including cost controls, design and
construction phase involvement, and how they dealt with change
orders, (4) the firm's use of consultants that may work on the
project, (5) accessibility and the ability to meet the project's
tight deadline, and (6) the firm's experience and methods used for
budgeting and financial controls and how fees and compensation were
determined.
At the conclusion of the interviews, the eight firms in interview
rank order were:
1. LPA, Inc./Legorreta Arquitectos
2. Rob Wellington Quigley, FAIA
3. Architects Mosher/Drew/Watson/Ferguson
4. Wheeler, Wimer, Blackman & Associates
5. George Miers & Associates/Legorreta Arquitectos
6. Stichler Design Group, Inc./
Scogin Elam and Bray Architects, Inc.
7. Martinez, cutri & McArdle, Architects
8. Brown, Gimber, Rodriguez & Park
Architecture and Planning/Bennie M. Gonzales
Associates, Inc.
(Ref:WPDoc\Memos\32692.RL)
I:) -I 50
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
3.
March 26, 1992
Based upon the responses to the RFQ, the interview and reference
checks, the Committee unanimously recommended that the Library
enter into negotiations with LPA, Inc. The Library intends to
begin negotiations as soon as possible and expects to bring a
completed contract to the city council for its approval in May.
LPA, Inc., founded in 1965, pioneered using value engineering and
is sensitive to project costs, and fiscally responsible design
solution. The San Diego office has never had a project behind
schedule and over budget and has strong computed aided design and
drafting (CADDl capabilities. The LPA, Inc. also has significant
experience in working with municipalities and public projects.
Their team of subcontractors includes Marshall Brown who designed
the interiors for the 1976 Chula vista Public Library and brings
experience with ten additional public library projects in Southern
California and two university library projects.
Their reference phecks were outstanding with the clients' citing
attention to the/project, attention to detail, more frequent site
visits than required by contract, and coming in under budget.
In San Marcos, where they are currently designing a civic center
which includes a library, the references stated they explain their
recommendations clearly and work well with people.
LPA, Inc. was also selected because in association with Legorreta
Arguitectos, it is an outstanding design team. Legorreta has an
international design reputation with extensive experience in the
United States and Mexico. He is currently designing the 200,000
square feet public library of San Antonio, Texas in conjunction
with a Texas firm.. The San Antonio staff is impressed with his
responsiveness, his listening ability and his creative solutions
to the problems. He has also designed unique galleries and museum,
some for children. His style is contemporary with simple
structural forms and contrasting bright colors. It will be easily
related to the contemporary design expressed in the schematic
design the state Library accepted when awarding the grant.
LPA, Inc. and Legorreta also have a history of working together.
Recent projects are the International student Center at UCLA, IBM
National Marketing Headquarters, Dallas, Texas and the Solana
Marriott Hotel in Dallas. These projects have been widely
recognized.
This item is provided for this Council's information. As indicated
above, the Library expects to begin negotiations with LPA, Inc. and
bring a completed contract to council for approval in May.
(Ref:~PDoc\Memos\32692.RL)
/'J _),:;-J
:7- ,-----" /
i'
lit
.
.
..
.
.
.
:a
=-
=-
=-
:e
=-
:e
=-
::e
=-.
::e
:a
=-
ATTACHMENT K
i;,}~{ff3~
. J~'-~';,
/~:~;-.;:~,~
J: ,:'_-::.
Response to
Request for Qualifications
a-IULA VISTA PUBUC UBRARY
Oty of Chu/a Vista
;.-.
.....
,., y-
..;> -:
...~..,.
,
.,
;.:'0 'f'
'_'r.
.~ . "
~': :'=.
r: .-t'
i '
'.i~"" .
i' .
~..,.
....~;- ..
r. .
~",.........:,./.
.':;-r. -:. .,..-'
.:..~:.. '. J~..: ~.
~f/z:;;.. ~
~'..~,.-..: .' ':.
~/?-.
.:.-.:~...
:.' - .
. ~.'--.
.~ #j,'. " oJ" .
..[--
.-
Submitted by
II"'''..~'
.. .
. ~
. .'- - .~'.
. . .
. ..
.
,
LPA, Inc. and
Legorreta Arquitectos
.-
'~'~.,
'-'t1.t..
February 7, 7992
/:;2 - /:;::2
LB~
~
>>
>>
.
It
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:a
:G
.
=-
::G
=-
February 7, 1992
Ms. Rosemary Lane
Ubrary Director
CllUla Vista Public Ubrary
Attention: RFQ Ubrary
365 F Street
Chula Vista, California 91910
RE: Chula Vista Public Ubrary
Chula Vista, California
Dear Ms. Lane:
It is a distinct pleasure for the design Team of LPA Inc./Le{J!rreta Arquitectos to
respond to your Request for QualificatIons for the proposed Chula Vista Public Ubrary.
Included with this Team is a group of San Diego's most qualified consultants in all
areas of building engineering and fixturization. We are delighted, as well, that the
internationally acclaimed Mexican architectural firm of Legorreta Arquitectos, led by
Ricardo Legorreta, is a key leader in this Team structure.
LPA Inc. and Ricardo have worked for many years together on varied award-winning
projects throughout the United States. We have a Close professional and personal
relationship and are excited with this opportunity to work together again on this
important project with its special bi-cultural and oi-national expression.
The enclosed Response will address the areas of concern expressed within the Request
for Qualifications, as well as this Team's design philosophy with overall qualifications
and experience.
Again, we are especially delighted with this opportunity to respond to the Oty and
request your careful consideration of this Team.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
267UT
BUSDlV
../.) .----.~
. 0' - ~/S _~
LPA
Architecture
Planning
Interior Df'5ign
San Diego
Orange County
wsAngeles
Sacramento
43.10 l.a lalla \'iIlJgt, Dr
Suite 130
San Diego, CA 92122
fAX 619.:58790-,-l
619587.6665
t
t
It
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
=-
.
=-
=-
~
=-
=-
::ra
=-
:e
LEGORRETA ARQUITECTOS
Mexico, D.F., February 4, 1992
MS. ROSEMARY LANE
Library Director
Chula Vista Public
Library
365 F. Street
Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
Attn:
Re
RFQ Library
Chula Vista Public Library
Chula Vi sta, Ca.
Dear Ms. Lane:
It is my great pleasure to submit for your review
the experience and qualifications of Legorreta Arquitectos
for the design of your proposed Chula Vista Public Library.
1 am equally pleased to associate with the San Diego
office of LPA Inc. turrently our two firms have a wonderful
association and a commitment to continue that relationship
for all work performed by my firm in the United States.
Among the work our two firms have performed together
are the International Student Center at the University of
California, Los Angeles and Solana for IBM and Maguire Tho-
mas Partners near Dallas, Texas.
Your project provides a unique challenge to create
a bi-cultural and bi-national design solution for this pu-
blic facility.
I welcome this challenge and am hopeful you will
allow us the opportunity to work with you.
Sincerely,
{}
-)
/) -/>11
PALACIO DE VERSALLES 285 -,;, 11020 MEXICO. D. F. TELEFONO 251-96-98 FAX: 596-61-62
34~0 MOTOR AVENUE, FLOOR 2 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90034 (213) 559-94-57 FAX:(213) 559-94-77
'..
a
.
:a
=-
:a
~
=-
=-
~
=-
::e
=-
=-
=-
=-
=tI
=-
=-
=-
=-
=-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover Letter . LP A
Cover Letter . Legorreta Arquitectos
Table of Contents
1990 Firm Award
Design Leadership .
LP A/Legorreta Arquitectos
Project Profiles
Team Structure
Response to Questions
LP A References
Scheduling/Fee Structure/
Agreement Structure
LP A Brochure
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
Section 5
Section 6
Section 7
\ C--/
.~.,.(' /j/'>
LPA
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
=-
:a
::a
.
=-
=-
=-
:e
=-
=-
:lit
=-
.
=-
Mortey Baer
Robert Habian
George lande-stny
.~.
"\._~",,.
,\ . . ,I , r
~ 'i;)"
- . l .' I'
~~~\~, ,: 1/ r
.~, >)'2lf,-
, ~".',--~'~
::;;......., ", "~" ~
, ;:/:; "'- - - ' " ..
~-<7. ..'-' .:" ,,~
~~~,::' '~
.../~ -...
~~
CALIFORNIA COUNCIL
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE
OF ARCHITECTS
flRI AWARD
1990
CONFERRED UPON
LPA, Inc.
Leason Pomeroy Associates
FOR EXCELLENCE IN DESIGN OF
Consistently Distinguished Architecture
Since the Founding of the Firm in 1965
I U R Y
/J r/3?
Henri" Bull, fA.IA
Norma Sklarek. fAIA
Moan'in Mal~, AlA
It
e
e
DfSICN UADERSHIP . LPA/lEGORRETA ARQUf1fCTOS
.
.
M"i
. '.
~.. '
~."., --
, .., . ". . "
J ..' :,." . ".. . . ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
=-
:G
.
=-
::e
=-
Section 1
LPA" Inc., in association with the internationally rerognized
Mexican architectural firm of Legorreta Arquitectos is
pleased to offer its creden6als to.setYe the Oty of Chula
VISta and the Chu/a VISta Public library as the Design Team
for the proposed Public library.
This spedaI association is designed to setYe the Public
library and the Oty in many ways:
. To provide a unique design sensitivity to the bi-
cultural and bi-national opportunities that exist
within the community of Chu/a Vista.
.
To provide a final design solution that reflects the
purpose of this library and the vision of its
community.
.
To provide the deep resources of a Design Team
that is nationally and internationally recognized for
its design strength, as well as its cost effective
architecture and interior design.
.
To provide a Team that has extensive experience
working with municipalities and public projects
throughout the United States and Mexico.
To provide a Team that has worked closely together
for many years on several million square feet of
public and private projects.
.
.
To provide a Team that has extensive experience in
South San Diego County and in the Dty of Chula
Vista.
.
To provide a Team that is able to commit to the
Dty the "hands on" involvement of Principals
throughout all phases of project development.
.
To provide a Team that is local and accessible to
the Dty of Chula Vista.
/1-/57
LPA
~
~
~
.
-THINK OF THE ADOBE WALL.
WHICH 18 SUPREMELY
LOGICAL AND SPARE,
yeT WHICH CAN BE ADAPTED
NATURALL.Y, AND IN A
NEW CONFIGURATION SEEMS
AS THOUGH
THAT WAS THE WAY
IT WAS MEANT TO BE."
~
.
.
t
.
I
>>
.
II
I>>
,.
UCORRfT). NlQUfTfCTOS
I'fI()fIU
In twenty-five years of practice, Ricardo Legorreta, has
established himself as one of the world's leading architects.
His designs successfully blend the sophistication and
rationality of twentieth.antury architecture with the vivid
vernacular traditions of the place in which he lives and
works _ Mexico. As a result, his works embody the
romance of Mexico, free of the sentimental cliche's that
often mar attempts to make buildings look regional.
Mr. Legorreta was born in Mexico Dty and received his
Bachelor in Architecture from the National Univetsity of
Mexico. In addition to his numerous professional activities,
Mr. Legorreta has been active in academic circles. From
1959-1962 he was Design Professor at the National
Univetsity of Mexico and from 1962-1964 he was the head
of an experimental group in architecture at the Univetsity.
He is a professor at Harvard Univetsity and UCLA.
In 1978, Mr. Legorreta was named an Honorary Fellow of
the Mexican Society of Architects and in 1979 became an
Honorary Fellow of the American Institute of Architects.
Since 1983, he has been a jury member for the annual
Pritzker Prize and recently was a consultant to the Getty
Museum for their work on their new addition.
Recent significant projects that are completed or underway
include:
. MAIN UBRARY
San Antonio, 7X
. a-II/DREN'S DISCOVERY MUSEUM
San Jose, CA
. SOlANA SPORTS aUB
Dallas, 7X
. SOlANA MARRIOTT HOm
Dallas, 7X
. aUB MfDTTfRRANfN\I
Huatulco, Mexico
. PR/lZKER RESIDENcE
Rancho Santa Fe, CA
. IBM NATIONAL MARKE11NG HEADQLJAJUERS
Dallas, 7X
. /NTfRNAnONAL STUDENT CENTER AT ucu.
University of California . Los Angeles
Los Angeles, CA
Note that many of these projects are in as!""'''''''''' with
LPA, Inc. as the Executive Architect.
/;2 . /<%
LPA
.
lit
LEGORRETA ARQUfTfaOS
e
.
.
:0
.
=-
:0
::0
:a
=-
::0
::e
::e
=8
:0
:e
::e
::lO
:31)
. .",.-
, . J .. -',~
.-,....
~.
:~-::--~'!;
. ,~;
-~~-..:.'"
. I_~
.Z~....,.,~' .0". .A\. .....'.-..
, .,\;':':i;~> - -.". V ,'7_ ',~~~~
DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
The following statements of personal inspira'tion are
provided by Ricardo Legorreta in his book The Architecture
of Ricarclo Legorreta, copyright 1990 by the University of
Texas Press.
MYSTERY
,
'0
"Human beauty and nature's beauty are never discovered at
once.
When that happens, their charm disappears.
The same is true of buildings.
It is better to discover them little by little, to discover them
in a different manner each time, to provoke in us different
emotions, including the sense that we are the building and
receive from it what our souls demand.
What makes us feel we are the owners of a building is the
ability to enjoy it in our own way according to the hour,
the light, the weather, and to adapt it to our own
mentality.
Buildings that are given to us all at once do not give us the
happiness of mystery and discovery and of living life
through our imaginations.
There is no true woman without mystery;
there is no true architecture without mystery.
UGHT
"Light and spirituality go together.
Light and architecture go together.
Light gives value to walls, windows, materials, textures, and
during hours, days, and seasons it changes space and is a
fundamental tool for shaping our emotional response.
Light, both natural and artificial, cannot be ignored nor
used with a technical mind.
Light belongs to the heart and to the spirit. "
COLOR
"God gave us everything:
life, earth, wind, and sun.
His gifts have a common value, a marvelous value:
He gave them to us with Colorl
Without it the world would not exist, our life would be an
unbearable monotony.
Color is the basis of our life's happiness and sorrows, it is
the symbol of our emotions.
Color is ... lifel
It is not a complement, it is a fundamental element.
Therefore I shout and shout again:
VIVa eI color!"
/') /a
. ,7'- -/':? !
LPA
.
:l'
:e
.
..
:D
.
.
~
3D
.
.
:G)
.
.
=
:tD
:e
=-
:G)
:e
UGORRETA ARQUfTfCTOS
WAllS
"Architecture cannot exist without walls.
Mexico is a country of architects.
Mexico is a country of walls.
We live and see Mexico in its walls;
tragedy, strength, joy, romance, peace, light, and color, all
of these qualities are in Mexican walls.
Pre-Hispanic, colonial, and modern civilizations are present
in our walls.
When a foreign civilization dominates us, the wall,
ashamed, disappears; it hides and cries.
When Mexico suffers, the wall shouts;
when Mexico succeeds, the wall emerges.
That is our history.
The wall will never die.
The day the wall dies
Mexico will die,
architecture will die. "
WA1fR
There is a lady called Water.
We can't live without her.
Water is romantic, sensual, beautiful, happy, strong, sweet,
and fresh. Peace and movement, limited and eternal,
landscape and architecture, water is life."
PATIOS AND COUIlTS
"It is beautiful when we limit space.
When we create a patio, we become the owners of that
space.
Before, it belonged to everybody; after, it is ours.
Patios are romantic, intimate; they give us a sense of
property and security.,
Light, color, and water are enhanced there. "
HUMOR
"I would like to design for the good man, to contribute to
happiness, to design for God, and at the same time, to
know that I am not important, that I should encourage
myself to achieve great things, but that I am not important
that I can ... laugh at myself."
Ricardo Legorreta
)J - If/; ()
LPA
..
:0
::e
=-
.
:0
:8
.
:0
:0
-LOOK AT A VILLAGE PLAZA,
ITS FOUNTAIN.
ITa ""AKET,
ITS CHURCH.
ITS ARCADE TO
SHELTER PEOPLE FROM
SUN OR RAIN. SEE THE TREES
WHICH GIVE SHADE
TO THE lOCALO.
IT'S ALL BASED ON
COMMON SENSE.
NOT ON ANY FORMAL IDEA.-
:8
.
:0
::0
.
:&
:0
:0
.
:0
:0
LPA, f\IC.
PROfIlE
LPA was founded in 1965 and lWeI" the last twenty_
yeats, has become one of California's leadirw design /inns
with considerable depth of experience in the development
of municipal and public facirdies throughout California.
Other areas of experience include cxxponJte headquarters,
institu6onal/eduOJ!ionaJ facilities, data Q!llteIs, high-
technology facilities, regional shoppi Q!IIte<s, offlc;.,
complexes, mixed-use developments '!:1 resott facilities.
We have become recognized nationally and statewide for
our leadetship in Planning, Architecture and Interior Design.
. Recently, LPA was named the recipient of the 1990
Firm of the Year Award by the California Council of
the American Institute of Architects which recognizes
over twenty years of excellence in design.
. LPA has been able to achieve for its clients over 250
national, regional and local design awards.
. LP A has been a leader in the attitude of "value
architecture" where cost effective design solutions are
part of LPNs philosophical objectives, especially in
public facilities development where cities and counties
have a responsibility to their citizens for /iscally
responsible solutions to development.
LPNs offices are located in San CJie&o, 111Iine,
Sacramento and Taiwan with a staff of over 100 which
represents a deep resource of expertise and experience.
.
.
LP A has been a forerunner in the United States in the
use of the latest computer aided design technology to
compliment the skills of our staff and elevate the level
of professionalism within LPNs se11lices.
LPA
.
More than 80% of LPA's se11lice load has resulted from
continuing relationships with existing clients, which is
perhaps the stroT/gest recommendation any design firm
can have.
Specific design se11lices include the follOw/if: descriptions:
. LPA often assists 'its clients in the early Pre-Design
Phase of facilities development which may include site
selection, jurisdictional analysis, feasibility analysis and
construction budget development.
. LPA offers full programming se11lices, space standards
development, furnishings selection, furnishings reuse
policy development and interior design se11lices.
. LP A offers se11lices for renovating, rehabilitation and
consolidation of facilities.
/~2-/~,/
..
:8
.
.
.
:e
:8
:e
:e
::e
:e
=-
::e
::e
:e
=-
::e
::e
=-
:e
::e
LPA,foiC.
. LPA offers full service site planning and architecture
services including design development, construction
documents, cost estimating, scheduling, man"8'!ment,
processing with governmental "8'!ncies and
presentation at public and community hearings.
. LP A offers construction administration services
including assistance in bidding and negotiations with
selectro contractors, project clos~ut services and post
construction follow-up.
Recent projects in ~/inIJ with ~ Arquitectos
include:
. International Student Center at UClA
University of California . Los Angeles
Los Angeles, CA
. IBM National Marketing Headquarters
Dallas, 1X
. Solana Marriott Hotel
Dallas, 1X
. Solana Sports Oub
Dallas, 1X
. Tustin Ranch Marketplace
Tustin, CA
. Solana Mixed Use Commercial Complex
Dallas, 1X
. Boy Scouts Headquarters
Dallas, 1X
PAST PERFOIlMANa
Of the handful of design firms that have been selected in
the past by the California Council of the American Institute
of Architects to receive the distinguished Firm Award, only
LPA has the unique distinction of coming out of the
development industry where the value of a project is not
only measured by the level of design, but by its cost-
effective "bottom-line" success in the marketplace.
The San Diego office of LPA has never had a project
completed over-budget or behind schedule. A recent
example is in the Oty of Chula Vista, where LP A had full-
service architecture and interior design responsibilities for
the corporate headquarters of North Island Federal Oedit
Union in the East/ake Business Center. This project recently
completed one month ahead of schedule and substantially
below its construction budget.
Additionally, the Chula Vista Planning Department has stated
on several occasions to our Team that it has rarely
);2~) 1P2
LPA
t
I
e
!PA, file.
had a project move so smoothly and efficiently through
their office.
.
LOCAl. AGENCY EXPER/fNCE
.
LP A has successfully processed over four million square feet
through local San Diego agencies in the last five yeal3. LP A
believes strongly in a close, early working relationship with
all agencies and community groups, and our success in this
process is widely acknowledged by our clients.
Comments from teCl!IIt clients include:
.
.
./ am thrilled to have the opportunity to extol the virtues of
LP A for anyone interested in quality public buildings
delivered on time and within budget. LP A has
demonstrated remarkable flexibility and cooperation in
adhering to a rigorous, fast-track schedule imposed by the
City Council. They have produced cost saving ideas to
meet the City's constraints...and still achieve original design
concepts...I cannot over-emphasize the team work and
dedication to the City's interests which LPA has shown
under the extraordinary political and economic
circumstances surrounding this endeavor....
.
.
.
.
Robert A Curtis
Mayor
aT'( Of MISSION VIEJO
.
....On behalf of the Burbank Redevelopment Agency Board
membel3 and staff, I would like to...thank you for the
.Award of Excellence. for the Media City Center project.
We appreciate the fine work you and your staff have done
for this project and rest assured we will cherish the
architectural quality for yeal3 to come....
:0
.
:8
William R. Kelly
Assistant Executive Director
BURBANK REDEVf1.OPMfNf AGENCY
:e
.'n reflecting...I wanted to express my sincere appreciation
of the level of dedication, design expertise and performance
/ have received to date...1 can unequivocally state that I
have never had my architectural needs more expertly
fulfilled than with those provided to us by LP A I have
been...particularly impressed with...the level of design and
interior space planning that we have received...I look
forward to a...long term continued relationship with future
projects. .
Kipland Howard
President, AI/egis Development Services
NOKTH ISlAND FEDERAL CRfDlT UNION
San Diego, California
:0
::e
=-
=-
::e
1 ') - / /'3
/0-- ,1/
LPA
t
~
s
LPA, fIIC.
I
Ia
r:t
"As space planners, LP A has successfully mastered the art of
combining the knowledge of the elements of architecture
and functional design... with the understanding of the need
to be sensitive toward the personalities and egos...it was a
pleasure for me to work with the staff of LPA.. They were
professional, responsive and provided critical support in
defining and resolving any problems. Additionally, they
completed the project on time and on budget."
Debra Kurita
Assistant City Manager
aTY Of SANTA ANA
.
"When considering LP A, a category of EXCEUfNT must be
included. (We) were impressed by the professionalism and
talent of this firm. To date, (our project) has won two
architectural Honor Awards and is currently entered in a
national competition. LP A was able to achieve these
awards while working within our programming and budget."
Cheryll j. Ruszat
Business Manager
UNMRSlTY MONTfSSORI SCHOOl . UC IMne
.
o
o
.
.
"Your entire team has been highly professional and
responsive...most important was your team's ability to
design a beautiful building within a very tight design and
construction budget. Your understanding of the importance
of a project budget and your ability to design within the
budget is a rare quality in most architects today."
Steven I. Berg
Director of Real Estate
MCGRAlli DEVELOPMENr INC
San Diego, California
o
.
.
:0
:0
"I would like to commend both you and your staff for the
exemplary performance which you have shown us (on our
projects). Your ability to respond to changes, assume
complete responsibility for the design team, establish
budgets and schedules (and meet them) are but a few of
the intangibles which distinguishes LPA from its
competitors. rr
:e
::e
James R. McCann
Vice President - Development
NEWPORT NATIONAL CORPORATION
Carlshad, California
::G
/;2 -/4 L/
LPA
=-
.
It
LPA, I'IC.
o
"I can say without the slightest doubt that you and your
most professional staff have more than met my
expectations... you have proven to be an able and talented
partner in the development of our plans...I am most pleased
to give LPA an absolutely unqualified recommendation of
the highest order... ".
.
.
Lyndon E. Taylor, PhD.
Assistant Chancellor . Instructional Setvices
NOIm-I ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY CD1.1.fGE
DIS1RJCf
o
.
SPfQFIC PROJECr EXPERIENCE
.
LP A is currently active on several significant public projects.
Brief descriptions of recent projects completed or underway
include:
.
SAN MARCOS TOWN CEN11lE
San Marcos, CA
.
Scope:
This project is presently underway and includes
the development of a major governmental complex
for the Dty of San Marcos. The project consists
of approximately a 150,000 S.F. civic center
complex with a 15,000 S.F. library and a 25,000
S.F. community center. LPNs setvices include
programming. space planning. furnishings
selection, interior design, site planning and full
architectural and construction administration
setvices.
.
:8
::G
Oient:
Dty of San Marcos
The KolI Company
:e
MISSION VIEJO avtC CENTER
Mission Viejo, CA
:e
Scope: This project includes the development of 81,500
S.F. of civic center complex. LPA's setvices
include programming confirmation, space
planning. furnishings selection, interior design, site
planning and full architectural and construction
administration setvices.
::ra
=-
Oient: Dty of Mission Viejo
Snyder Langston CCM
:e
:e
=-
=-
/ 'j "j /t:
/ '-~ (~:::>,..//
LPA
t
.
.
lPA, ",c.
SANrA NolA. U1Y HAll
Santa Ana, CA
.
.
Scope:
.
.
.
.
This project included space planning services for
the relocation of several Oty departments within
three floors, or 40,000 S.F. of the present Oty
Hall. This involved moving approximately 100
people between the Police Department, Finance
Department and their administrative areas.
W8A 01Y HAll
Yuba City, CA
Scope:
This 21,000 S.F. one-story City Hall is located
within a regional governmental complex, and
includes a 100-seat Council Chamber. The
building design is intended to encourage the
democratic spirit of that rural community by
allowing for open and accessible work spaces, as
well as a central court where the public and their
selected leaders are able to interact.
Oient: The City of Yuba City
.
IRVINE RANCH WA1fR DlSTRICf CORPORATE
HEADQUAKTERS
Irvine, CA
.
.
.
.
Scope:
Oient:
.
.
This two-story facility of 51,BOO S.F. will house the
various administration departments of the Water
District. An ancillary one-story facility provides a
conference center that may be operated
independently. LPA's services include architecture,
planning and interior design.
Irvine Ranch Water District
ORANGE COUNTY JOHN WAYNE IJRPOI{T
Orange County, CA
Scope:
.
.
.
Client:
.
=-
A two-level terminal of approximately 337,900 S.F.
serving 14 gates. Bridges connect the adjacent
circulation and parking facilities. In association
with two leading airport consultants, LPA is the
Executive Architect for a terminal that presents a
new image of Orange County to its visitors.
County of Orange
,
/).- it::; ~
LPA
-AS A CHILD I VISITED
VAST, COMPLEX HACIENDAS
WITH MANY ROOMS TO HIDE IN.
IT WAS IN THOSE HACIENDAS
THAT I FIRST KNEW
THE PLEASURES
OF MYSTERIOUS BUILDINGS.
MODERN ARCHITECTS CALLED
FOR TOO MUCH CLARITY
IN BUILDINGS
AND MISSED
THE PLEASURE OF MYSTERY
AND INTRIGUE.-
PROJECT PROFILES
Section 2
On the following pages are combined images of recent
projects by LPA and Legorreta Arquitectos.
),,).'}
~--:,/ /
LPA
LA
LA
LA
/ '1 _.//,C)/
/ .C/- e> 0
LPA
.. ... . .~.'...' ...J.,...",.. .'.''.V~
t. '('~::\" ';-
1~1i'-. .
'- \,,;
~ ,:".,I .
~.,,'...
If';"--
LA
LA
LPA
/-1 -- ) ~ <}
LPA
.,",.~
-.""'..;~~
LA
LPA
J., )17
,~- If)
LPA
LPA
LA
:J
.,
LA
/ ;2-/ 7 /
LPA
j) -/? ~
I C-~ ~
LPA
J.
I
~
LA
LA
) ,~---)
/) - /)
LPA
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
::a
.
::a
=-
::e
:e
/)~/7f/
LPA
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
a
a
3
:II
~. ,
LPA
'---.
)"./'J)
,;OL /~
LPA
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:8
=-
:8
::e
=-
=-
=-
=-
=-
) 'L) 7/;
,~
LPA
"
:8
TEAM STRUCTURE
.
.
.
.
.
.
:0
=-
-I ASKED AN OWNER
OF A HOUSE
WHY HE PAINTED IT
THAT WAY.
THE MAN REPLIED,
'( JUST ENJOYED PAINTING IT
LIKE THAT.'
HOW SHOCKING IT IS.
AND LIBERATING,
TO HAVE INTUITION VALIDATED
IN SUCH A WAY,"
:8
:e
::e
::e
::e
=-
::e
::e
=-
=-
=-
Section 3
The proposed Project Team will be composed of LPA
Principals and management staff working closely with
Legorreta Arquitectos throughout the course of design and
documentation.
Ricardo Legorreta retains control over the design vision
working with the Dty and Public Library. In our many
projects with Ricardo and his office he has always played a
hands on role in all phases of development. He has
committed himself to close involvement throughout this
project for the Dty of Chula Vista.
Our significant Consulting Team members are also
represented by a Principal within that firm. These
individuals are listed below with their corresponding
responsibility.
Ricardo Legorreta, Legorreta Arquitectos
Design Principal, President
Mr. Legorreta, as the Design Principal, will be responsible
for evaluating the Project Program and interpreting the
vision of the Dty and the Chula Vista Public Library. He
will be responsible for directing the design of the
architecture, as well as overseeing the development of the
interior design. LPA has worked with Ricardo in exactly this
same manner on over two million square feet of projects
within the last five years.
John P. Mattox. LP A, Inc.
Principa/-In-Charge
Mr. Mattox will be responsible as the Principa/-In-Charge to
act as the Dry's prime point of contact throughout the
course of the Project. He will be responsible for directing
the day-to-<iay activities and overseeing all phases of the
project development. He has worked with Ricardo as
Project Principal on several projects throughout the United
States. Specifically:
.
Solana Marriott Hotel
International Student Center at UCLA
IBM National Marketing Headquarters
Solana Village Center
Solana Boy Scouts Headquarters
Solana Office Complex
LPA
.
.
.
.
.
Mr. Sean E. Towne, LP A, Ine.
Project Manager/Principal
Mr. Towne will be responsible for the technical
development of all design and construction documentation
including construction administration. His effort will assure
);] -) 7 7
.
:I
TEAM STRUCTURE
.
that all design direction from Mr. Legorreta's office will meet
building code standards and Planning Department requirements.
.
Mr. Jeff Miller, LPA, Inc.
Director of Interiors
.
Mr. Miller will be responsible for directing all interior staff,
developing the design and space planning direction and coordinating
with our library fixturization consultant, as well as confirming with
Mr. Marshall Brown that all aspects of the Project Program are
considered within the interior planning.
.
.
Mr. Marshall Brown, Marshall Brown - Interior Designer Ine. (San
Diego)
Principal
Mr. Brown will be responsible for selecting and specifying all library
equipment and special library fixturization necessary to meet the
requirements of the Project Program.
Other key Team members include:
Landscape Architecture
BUKfON ASSOCJATfS (San Diego)
Mr. William Burton, Principal
Mechanical Engineering
TSUCHIYAMA, IWNO AND GIBSON (San Diego)
Mr. Paul Gibson, Principal
.
.
.
.
.
.
Electrical Engineering
R. E.. WAll AND ASSOCJA1ES, 1Ne. (San Diego)
Mr. Mike Wall, Principal
Structural Engineering
NOWAK-MEUIMESTER ASSOCJATfS (San Diego)
Mr. Robert Nowak. Principal
a
::e
Cost Consulting
CONSTRUCTION ANALYSTS 1Ne. (San Diego)
Mr. William Schiller
::e
On the following pages are further descriptions and resumes of our
Project Team including biographies of each LPA Principal.
:e
a
=-
=-
=-
/
);)-)? g
/
LPA
.
. MARSHAll. BROWN - MfRJOR DESIGNER INC
. Marshall Brown - Interior Designer Inc. will play a critical
role during the course 01 project development. In addition
to spec:r/'Js special library fixturization and equipment, this
. office wi lobe dosely involved with the architectural and
interior design teams in assuring that all phases of design
and documentation are consistent with the requirements of
. the approved Project Program.
This Team member offers considerable experience with
. respect to library pr':!f::.eamming and interior design. Recent
projects include inva ment with the development 01 the
Project Program for the Chula VISta Public Ubrary, as well
as assistance in developin~ the Application for California
. Ubrary Construction and enovation Bond Act Funds for
this same project. Other projects include:
. BEVERLY HlUS lJB/W(l'
. Beverly Hills, CA
. CORONA PUBI.JC lJB/W(l'
:8 Corona, CA
. CDRONADO lJB/W(l'
. San Diego, CA
. DfL WEBB MEMORIAL lJB/W(l'
Loma Unda University
. Loma Unda, CA
. NATIONAl.. 01Y PUBI.JC lJBRAR'( EXPANSION
:e San Diego, CA
. ONrARJO UBRAKY
:e Master Plan and Full Design Package
Ontario, CA
. RANOIO aJCAMONGA CENTRAL PARK lJB/W(l'
:e Rancho Cucamonga, CA
. /lAN0I0 SAN DIEGO UBRAKY
::e San Diego, CA
. SAN DIEGO PUBI.JC l1BRAKY
Tierrasanta Branch
=- San Diego, CA
. SCOTTSDm PUBUC UBRAKY
::e Musta1a Branch
Scotts ale, AI
. SCOTTSDm PUBI.JC lJB/W(l'
::e Headquarters Expansion
Scottsdale, AI
~ . UNMRSI1Y OF CNlFORNIA, IIMNE
Main Library Renovation
Irvine, CA
::e
=- l;l-/7i LPA
~
=-
BU/[fON ASSOaA1ES
::e
::I
Burton Associates Landscape Architecture and Planning Was
formed in 1989 by William S. Burton. Mr. Burton had been
a member and principal of One of San Diego's prominent
landscape firms since 1978.
Burton Associates' award winning staff represent 45 years of
landscape architectural experience, providing services in
Southern California, San Francisco, Alabama, Las Vegas and
the Cochella Valley. This firm maintains worldng
relationships with some of the largest commercial and
residential real estate development companies, corporate
users and institutions in the region including: Trammel
Crow, The Baldwin Company, Oliver McMillan, Uncoln
Property Company, j. M. Peters, GSC Realty and Davidson
Communities.
=-
=-
=-
=-
They have an excellent worldng relationship with the Oty of
Chula Vista. Recent public and private projects include:
=-
::e
=-
=-
fSCOND/DO CIVIC CENTER
Escondida, CA
METRO FIRE STATION
Rancho Santa Fe, CA
MIRA MESA SENIOR CENTER
San Diego, CA
::e
NfllCOR. HEADQUAKTERS
Chula VISta, CA
SUMMIT POINTf RESIDlN1W COMMUNITY
Anaheim Hills, CA
::e
PIAZZA CARMEL RETAIL CENTER
San Diego, CA
:e
:e
:e
::e
=e
=-
a
/d ~ ) ~f)
LPA
=-
=-
1SlJCHY.Mf..\ KNNO AND GIBSON
:e
:e
joining the Design Team is Tsuchiyama, Kaino and Gibson
who are easily recognized as one of San Diego's leading
mechanical engineering firms, led by one of this industry's
experts, Mr. Paul Gibson.
::e
The office of Tsuchiyama, Kaino and Gibson offers over 70
years of combined mechanical engineering experience
nationwide and specialized projects overseas. These
projects include an extensive background in micro
electronic (clean room) facilities, science laboratories and
high-rise, industrial, manufacturing, hotel and residential
buildings. Their list of clients include General Dynamics,
Scripps Oinic, Fluor, Sherwood Medical, IBM, Hughes, R. W.
johnson, Alcoa, Cedars/Sinai Medical Center and U.CS.D.
:e
:e
Recent public and institutional experience includes:
:e
. RANOIO SAN DIfCO UBIWlY FAC1llTY
San Diego, CA
. SCIENCE UBIWlY/NJMINISlRATION FAaI/TY
Carlsbad High School
. IIMNE aTY HAlL
Irvine, CA
::e
::e
=-
. FINE AJ(lS BUIlDING
University of California Irvine
:e
. L R. GREEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOl
Escondido, CA
::e
. '8' S1J/EET PIER EXHIBI110N HAl1./ART MUSEUM
San Diego, CA
::e
. MJSSJON VIEJO CMC CENTER
Mission Viejo, CA
=-
. /NTfRNA11ONAL STUDENr CENTER AT LOA
University of California Los Angeles
=-
::0
::e
:8
::D
=-
/v-2 - IS)
LPA
.
.
.
R. f. WALL & ASSOQA1fS INC.
.
for over twenty years, R. E. Wall & Associates, Inc. has
offered technically sophisticated electrical engineering and
lighting design for all types of public and private
construction.
.
The Design Team of lPA/Legorreta Arquitectos have worked
with this engineering otganization for many years and on
many different projects throughout the United States. R. E.
Wall is located in San Diego and would assist this Team in
electrical engineering, lighting design and energy
conservation engineering.
.
.
Recent public projects include:
.
HOME SAVINGS Of AMfRlCA LAW UBRARI'
Irwindale, CA
.
SCHOOl Of BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION/
"'FORMATION
California State University San Bernardino
.
.
.
JOHN WAYNE IJRPOI(f TERMINAl..
County of Orange, CA
fAGUolA IJEAQ-I MUSEUM Of AKf
Laguna Beach, CA
MONTREAL IlRCHf1fC1l}RAL BOOK MUSEUM
Montreal, Canada
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
S1UDfNT CENTER
University of California Irvine
. MISSION VIEJO OVIC aN1FR
Mission Viejo, CA
.
. INTfJINATJONN. CENTER AT UClA
University of California Los Angeles
This firm is the recipient of the prestigious 1990 "Paul
Waterbury Outdoor Ughting Award of Excellence" from the
judges of the IESNA's International Illumination Design
Awards. R. E. Wall & Associates has also received the
IESNA Orange Section 1991 "Lumen Award for Excellence
in Ughting Design", the 1991 "Edwin f. Guth and Paul
Waterbury International Awards of Merit" for the John
Wayne Airport Terminal, and the NECA Orange County
Chapter 1990 "Award for Electrical Excellence" again for the
John Wayne Airport Terminal.
In 1989, R. E. Wall & Associates, Inc. was awarded two
Southern California Edison "Design for Excellence" awards
for energy efficiency, as well as two NECA "Awards for
Electrical Excellence", including an electrical excellence
award for the Home Savings of America Irwindale /1/
Computer Center.
.
:0
::0
:e
::e
::0
=-
/)-)';"
._'< . {)(7'-.
LPA
..
=-.
NOWAX-MEUlMfSTfR AND ASSOC1A1fS
:8
:8
::e
:e
=-
:e
=-
=-
:a
::e
=-
::e
=-
:e
:0
:e
::e
:0
::0
Robert L Nowak and GeoIge E. Meulmester, are the firm's
founding principals. They had, respectively, 15 and 18
years of structural design experience in State and City
aeencies and private firms before forming Nowak-
Meulmester & Associates in 1977. Combining that past
with Nowak-Meulmester & Associates' 13 years of present
experience has led to a diversified organization capable of
designing a tremendous variety of project types.
To date, Nowak-Meulmester & Associates have successfully
completed more than 1,900 engineering projects of which
400 were projects of major importance. This large \IOlume
of work in\lOlved projects tota/ing over $1 billion in
construction costs.
Recent public projects include:
. DTAY MESA UBRAKY
San Diego, CA
. FINE AKTS GAllERY, BAlBOA PARK
San Diego, CA
. CARlSBAD HIGH SCHOOL EXPANSION
Carlsbad, CA
. llBRAKYjMUlTl-l'URl'OSE FACIUlY
Va/ley Junior High School
Carlsbad, CA
. CARlSBAD aJl.1llRAL AKTS aN1fR
Carlsbad, CA
. OPERATIONS aN1fR
Spring Valley School District
La Mesa. CA
. IMPERIAL COUNTY SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION
FACIU1Y
EI Centro, CA
/'L Jrt1
/ rZ . ./
LPA
.
.
.
CONSTRUC11ON ANALYSTS lNe
.
.
Joining the /PAl Legorreta Arquitectos Design Team is
Construction Analysts Inc. (CAI), who will playa critical role
in providing professional estimating and cost consulting
services.
CAI offers considerable experience working in public
projects. Recent library experience includes:
.
.
. CARl.S8AD UBRARY
CMlsbad, CA
. EARL AND BIRDIE TAnOR U8RARY
San Diego, CA
. VA/..ENaA PARK BRANOI U8RARY
San Diego, CA
.
.
.
.
.
:0
:0
. HENDERSON UBRARY AND 01Y HAll
Henderson, NV
. HUNTlNGfON UBRARY AND 01Y HAll
Huntington Beach, CA
. POWAY UBRARY
Poway, CA
:8
=8
:0
.
:8
::0
:0
>', _) c/ij
/ I D f
, ---
LPA
.
tt
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:8
.
:e
:a
:a
=-
::e
:8
::e
=-
=-
::e
LPA NC. . RESUMES
. Mr. john P. Mattox
. Mr. Sean E. Towne
. Mr. Jeff B. Miller
,/
,1-/ ,'i]'? LPA
,.
ft
JOHN P. MATTox. AlA . Principal
1l'A, Inc.
.
Educated at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, Mr. Mattox received
his Bachelor of Science in Architecture degree, with honors,
in 1976. He brin~ to the firm substantial experience in
several design discIplines including municipal architecture,
fire station and fire training facilities, forensicjlaw
enforcement, educational, residential, church and preschool
facilities and theater complexes.
A licensed Architect in the State of California, Mr. Mattox
is a member of the National Association of Industrial and
Office Parks, Building Industry Association and is a member
of the Board of Directors for the North City Transportation
Management Association (TMA).
Mr. Mattox is responsible for all phases of project develop-
ment including establishing and implementing the client's
program and "directing the development of Design, Con-
struction Documents and Construction Administration for
each project.
Mr. Mattox has been involved as Project Principal in the
direction and production of several notable LP A projects
including:
.
.
.
.
.
.
NORTH ISLAND FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
CllUla Vista, 0\
A 135,600 square foot corporate headquarters
facility that includes administrative offices and full
computer/data facilities for the Iatgest local credit
union in San Diego County.
.
.
.
IBM NARONAL SYSTEMS SUPPORT UNTfR
(In association with Legorreta Arquitectos)
Dallas, 1)(
.
400,000 square feet of national corporate offices for
IBM's marketing and engineering research offices
that incorporate data processing facilities, ad-
ministrative offices, interior design services and full
latchen/cafeteria facilities.
UClA INTfRNARONAL STUDENT UNTfR
(In association with Legorreta Arquitectos)
Los Angeles, 0\
A 40,000 square foot administrative facility for the
international student community on the UClA
campus that includes classrooms, meeting rooms,
full interior design services and cafeteria and
latchen facilities.
.
.
.
.
SOLANA VILLAGE UNTfR
(In association with Iegorreta Arquitectos)
Dallas, 1)(
.
A mixed-use business community that will be built
in three phases over 10 years. The initial phase will
include 1.1 mil/ion square feet of office space and
support facilities for IBM, the Village Center, a
fitness center, a luxury 3oo-room hotel and 300,000
square feet of office space.
.
.
.
/ ,) - /2:6
( ,""- (
LPA
=-
::tt
SEAN f. TOWNE. AlA . Principal
LP A, 1nc
=-
::e
As an LP A Project Principal, Mr. Towne is responsible for
administrating projects through Design, Design
Development, Construction Documents, Bidding and
Construction Administration.
=-
A licensed Architect in the State of California, he is a
member of the American Institute of Architects. He
received his Bachelor of Architecture degree from Cal Poly,
San Luis Obispo.
=-
=-
Mr. Towne's experience includes recent leadership
involvement in several of LPA's significant projects, some
of which include:
::e
NORTH ISLAND FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
Chula Vista, CA
:0
135,600 sq. ft. corporate headquarters facility that includes
administrative offices and full computer/data facilities for
the largest local credit union in San Diego County. SeTVices
include programming, space planning, interior design and
full architectural seTVices.
::e
:8
AST RESEARaI CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
ITVine, CA
:e
A 224,000 sq. ft. headquarter facility that includes
laboratory support facilities, data processing facilities and
administrative facilities and full interior design seTVices.
:0
ELMO SEMICONDUCTOR
Burbank, CA
::e
A 70,000 sq. ft. state-of-the-art research facility with
laboratory support facilities, data processing facilities and
administrative facilities and full interior design seTVices.
:a
SHERWOOD MEDICAL
San Diego, CA
A 125,000 sq. ft. medical products manufacturing,
distribution, administrative facility with laboratory support
spaces, clean rooms, data processing facilities and full
interior design seTVices.
Mr. Towne's experience also includes the improvement of
existing facilities for Xerox Corporation and TRW; as well as
the development of a Space Plan Program and Schematic
Drawings for the improvement of 50,000 sq. ft. of space at
TRW Building 138 in Manhattan Beach in 1983.
=-
::0
:e
::e
::0
::0
) ,') ~/cYl/
C-.-'- ,6 l
LPA
~
t
JEFfREY B. MIllER, AlA, - Director of Interiors
LPA. Inc.
t
Mr. Miller has CM!rall responsibility for the project ad-
ministration and design direction of LP A's major interior
projects. With oW!r 18 yeatS of experience in the fields of
architecture and interiors, he affords the design team
extensive experience in all aspects or major projects from
initial data acquisition to completion and Owner occupan-
cy. His particular emphasis is on facility issues associated
with major corporate projects.
Mr. Miller has extensive experience in all areas of com-
mercial interiors, including corporate headquarters, tenant
improvements and financial institutions. He maintains an
impressive record of clients, including AT&T, Arthur Ander-
sen & Company, United Telephone Systems, Inc., The
Federal ResefW! Bank, Quotron Systems Inc., and Western
Savings.
Most recently he directed the design of the Anaheim
Convention Center renovation and sefW!d as Project
Manager for both the renovation and $30 million expansion
of the convention center.
~
.
It
.
.
I
.
Graduating from Kansas State University, he received his
Bachelor of Architecture. Mr. Miller is actively involved with
the American Institute of Architects, National AlA Commit-
tee on Interiors, the Orange County Chapter of the AlA.
and IFMA
.
.
.
Mr. Miller's relevant experience includes leadership involve-
ment in several significant projects, some of which include:
SAN MARCOS TOWN CENTRE
San Marcos, CA
.
.
Full interior design service for a 200,000 S.F. Ovic
Center complex with a 15,000 S.F. community
library and 20,000 S.F. community center.
WfSTfRN SAVINGS
Phoenix, AZ.
.
.
A 160,000 square foot operations facility in Phoen-
ix, Arizona housing Western Savings on-line check-
ing and savings operations as well as MIS and
generation of statements and receipt of payments.
.
.
MISSION VIEJO C1VIC aN1fR
Mission Viejo, CA
An 81,500 5.F. Ovic Center complex with full
interior design services.
.
.
!~ - ) X;;
LPA
t
,
JfAM MEMBER. RESUMES
t
. Marshall Brown, Marshall Brown - Interior Designer Ine.
. William BuTton, BuTton Associates
. Paul Gibson, Tsuchiyama. Kaino and Gibson
. Mike Wall, R. f. Wall and Associates, Inc.
. RobeTt Nowak. Nowak-Meulmester Associates
. William Schiller, Construction Analysts Inc.
.
It
[I
I
.
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:8
a
::8
:e
/) - / /(9
LPA
:e
,
,
.
it
.
.
.
.
.
.
:&I
.
:lI
:8
:8
=-
::t8
:e
=-
=-
..
MARSHALL BROWN - PRESIDENT
Education
B.A. Degree in Architecture from North Carolina State
University (1965)
Work Experience
Five years architectural experience.
Twenty years interior design/space planner experience.
Marshall has been involved in many exceptional projects and has
gained an excellent reputation within the field of interior
design. His work has been widely published in national, state
and local design publications: and he has received numerous
awards for his service.
In recent years he has served as principal on the following
projects:
Beverly Hills Library
Chula vista Public Library
Corona Public Library Master Plan
Del Webb Memorial Library
Lema Linda University
East County Regional Center
MTS/James R. Mills Building
ontario, California Public Library
Orange County Regional Center
Rancho Cucamonga Public Library
Rancho San Diego Library
San Diego Police Headquarters
/;]- FjiJ
~.aD ".~H AV_Hue. .AN D'..O. CAUflD"NIA ..1 oat .1...."..171. flAX C.1.J ..:a.:aa:aa
I
It
.
.
.
..
.
.
::0
:e
:8
::e
::e
::e
:e
=-
::e
::e
=-
::e
:e
WM. S. BURTON, ASLA
EDUCATION
1971 Master of Science, Agricultural Sciences
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
1976 Bachelor of Science, Ornamental Horticulture
Camornia Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
EXPERIENCE
President, May, 1989 to Present: Burton Associates
Vice President, 1985-May, 1989: DeWeese BlI10n Associates
Landscape Architecture and Plaming
Associate, 1981-1985: Roger DeWeese Inc., and Associates
Landscape Architecture and Plaming
Project Architect, 1971-1981: Roger DeWeese Inc., and Associates Landscape
Architecture and Plaming
Instructor, 1984-1986: UCSD Extension Program in Arts and Architecture
InstJUctor, 1976 -1971: Extension Education, California Polytechnic State University,
San Ws Obispo
INVITED LECTURES
'Xeriscape and Maintstream Design'
1987 Xeriscape Conference
San Diego, Califorria
'Mission Bay South Shores Master Plan'
American Society of Civil Engineers
1986 Annual Meeting
San Diego, Califorria
PUBLICATIONS
Fountains and Ponds 1989,
Sulset Books/Lane Publishing Co.
Del Mar Place Model Complex, 'Cantamat
'Contractors Respect Architects with Field Experience'
California Landscape Magazine
September 1987.
TEL: li'91451-3I!1
fIX: (ilSl451-3!93
.
1868 SCRlITON ROIO SUITE 200
SlI DIEGO, CAlIFORNIA 9212\
.
. M. S.
, l .
BU'TON
2 1 3 5
);2~ r~ )
=-
:c
::e
.
.
::0
.
.
.
:e
.
.
.
.
.
.
It
.
.
..
.
TSUCHIYAMA, KAINO & GIBSON
PERSONNEL RESUME
PAUL D. GIBSON. PRINCIPAL
EDUCATION
State University of New York, 1975
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 1979
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
California, Mechanical . #24934
EXPERIENCE
1989 to Present
1982 to 1989
1979 to 1982
1975 to 1976
Tsuchiyama, Kaino & Gibson,
Consulting Mechanical Engineers
Tsuchiyama & Kaino, Consulting Mechanical Engineers
Carrier Corporation
Barrett Heating & Air Conditioning
OTHER EXPERIENCE & QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Gibson possesses over thirteen years of extensive experience in engineering and
construction which includes 8 years of management experience in a wide range of projects
including industrial, commercial, institutional and recreational facilities with an emphasis
in energy efficiency and optimum system operation. Mr. Gibson has directed and
supervised engineering for various remodel and new construction projects that include
office and laboratory areas for Aselsan Microelectronics Industry (Ankara, Turkey), Telios
Pharmaceuticals; Alcoa Electronic Packaging, U.C.S.D. . IGPP, Sherwood Medical, Kaiser
Permanente, General Dynamics, CSU . San Marcos, Carlsbad High School and various
commercial office complexes.
/)~)/J-
,- r-- - '
Tsuchiyama. Kaino &. Gibson
4370 La Jolla Village Drive
Suile 750
San Diego. California 92122
(619)59M555 . Far. (619)597-<1565
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:It
:It
.
:8
.
::8
a
:s
=-
~
r
R.E. WALL & ASSOCIATES, INC.
MICHAEL E. WALL
Michael E. Wall, Vice President of R. E. Wall & Associates, is a 1980 graduate of the
University of California at Irvine with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and a Registered
Electrical Engineer in California, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and Utah. He is a member
of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers and the Illuminating Engineering
Society of North America as well as the International Association of Electrical Inspectors.
Michael has extensive experience in project management of major industrial, computer,
UPS and commercial projects. He has conducted electrical seminars for A.I.A. Associates
in Los Angeles, Orange County and San Diego and is a recipient of A.I.A. Appreciation
Awards in all three sections.
,
. ." - In)~
! ~.~ I I
.
{t
NOW\K-ME.LJU\1ESTER & ASSOCWES
It
.
.
~
.
.
s
:e
:e
:e
:e
::e
=-
=-
:s
=-
=-
::S
=-
Seismic Strengthening
Construction Technology
Restoration & Repair of Buildings
^:'\ I'\DLI'E:"<DE.....TLy U\\":-,T::D AITIU:\TE OF
HECKER E:-";C;I:'\EEHI:\(j COHPOR:\TIO:";
;-/9/
STRUCTURAL ENGI~EERS
I ROBERT L. HCMAl{ I
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
29 years of Professional Engineering experience
Registered Structural Engineer - California SE1678
- Illinois 081-0004272
Registered Professional Engineer - Alabama 14488
- Michigan PE28761
- Texas PE49198
Registered Civil Engineer - California C15784
Registered by National Council of Engineering Examiners - #6569
B.S.C.E. University of Arizona 1962, with graduate study in
Structural Engineering
EXPERIENCE RECORD
Nowak-Meulmester & Associates - San Diego, California - 14 years
President
Robert L. Nowak & Associates - La Mesa, California - 2 years
Prinicpal Structural Engineer
Crossman-Nowak & Associates - EI Cajon, California - 3 1/2 years
Chief Structural Engineer and Vice President
Project Engineer with various consulting firms in San Diego - 3 years
State of California, Department of Water Resources - 6 1/2 years
Structural Designer
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOCl
Board of Directors' 89-' 91
Structural Engineers Association of San Diego (SEAOSD)
Vice President '87-'88, President '88-'89
American Concrete Institute (ACIl
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute IEERIl
SPECIAL SKILLS
Investigation of Building Problems
Value Engineering of Structural Systems
Forensic Engineering - Expert Witness
JH:~{)Ob('rlln I)rlvt', Suilf' 200
Sail Djq.:~o, Callfornia 92121
(6191455-6681
FAK (619) 453-3947
Prtndpals
Roben L Nowak, S.E
George Meulmesler, P,E
senior ASsociates
Bradley T LOwe. S.E.
James Amundson, S.E
ASsociales
Michael W. Devine. r.E.
Alex Azodi. S,E
- Arizona SE15836
- Nevada SE5428
- Florida PE31756
- Virginia 014754
.
.
.
WILLIAM O. SCHILLER
.
Principal
Construction Analysts, Inc.
.
QUALIFICATIONS:
.
Twenty eight years of construction experience including estimating, purchasing, project
engineering, project management, contract negotiations and business development.
.
EDUCATION:
.
San Diego Mesa College - Business Administration
Pasadena City College - Engineering Technology
.
CURRENT RESPONSIBILITIES:
.
Manaoement
.
Provide oversight for all phases of operations. Activities include marketing, cost .engineerir.g,
project monitoring and claims consulting.
MarketilJ.ll
.
Initiate business development with architects, owner/developers, lenders, governmental
agencies, insurers and attorneys.
.
Cost Enoineerino
.
Provide design phase budgeting, estimating and value engineering services to owner/developers,
lenders and design professionals. Includes residential, commercial, institutional and industrial
projects.
.
Claims
.
Construction consultant to attorneys, insurers, owner/developers and local agencies. Advise
on issues involving construction defects, contract disputes and loss claims.
.
EXPERIENCE:
.
Vice President/Branch Manaaer 1987 - 1989:
Lee Saylor, Inc., San Diego Office.
.
Provided overview management and coordination of all branch office activities. Worked closely
with architects, owner/developers, governmental agencies, lenders, insurers and attorneys.
Coordinated cost engineering, scheduling, project monitoring and claims consulting services.
:8
.
,/
;J ~ JC}'-J
/<.""L- /,,_
Dl
D
a
WILLIAM O. SCHILLER - Continued
.
Director of Business Develooment 1982 - 1987:
University Mechanical and Engineering Contractors, Inc. San Diego, CA
.
Preconstruction phase activities for a major contractor operating in the eleven western states.
Responsibilities included business development, proposal preparation, contract negotiations and
project mobilization. Encompassed estimating, project staffing, local labor acquisition
subcontractor-supplier negotiations and logistics. Included commercial, institutional and
industrial projects.
.
.
Vice President 1977 - 1982:
University Contractors International, S.A. and concurrently Vice President/Commercial Manager
of University Mechanical Saudi Arabia, Ltd.
.
Established successful relationships with clients, consortium partners, agents, labor brokers,
subcontractors and suppliers. Activities included business development, estimating, proposal
preparation, contract negotiations, project staffing, labor acquisition, subcontractor-supplier
negotiations and logistics. Included commercial, industrial, healthcare and public works
projects.
.
.
Proiect Enoineer 1974 - 1977:
University Nuclear Systems, Inc. San Diego, CA
.
Project engineer for the installation of HV AC systems for nuclear power stations in the United
States and Brazil. Participated in work acquisition, estimating and day to day project
administration. Coordinated shop drawings, submittal documentation and expedited the timely
approval of change orders. Resolved Quality Control issues with subcontractors and suppliers.
.
:0
Proiect Enoineer 1970 - 1974:
University Mechanical and Engineering Contractors, Inc. San Diego, CA
::e
Project Engineer for industrial piping installations. Duties included work acquisition, estimating,
scheduling, contract negotiations and day to day project administration. Involved business
development, conceptual design, budgeting, estimating, contract negotiations, subcontractors
and suppliers, Quality control, submittal documentation, change orders and contract
administration.
a
::e
Svstems Enoineer 1962 - 1970:
Applications engineering for instrument and control systems for petro-chemical, food processing
and industrial manufacturing plants. Included design, fabrication, installation, testing and
commissioning.
:e
=-
=-
::a
=-
/ ' _.I ,o}.'(/I
.-.L .
j ','
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:8
.
:8
=-
:e
a
:a
::0
:at
RESPONSE TO QUfS110NS
-LOOK AT It. COLUMN
IN A MEXICAN VILLAGE,
A COLUMN laME ONE TOOK
.T H E T R 0 U I LET 0 I U I L D .
.y 0 U W ILL 8 if E T HAT
IT IIAY IE BATTERED
BY TIME.
PERHAPS NOT REPAINTED
THIS YEAR. YET
IT STANDS THERE WITH
THE DIGNITY
ITS BUILDER GAYE IT.e
Section 4
The following responses are directed to specific questions
within the Request for Qualifications. These questions are
listed below with LPNs accompanying response;
1. What do )'OU consideI- tD be )'OUr #inn's major
strengths. especially as they relate 10 this project7
LP A/l-egorreta Arquitectos offers a deep resource of
expertise and experience for the City of Chula VISta
and the Chula VISta Public Ubrary. These strengths can
be outlined as follows:
. This Team offers nationally and internationally
acclaimed design strength in architecture, as well
as interior design. Ricardo Legorreta offers also a
unique sensitivity that will assure a bi<ultural, bi-
national design solution for the City of Chula
VISta. LP A. also, is a significant design #irm
recognized as California's 1990 Firm of the Year.
Additionally, LP A has worked closely with Ricardo
on many of his critically acclaimed, award-winning
projects in the Un<<ed States.
. LP A has virtually coined the phrase "value
architecture'. We are vel)' sens<<;..., to project
costs, appropriate design and fiscally responsible
design solutions for our public clients. The San
Diego office has never had a project behind
schedule or over-lJudget. as we have described
within this booklet.
. LP A has processed over four million square feet
through local agencies within the last #ive years.
Recently, we worked with the City of Chula VISta
during the processing of design and
documentation for the corporate headquarters for
North Island Federal Oedit Union. We have had
only glowing reviews from the Planning
Department with respect to LPNs attitude and
attention to the City's concerns.
. LP A offers a depth of resources that are not easily
matched in the design industl)'. Our access to
information, familiarity with building systems and
knowledge of cutting edge technology coupled
with an extraordinary consulting team, all of who
are local leaders in their industl)', makes this Team
a wealth of resources for the City of Chula VISta.
. LPA/l-egorreta Arqu<<ectos and consulting Team
members are commming their Principals to
'hands-<Jn' in\'Olvement during all phases of
project development.
11 - } 7 7 LPA
.
.
RESPONSE TO QUfS1IONS
.
. This Team is local and "''Y accessible to the Oty
of Chula VISta. ll'A's office is within 20 minutes
of the Oty of Chula VISta's Civic Center. Ricardo
Legorreta has always proven to be \ole')' accessible
to his clients and has likewise stated his
commitment to this project and his personal
involvement through the de",/opment of design.
2. How does )UlIr linn anticipate incotporating the bi-
cultural, bi-national theme of this /ibr.uy into its
design1
.
.
.
.
R;cardo Legorreta will be this Team's significant
resource in de",'oping the bi<ultural, bi-national
theme with the Oty of Chula Vista. His projects
throughout the United States have consistently
emphasized these same elements with critically
acclaimed success.
.
.
.
.
3. What is )UlIr linn's approach to interior design1 Will
interiots be a responsibility of )UlIr linn's personnell
If not, please incilaJte the interior design #inn you
would associate with and describe any past experienre
with the linn ex other reasons (ex )UlIr choice.. At
what point will the interior design personnel become
involved with the project1
.
.
.
LP A has been recognized as a significant interior design
firm for many years. The majority of our projects
include full programming and interior design services
with award-winning success. Also, this same interior
Design Team has worked closely with Legorreta
Arquitectos in realizing special bi<ultural themes.
LPNs interior design Team will be involved at the
outset of design, developing the blocldng diagrams and
relationship diagrams with R;cardo Legorreta and
validating these diagrams with Marshall Brown -Interior
Designer Inc. We ha.., invited Marshall Brown's office
to join our Team as a point of continuity between pre-
proposal planning and continued planning efforts with
this design Team. Additionally, Marshall Brown will
work with ll'A in assuring that program elements,
fixturization and equipment requirements are
incorporated properly into the design.
.
.
:8
4. How does )UlIr linn evaluate an evolving design in
terms of rost of operations and life cycle rostsl
.
An important ingredient to many of LPNs projects is
life cycle costs and operational costs for building
systems, as well as furnishings systems. LPNs Team
offers a computerized life cycle cost analysis program
that evaluates building structure with alternative
mechanical systems and compares these alternatives on
=-
.
.
') )qr/
f~ - I '(, LPA
II
.
.
Rf.SfONSf TO QUfS110NS
.
.
.
.
an hourly basis summarized for one year based on
local weather data. This process occurs during
schematic design so that an early evaluation is available
for our clients.
.
Additionally, LP A is able to evaluate life cycle cost
benefits of furnishings systems which can be either a
functional issue or an aesthetic issue based on what
the overall return is to the City. We will analyze initial
costs against maintenance and operational costs, as
well as, ..ery importantly, the impacts of future
relocation of workstations or offices. We also make it
a point to secure "real costs" directly from the
manufacturer and installation industries to assure the
City of the validity of these analyses.
5. What are your linn's CAD capabilitiesl
.
.
.
LP A has always been a forerunner of firms with the
ability and drive to elevate the le..el of professionalism
within their services. In a tremendous step of progress
to de..elop quality design with increased precision,
accuracy, and cost-effectiveness for our clients, LPA
incorporated state-d-the-art computerized capabilities
to assist in a project's earliest design stages through
construction phases.
.
.
LP A offers an expanded scope of capabilities with the
Intergraph Computer Aided Design and Drafting system
(CADD). CADD complements the stalls of our profes-
sionals. CADD has pro..en to be an appropriate
marriage to human creative expertise, together
producing outstanding, cost..,ffective design.
The quality and accuracy of resulting drawings is
maintained by electrostatic plotting which produces
highly readable, concise drawings with the highest
attention given to final detail.
LP A responds more quickly and effectively to varying
conditions surrounding the design process, extending
to changing client needs, consultant requirements, and
vacillating economic conditions. Responsiveness and
flexibility are key elements of LP A service.
:8
:8
::e
::e
::e
::e
=-
CADD eliminates the need to recreate design
information. Complete construction documents are
developed, corrected, revised, recalculated, and plotted
with speed and accuracy.
LP A offers a full set of functions for space planning,
including the development of preliminary and final
layout plans, and all necessary reports to document a
particular project. The resulting information is added
::e
oj . J L;,:,)
/",.'- / / /
LPA
.
. RESPONSE TO QUES110NS
. to the database identifying furniture location, specific
. users, and its cost and depredation status. Block plans
and stacking diagrams are generated and revised
quickly to provide several space planning alternatives.
. 6. How does )lOll' #inn anilIe at dependable estimares of
project msts duri'f: the axuse of the designl
. LP A will work closely with Construction Analysts Inc.
in the development of budget estimates throughout
each phase of project development. These work
. products are described as follows:
Conceptual Estimate (0 to 14% Complete):
a.
. Complete stage estimates are based upon project
criteria, rough sketch floor plan, total square
footage, plot plan and statement of soil conditions.
:0 Depending upon the type of project or structure,
a design contingency of 7% to 12% will be
included in the estimate. Escalation will be added
::0 at the appropriate percentage for bid date and
project duration.
:8 b. Schematic Estimate (15% Complete):
Schematic stage estimates are based upon singfe
:8 line drawings or sketches of plot and site plans,
floor plans, elevations or renderings, sections
labeled for materials, brief outline specifications,
statement of structural system, statement of
:0 mechanical & electrical systems, statement of soil
conditions and a list of consultants. Again,
depending upon the type of project or structure,
::0 a design contingency of 7% to 12% will be
included in the estimate and escalation will be
added at the appropriate percentage for bid date
::8 and project duration.
c. Design Development Estimate (35% Complete):
:a Design Development stage estimates are based
upon preliminary drawings of plot and site plan,
floor plans, elevations, sketches of details, sections
:e labeled for materials, sections indicating structural
systems, plumbing plans, /-N AC plans, electrical
plans, broad outline specifications, preliminary
::e soils report and list of consultants.
d. Final Estimate (80% Working Drawings):
::D Final Estimates are based upon construction
drawings of plot, site and grading plans, floor
=-
=- /1 -)fJP LPA
.
:8
.
1lfiPONSE TO QUfS1IONS
.
.
.
.
:8
:0
plans, elevations, sections, details and finish
schedules (need not be complete), plumbing plans
and details including equipment schedules and fire
sprinkler system, /-NAC plans and details including
equipment schedules, electrical plans and details
including equipment schedules, specifications,
updated soils report, list of consultants and list of
special items not included on plans and
specifications. All estimates include civil,
structural, architectural, mechanical and electrical
work as applicable. A design contingency up to
2% may be included in the estimate. Escalation
will be added at the appropriate percentage for
bid date and project duration.
7. What is )OIIr finn's approach to lighting, including
dayfrghting, illumination and task lightingl
::0
=-
::0
::0
:e
::e
Ricardo Legorreta has successfully included natural
lighting as a key component of his design approach.
Careful attention will be directed to the opportunities
for natural lighting.
With respect to more technical concerns ... lighting
design for public areas requires sensitivity to proper
illumination 1e\lf!/s, glare and energy efficiency. As
recent recipients of numerous national lighting design
and energy efficiency awards, our lighting consultant,
R. f. Wall and Associates, has demonstrated the ability
to integrate these concerns successfully. A
comprehensivl! lighting design approach is utilized, one
that is sensitivl! to architectural design elements while
recognizing the critical role lighting plays in a library
facility.
Separate control and illumination le\lf!ls are provided
for task area illumination, bookshelllf!s and circulation
areas. Ughting techniques for these areas would
include direct task lighting, indirect lighting, as well as
photo<ell controlled dayJighting techniques.
::0
:0
:e
::e
=0
=-
8. On what basis does )OIIr finn determine its feesl
Please refer to Section 6 for further discussion with
respect to fee structure.
/.2 / 2{/ I LPA
:8
D
LPA . REFERENCES
:D
.
>>
D
:D
a
:D
:D
.
-ARCHITECTS WILL SPEND
ALL AFTERNOON STUDYING
THEW"'" AST"IFl
IS FINISHED. WHETHER
TO END A MATERIAL
OR CONTINUE IT
BECAUSE BY PRINCIPLE
IT SHOULD CONTINUE.
INSTEAD,
FOLK BUILDERS CHANGE
BOTH MATERIAL
AND COLOR AND STilL
MAINTAIN GREAT SIMPLICITY.-
>>
:D
>>
:8
~
~
:a
:ID
:e
=-
Section 5
Mr. Kipland Howard
President, Allegis Development Services
619 . 238-5466
Mr. Bill Vidano
Chief Financial Officer, North Island Federal Credit Union
619 .232-6525
Ms. Cheryl Ruszat
OwnerjExecutive Director, University Montessori School
714 . 854-6030
Mayor Robert Curtis
City of Mission Viejo, California
714 . 582-2489
Mr. Joe Darin
Project Manager, Laguna Bernardo Management Co.
619.487-1011
Mr. Paul Malone, Assistant City Manager
City of San Marcos, California
619 . 744-4020
Mr. Andy Lauria
Project Manager, LRC Systems
714 . 553-a001
Mr. Steven Berg/Mr. Joe Skrysak
Director of Real Estate, McCrath Development Inc.
619 . 292-$00
Ms. Debra Kurita. Assistant City Manager
City of Santa Ana. California
714 . 647-5200
Mr. Mike Strode
President, Pacific Link Development Services
619 . 226-0331
Mr. John Kavanagh
President, Kavanagh Associates
619 . 549-6744
/~, j ') fJ ')
/.J- ..... i' ---
LPA
:t
:8
lPA.REFE/lENCES
:D
What Our Public and Corporate Oients Are Saying
>>
"I am thrilled to have the opportunity to extol the virtues of
lP A for anyone interested in quality public buildings
delivered on time and within budget. lPA has
demonstrated remarkable flexibility and cooperation in
adhering to a rigorous, fast-track schedule imposed by the
Dty Council. They have produced cost saving ideas to
meet the City's constraints...and still achieve original design
concepts...! cannot over~mphasize the team work and
dedication to the Diy's interests which lPA has shown
under the extraordinary political and economic
circumstances surrounding this endeavor..."
:0
::0
:D
>>
Robert A Curtis
Mayor
01Y Of MISSION VIEJO
Mission Viejo, California
:0
"In reflecting...! wanted to express my sincere appreciation
of the level of dedication, design expertise and performance
I have received to date...1 can unequivocally state that I
have never had my architectural needs more expertly
fulfilled than with those provided to us by lP A I have
been...particularly impressed with...the level of design and
interior space planning that we have received...1 look
forward to a...long term continued relationship with future
projects. "
:D
:t
:D
:0
Kipland Howard
Presiden~ Allegis Development Services
NOIUH ISlAND fEDERAL CREDff U'o/ION
Cotporate HeadquarteJS
San Diego, California
:0
:I
"Snyder l1Ingston CCM is currently working with ll'A on
the...Dty of Mission Viejo's new Civic Center/Oty Hall.
They were overwhelmingly selected out of a group of over
twenty qualified architectural firms...their thoroughness in
research and flexibility in adapting to the changing needs of
the Dty have been very impressive... Their willingness to
work towards a budget while maintaining the integrity of
the design has been an invaluable asset to the project."
:D
~
Blake Sandbetg
Project Manager
SNYDER lANGSTON a::M
Irvine, California
::I
:ID
~
:e
))/)t))
LPA
LPA . REFfRfNCE
~
OAs space planners, LPA has successfully mastered the art of
combining the Icnowledge of the elements of architecture
arid functional design... with the understanding of the need
to be sensitive toward the personalities arid egos...it was a
pleasure for me to MOrk with the staff of LPA..1hey were
professional, responsive and provided critical support in
defining arid resolving any problems. Mditionally, they
completed the project on time and on budget.o
Debra Kurita
Assistant City Manager
arr Of SANrA ANA
Santa Ana, California
.
~
~
~
t
t
.
D
D
.
"When considering LPA. a category of EXCELLENT must be
included. (We) were impressed by the professionalism and
talent of this firm. To date, (our project) has won two
architectural Honor Awards and is currently entered in a
national competition. LP A was able to achieve these
awards while working within our programming arid budget. 0
Cheryll J. Ruszat
Business Manager
UNMRS11Y AIONTESSORl SOIOOl . UC kvine
Irvine, California
"Your entire team has been highly professional and
responsive...most important was your team's ability to
design a beautiful building within a lIl!ry tight design and
construction budget. Your understanding of the importance
of a project budget arid your ability to
design within the budget is a rare quality in most architects
today.o
.
JO
:lD
.
~
~
:s
Stelll!n I. Berg
[)jrector of Real Estate
MCGRAm DEVELOPMENT lNe
San [)jego, California
"We recently received discretionary approval for the (project)
that will allow its delll!/opment on our site. Two important
issues that influenced the approval process were the design
of the project and the professionalism of LP A responding to
the regulating agencieso.
john M. Kavanagh
HAW1HORNf MACHlNEKY CDMPANY
San [)jego, California
))-.)171) LPA
IPA.REFfRENCES
~
"/ would like to commend both )'OU and )'OUr staff for the
exemplary perforrnarJa which )'OU have shown us (on our
projects). Your ability to respond to changes, assume
complete responsibility for the design team, establish
budgets and schedules (and meet them) are but a few of
the intangibles which DIStinguishes IP A from its
competitors. "
~
.
.
}ames R. McCann
VICe President - Development
NEWPOIlf NATIONAL CORPORATION
Carlsbad, California
.
t
"This is a critical project fur the Department and )'OUr firm
has been outstanding both professionally and personally in
providing the architectural/engineering services... your design
team members...have been perceptive in understanding
Department needs from programming through detailed
design. The architectural quality...is reflected both in
compliments received by members of the Cultural Affairs
Commission and in the Award of Merit from the Orange
County Chapter 01 the American Institute of Architects."
Mr. Ronald P. Merlo
Project Manager
DEPAKTMENr OF WA1fR AND POWER
Los Angeles, California
t
.
.
.
....On behalf of the Burbank Redevelopment Agency Board
members and staff, / would like to...thank you fur the
"Award of Excellence" for the Media Oty Center project.
We appreciate the fine work you and your staff have done
fur this project and rest assured we will cherish the
architectural quality fur years to come..."
.
..
I
.
William R. Kelly
Assistant Executive Director
B/JRBNI/K /lEDfVfL0I'MENT AGENCY
Burbank, California
.
"Congratulations and thanks fur the excellent work
completed with ADP. At our Santa Data facility and our
new West Coast Regional Headquarters in La Palma you
offered pleasing and functional design, highly organized
project teams and manageable construction budgets.
(These facilities) have been a source of pride fur the
surrounding community, as well as to the firm."
.
:I
john M. Hu/ina
President, Employer Services
AUTOMAOC DATA PROCESSING
DIVISION
La Palma. California
. WES1fR/II
:a
:I
,/
/2"20'7
1~~X:t:b
'"
LPA
~.
I
.
.
LPA. REFERENCES
., would like to take the opporlunity to commend you and
your stair on the job ~I done. The commitment NKf
setvice LPA brought to the projec13 has contributed greatly
to their succe$S..."
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Thomas Pokorski
Vie<! President
1RANSAMERICA IlEAL ESTATE SERVICES
San Francisco, California
....It has been our observation that LPA has provided a
project organization capable of going from our initial
layouts and design criteria to final design drawings and
specifications in a /Oflica/ sequence....particularly important
was their ability to re7ate their design recommendations and
decisions to the impact on construction costs and
schedules. LP A has made significant contributions to our
projec13 in terms of cost, quality and time.
Richard W. Henthorn
Manager, Facilities Planning and Special Projec13
HUGHES AIRCRAFT CO. . GROUND SYS1fMS
CIIOUP
Fullerton, California
., can say without the slightest doubt that you NKf your
most professional stair OO'o'f! more than met my
expectations... you OO'o'f! pro'o'f!n to be an able and talented
partner in the de'o'f!/opment of our plans...1 am most pleased
to give LPA an .hsoIutely unqualified recommendation of
the highest order.....
Lyndon f. Taylor, PhD.
Assistant Chancel/or . Instructional Services
NOIUH ORANGE axJN1Y CDMMUN11Y COlHGE
DISTRJCr
Fullerton, California
., wanted to express my appreciation for the thorough job
you provided in this project. The design of the project is
indeed unique and most striking. The team that you put
together...were exceptional people and made the (project)
enjoyable, as wel/ as successful..
Martin J. Coyne
Vice President, Senior Asset Manager
BANI( OF AMERICA
San Francisco, California
J)~ ;/')/
.r-..,.L. /l/V''l
LPA
-
.
.
.
LPA . REFERENCES
., have found your oI/ice to be skilled in the design and
management of . \ieI)' complex project with . complex
program on it complex site...LPA is . team player, it
problem solver...1 was ""ry pleased with the professionalism
and Mtention that LPA demonstrated.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
=-
=-
=-
::e
::e
=-
=-
:e
=-
~
Baschar Hrw
Facility Design Manager
WALT DISNEY 1AlAClNfER/NG
Glendale, California.
.... We at the Irvine Company would like to say again how
successful "'" feel the design of the project has become.
The quality image, the advanced...construction technology,
the very spedal pedestria.n spaces and exterior lighting are
all helping to set the pace for design...Congratulations and
thanks again for an excellent job. .
Roger Seitz
Vice President, Urban Planning and Design
JHE I1MNE (X)MPANY
Newport Beach, California
.Congratulations...to say that "'" are pleased would be an
oversimplification and an understatement... The award is it
result of a lot of hard work and inspiration.....
Gino Laiolo
Asst. Real Property Manager
SfAJE (X)MPENSATION WSURANCE FUND .
Cotpotate HeadquarfeJS
San Francisco, California
/ol';2{J '7
LPA
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
=-
=-
::e
=-
:a
=-
::e
=-
=-
::e
a
salEDUUNGjFEE STRUCTURE/AGREEMENT STRUCIlJRE
.OVER TIMe
TRADITIONS DEVELOP, LIKE
PAINTING EX.TEAIOR8 EACH YEAR.
THE ACCUMULATION OF COLORS
FROM SEVERAL YEARS
M"KES WALl.S
RICH AND APPEALING.
EVEN HOUSES WITH NO
ORNAMENT HAYE DIGNITY
BECAUSE A. SIMPLE
BAND OF COLOR IS USED
10 TAIM DOORS AND WINDOWS.
AND TO.'INI8H OFF THE
TOPS OF WAlLS.-
Section 6
SCHEDUUNG
LPA is pleased to commit the staffing and Principals of our
San Diego office and the resources of all of our offices to
this important project. .At this point in our project
commitments, we are completing the construction of
several important local projects and are able to commit our
staff to a new project of the complexity anticipated with the
Chula Vista Public Library. As of this date, we do not have
and do not anticipate commitments of the nature that
would impact our service to the City of Chula Vista.
Based on our understanding of the scale of services, upon
the completion of the Schematic Design Phase, our office
would anticipate that Design Development documents and
Construction documents would require approximately three
months for development. LPA is very familiar with the
means to "fast track" a project in order to meet critical
schedules. Recently, we accomplished "in 15 months" a
400,000 S.f. corporate headquarters facility with Ricardo
Legorreta, beginning from the day we received our initial
tefephone call from our client to the day we turned over
the keys for move-in. This included full interiors,
fixturization, computer facilities, full cafeteria facilities and
all systems fully operational. Additionally, we were pleased
to have brought the project through an intense "fast track"
process, significantly under budget and on schedule.
FEE STRUCTURE
It is our intent to provide a fair and reasonable fee to the
City of Chula Vista. This project carries a high degree of
importance to the office of LPA and Legorreta Arquitectos.
Your satisfaction with respect to the quality of service and
our fee without change orders is our finest reward.
Based on our understanding of the project and without
benefit yet of discussions, we would like to offer a
percentage range of fee based on construction and in-place
costs. Based on our historical models we would anticipate
a fixed fee range of 9% to 10.5% for full service
architecture, interior design and ff&E. We would be able
to establish a fixed percentage once we are to meet and
discuss with the City the more detailed elements of the
project.
This fee will typically break into the following phases with
corresponding percentages of the fixed fee:
Phase I Program Confirmation/
Schematic Design 20%
Phase II Design Development 20%
Phase 11/ Construction Documents 45%
Phase N Construction Administration 15%
/
I; / ..2(/;1 LPA
-' /"-
I
.
.
SCHfI)(JUIIG/FfE I'IlOI'OSAl/AGRHMENr srRUC1lJRE
AGREEMENT STRUCTURE
.
LP A has evaluated the proposed Agreement format and is
pleased with the spirit of this contract. Areas of discussion
are minor and are certainly areas that are easily resolved
with the City.
.
.
.
:e
::e
:e
:8
:e
These areas of clarification include:
1. Standard form Two Party Agreement
Page 8, Item 11
Addition of: "City will indemnify, defend and hold
harmless Consultant from all claims or demands arising
directly or indirectly from any use or reuse (reuse) of
project documents provided by Consultant under this
Agreement other than such use as is covered in this
Agreement. City further acknowledges that Consultant
has no duty to provide insurance as required under this
Agreement for any reuse of project documents.
2. Standard form of Two Party Agreement
Page 10, Item 16
Add a new item:
G. Definitions
::e
=-
:a
::e
With regard to Consultants' professional services
provided under this Agreement, use of the words
"certify", "represent", "warrant", "confirm" and
"assure", as stated in this ~eement, constitute an
expression of professionaT opinion by Architect
regarding those facts or findings which are the
suoject of the representation and does not
constitute a warranty or guarantee, either express
or implied. The certification of conditions whose
true properties cannot be known with certainty at
the time such representation was made in no way
relieves any other party from meeting requirements
imposed by contract or otherwise, including
commonly accepted industry practices.
As an added note, LPA carries and maintains over
$1,000,000.00;n Professional liability Insurance and would
be pleased to document that coverage for the aty.
:e
:e
::e
:e
=-
,2-)fJ;
LPA
I
LPA BRCJCHURf
I Section 7
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
.
. /;2 ~ 2/{) LPA
.
LPA
ATTACHMENT L
May 6, 1992
Ms. Rosemary Lane
Chula Vista Public Library
365 F Street
Chula Vista, California 92010
RE: South Chula Vista Library
LPA Reference Nei.. 2000267
Dear Rosemary:
Per our conversation, I have developed the following list of minority or female Team
members that will play an active role within their varied disciplines on the proposed
South Chula Vista Public Library.
The vision of this Project is very exciting. In the bi-cultural spirit of this Library LPA has
teamed with a very good friend, as well as, I believe, the finest architect in Mexico and
perhaps the United States. We have worked very closely with Ricardo Legorreta and he
shares an extraordinary social consciousness, a love of the Mexican culture and a deep
desire to work closely with Hispanic communities such as CflU/a Vista. This is apparent
in his approach to working with the neighborhoods of San Antonio, Texas on their main
library, which is presently underway in design.
LPA has also structured a consulting Team that is very familiar with your City. I am
proud that a recent project of LPA's will receive a City of CflU/a Vista Beautification
Award later this month. LPA has been very active for many years in the South San Diego
area where we have designed over two million square feet of corporate and industrial
facilities in the last five years alone, including the North Island Federal Oedit Union
Corporate Headquarters in the East/ake Business Center.
At your request, the following list will describe the minority/woman composition of our
entire Team. I hope that this is helpful to you:
/J<).//
Arcni/C'ClUre
Planning
In/erior Design
San Dif'go
Oranf.?C C o:.m~\'
lmAnf.?('lc,'
5auanwnt:!
.r;;nl?!;,'j,?\'I:I".r:1 t
-',(;111 )iil
-':if, ni"}.:I. ( .; "~;_~.'
/.'".",,7'''','-,'.
619,5S-!,t.i ,)
Ms. Rosemary Lane
May 6, 1992
Page Two
[PA, INC . EXECUTIVE ARCHITEG
Mr. Derek Kitabayashi
Project Designer
(Asian)
Mr. Joe Yee
Project Designer
(Asian)
LEGORRETA AROUlTECTOS . DESIGN ARCHITECT
Mr. Ricardo Legorreta
President
Design Principal 1
(Mexican National)
Mr. Gerardo Alonso
Principal
Project Manager
(Mexican National)
BURTON ASSOCIATES. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE *
Project Manager
(Hispanic/Female)
Production Manager
(Female)
Project Draftsperson
(Asian/Male)
R. E. WALL & ASSOCIATES. ELECTRICAL/LIGHTING ENGINEER *
Project Designer
(Hispanic/Male)
CADD Production Staff
(Asian/Female)
TSUCHIYAMA KAINO AND GIBSON. MECHANICAL ENGINEERING *
Project Designer
(Hispanic/Male)
Project Draftsperson
(Black/Female)
() /) 12
LR~
Ms. Rosemary Lane
May 6, 1992
Page Three
NOWAK-MEULMESTER ASSOCIATES. STRUaURAL ENGINEERING *
(Hispanic/Male)
Project Engineer
Project Draftsperson
(Hispanic)
CONSTRualON ANALYSTS INC. COST CONTROL *
Project Manager
(Female)
Staff
(Hispanic/Female)
MARSHALL BROWN INTERIOR DESIGNER INC . FF&E *
Project Manager (Female)
Furnishings Specification Manager (Hispanic/Female)
Project Designer (Hispanic/Female)
Rosemary, please call me if you should have any questions. We are delighted with the
opportunity to work with you and the Oty in this important project for the community
of South Chula Vista.
Sincerely,
* LPA's subconsultants have provided minority/
women status for critical positions working
on this project. However~ they are unwilling
to provide individual's names due to privacy
issues.
LPA, Inc.
San Diego Offic
f506-267.L 1
BUSDfV
J 'j ~, 1 1)~'7
/~ d-
LB~
ATTACHMENT M
Parties and Recital pagers)
Agreement between
City of Chula vista
and
LPA, Inc.
for architectural and design services
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated June 9, 1992 for the
purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last
executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on
Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("city"), whose business form is
set forth on Exhlbit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on
the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business
form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of
business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A,
paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City
Consultant to provide
conjunction with a new
Section I; and,
is desirous to retain the services
architectural and design services
area library as described in Exhibit
of
in
A,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are
experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can
prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to city
within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement;
(End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.)
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 1
/c2 ~02)Lj
Obligatory Provisions Pages
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant
do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the
attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General
Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services
described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to,
and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and
deliver to City ~uch Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being
of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties and the work
and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and Schedule shall
be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to
complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not,
except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this
Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from
time to time reduce the Defined services to be performed by the
Consultant under this Agreement. upon doing so, City and
Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose
of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation
associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set
forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional consulting
services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"),
and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of
services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on
a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate
Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (e), unless a separate fixed
fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional
Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 2
/1 -;2[s
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any services under this agreement,
whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in
a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under
similar conditions and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and
subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services
required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by
the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and
to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance
Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or
shall meet with the approval of the city:
statutory Worker's Compensation
Liability Insurance coverage in the
attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9.
Insurance and Employer's
amount set forth in the
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business
Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each
project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which
names city and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is
primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary
Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the ci ty and
Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public
("Cross-liability Coverage").
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is
included in the General Liability policy.
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
Consul tant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein
required, prior to the commencement of services required under this
Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating
same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional
Insured.
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 3
/)~;2)t/
(2) Policy Endorse~ents Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage,
Primary coverage and cross-liability Coverage required under
Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy,
Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City
demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the
Risk Manager.
H. Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 9, indicates the
need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond, which indication
shall be made by checking the parenthetical space adjacent to the
term, "Performance Bond", then Consultant shall provide to the city
a performance bond by a surety and in a form satiSfactory to the
city Attorney in an amount indicated in the space adjacent to the
term, "Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 9, Exhibit A.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consulthtion and Cooperation
city shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose
of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule
therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve
the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to
its office facilities, files and records by Consultant throughout
the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, city agrees to
provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on
Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that
delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after
authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the
justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this
agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant
submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the
day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, city shall
compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant
according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 11 adjacent to the governing compensation relationship
indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, and
shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided
in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 4
;<) 7
) ) - ,Hi:,
All billings submitted by Consultant sh311 ccnt3in sufficient
information as to the propriety of the billing to permit the City
to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper,
and shall specifically contain the City'S account number indicated
on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (e) to be charged upon mak:lng such
payment.
C. Payment.
Consultant shall submit invoices in such form as approved by
City. Invoices submitted shall be processed for approval within
20 days after submittal and, upon approval, shall be paid by city
to Consultant within 30 days following approval. If, for any
reason, Consultant's invoice is not approved by city, city will
immediately notify Consultant and provide to Consultant all details
regarding the unapproved portiones) of the unapproved invoice.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract
Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said
party's contract; administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied
with all executory provisions hereof.
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages
Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence
in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate
the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The
parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount
to compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted
time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the
following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of
the time specified for the completion of the respective work
assignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City,
or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages
Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages
Rate").
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 5
j,) -d Jf{
Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control,
other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing
to the city's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the
expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when
granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work and
will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it
can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the
work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an
"FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the
purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the
City Clerk on the required statement of Economic Interests in such
reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of Exhibit
A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City
Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in
any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a
governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to
know Consultant has a financial interest other than the
compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has
diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations
promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has
determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with
Consultant's duties under this agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 6
)c2/;2/~J,
the term of this Agreement whic!1 ~rou:d constitute a c':Jnflict of
interest as prohibited by the Fair political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant
learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in
a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political
Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant,
nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's
employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any
interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which
may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any
property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any
property which may be the subject matter of the Defined services,
("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 15.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of
future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other
reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates
in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement.
Consultant promises to advise city of any such promise that may be
made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months
thereafter.
Consul tant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire
any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with
the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any
party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in
conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City,
its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against
all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including
without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of
the Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others
in connection with the execution of the work C1:lvered by this
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 7
J;Z - J:lC7
Agreement, E:xcept only for those claims arising frcI:l the sole
negligence or sole willful conduct of the city, its officers, or
employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all
costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the
City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such
claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further,
Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the
City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its
officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of
City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration
by the Consultant.
City will indemnify, defend and hold harmless Consultant from
all claims or demands arising directly or indirectly from any use
or reuse (reuse) of project documents provided by Consultant under
this Agreement other than such use as is covered in this Agreement.
city further acknowledges that Consultant has no duty to provide
insurance as required under this Agreement for any such use or
reuse of project documents.
8. Termination?f Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a
timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this
Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to
Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such
termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents,
data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials
prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the
property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive
just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily
completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective
date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable
hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach.
9. Errors and omissions
In the event that the city Administrator determines that the
Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance
of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City
greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence,
errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any
additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is
intended to limit city's rights under other provisions of this
agreement.
2pty7.Wp
June 3, 1992
standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 8
/.1 ~;l;) r
10. Termination of Agree~ent for Convenience of city
ci ty may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any
reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such
termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least
thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination.
In that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other
materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City,
become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is
terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall
be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials
to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby
expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation
arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the city, and
Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and
shall not transf~r any interest in the same (whether by assignment
or novation), without prior written consent of City, which city
may not unreasonably deny. City hereby consents to the assignment
of the portions of the Defined Services identified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 17 to the subconsul tants identified thereat as "Permitted
Subconsultants". The Personal services of the members of the
principal architectural team (whose names and titles appear in the
rate schedule, Exhibit A, paragraph llC) are critical to the
performance of this agreement. Consul tant shall provide the
services of the principal architectural team to City, and no
substi tution therefore shall be made without the prior written
approval of the City's Contract Administrator.
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms,
designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties
produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject
to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the
United states or in any other country without the express written
consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to
publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of
the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright
or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data,
statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under
this Agreement.
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 9
/ ;2 - .1;2 ).,
~otwithstanding the foregoing, the Architect's drawings,
specifications or other documents shall not be used on other
projects, for additions to this project or for completion of this
project by others, unless the Consultant is judged to be in default
under this Agreement, except by Agreement in writing and with
appropriate compensation.
13. Independent Contractor
city is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant
shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the
manner and means of performing the services required under this
Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept
Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's
agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under
this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed
to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to
any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not
limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation
benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits.
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this
agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented
in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the
Chula vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be
amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference
as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used
by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good
faith with city for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the
terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in
litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense
of the claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document,
or participates in the preparation of a report or document in
performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause
the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 10
)d-~).:J)
nUIT~ers and cost in dollar a~ounts of all contracts and
subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document.
17. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant
shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind city to any
contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the
Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State
of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker
or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither
Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate brokers
or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to
be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All
notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served
or deposited in the united States mail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of
business for each of the designated parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document
referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement
and understanding between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof
may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an
instrument in writing executed by the party against which
enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents
to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and
direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that
all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable
it to enter into this Agreement.
F. Governing Law/Venue
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 11
/.1-2:21
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the state of California. Any action
arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, state
of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula vista, or as
close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula vista.
G. Definitions
With regards to Consultants' professional services provided
under this Agreement, use of the words "certify", "represent",
"confirm" and "assure", as stated in this Agreement, constitute an
expression of professional opinion by Consultant regarding those
facts or findings which are the subject of the representation and
does not constitute a warranty of guarantee, either express or
implied. The certification of conditions whose true properties
cannot be known with certainty at the time such representation was
made in no way relieves any party from meeting requirements imposed
by contract or ..otherwise, including commonly accepted industry
practices. '
[end of page.
next page is signature page.]
2pty7.wp
June 3, 1992
Standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 12
/'
);2 ~ .2 :l_S
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chu1a Vista and LPA, Inc.
for
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this
Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood
same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms:
Dated:
,19_
city of Chula vista
by:
Tim Nader, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authe1et, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney
Dated:
LPA, Inc.
By:
Robert . Kupper AlA
Senior Principal
Exhibit List to Agreement
( ) Exhibit A.
2pty7.wp
June 2, 1992
standard Form Two Party Agreement
Page 13
J' - <~Ll {
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
LPA, Inc.
1, Effective Date of Agreement: June 9, 1992
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation
of the State of California
() Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a
political sUbdivision of the State of California
() Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula
Vista, a
() Other':
("City")
, a
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant: LPA, Inc.
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(X ) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
4350 La Jolla Village Drive #130
San Diego, CA 92122
Voice Phone (619) 587-6665
Fax Phone (619) 587-9033
2PTY7-A.Wp
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
/;2-22;
7. General Duties:
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
(1) The City of Chula Vista has been awarded a
$6,747,528 grant representing 65% of the total
project cost by the California state Library.
This grant is to be applied toward the
construction of an area library located at the
southeast corner of Fourth and Orange Avenues in
the ci ty of Chula vista. The site occupies
approximately 6.1 acres of land area.
(2) The area library shall include approximately
35,000 square feet of gross floor area. This
facility shall be designed to accommodate a
library materials collection will ultimately
number 178,000 items and 239 reader seats. The
are library facility will call for a variety of
functions in interior space including, but not
: limited to, the following:
a. Special browsing areas
b. Quiet study rooms
c. Technology user center
d. Literacy Center
(3) There will be a meeting room complex which will
include the following:
a. A 100 seat, flat floored multi-purpose room
b. A 25 seat conference room
c. A small bookstore/cafe
d. Large exhibition hall
(4) This are library facility is located 4 miles from
the Mexican border. The library will be a
facility designed to a bi-national, bi-cultural
concept of library services. The design will
incorporate the best elements of contemporary
Mexican architecture.
B. GENERAL PROVISIONS
(1)
The Consultant acknowledges that time is of the
essence in regards to its performance under the
terms and conditions of this Agreement. As a
condition to the grant which is discussed under
section 7.A. above, the City of Chula vista must
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 2
/.2 -;2.2.'ir
commence construction on this facility on or
before August 30, 1993. The Consultant hereby
agrees to provide its services in a timely fashion
necessary to ensure compliance with this
stipulated time frame and in accordance with
normal industry standards of practice.
(2) The Consultant shall perform as expeditiously as
is consistent with professional skill and care,
the design and preparation of drawings,
specifications and addenda and other required
documents necessary for the purpose of
construction of an area library facility
consisting of the following:
a. site Work
b. Interior space Planning
c. Interior Design and Finish Selection
d. Specification
e. Landscaping
:f. Selection of art work
g. Selection and specification of interior plants
(3) The Consultant will ensure that the project is
designed and constructed in accordance with all
applicable current State and local statutes, codes
and ordinances including, but not limited to, the
following:
2PTY7-A. wp
June 3, 1992
a.
b.
Uniform Building Code
Relevant parts of the State Building Code
(e.g. accessibility and useability by the
physically handicapped)
Uniform and concentrated load standards which
are applicable for bookstacks.
Seismic horizontal floor standards for
bookstacks
National Fire Protection Agency requirements
Current standards of the American's with
Disabilities Act (ADA).
ci ty of Chula Vista's Application for
California Library Construction and Renovation
Bond Act Funds.
The Building Program for the South Chula vista
Library; California Library Construction and
Renovation Bond Act (Proposition 85).
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 3
j;)-d-.2/
(4) The Consultant hereby acknowledges that they have
read thoroughly the contents of the standard
Agreement approved by the Attorney General dated
July 1, 1991, between the California state Library
and The city of Chula Vista Contract #P85-032 and
accompanying attachments A through F. This
document contains specific requirements of the
Consultant. The Consultant will provide those
requirements contained within the Standard
Agreement as part of the Consultant's fee for
basic services.
(5) The Consultant hereby acknowledges that they have
read thoroughly the contents of the "Procedures
for Compliance with Title 24 for the Public
Library Construction Bond Act", pages 1 through
12. The Consultant will provide any requirements
and procedures contained within this referenced
document as part of the Consultant's fee for basic
> serv ices.
(6) The Consultant shall be responsible for
coordination of all the work and payment
associated with the consultants listed in Item G
below, involved with the project.
(7) The following consultants will be required to
satisfactorily complete the project:
a. Mechanical Engineer
b. Electrical Engineer
c. Plumbing Engineer
d. civil Engineer
e. structural Engineer
f. Interior Design Consultant
g. Space Planning Consultant
h. Landscape Architect
i. Signage & Graphics Consultant
The fees associated with these consultants shall
be included within the Consultant's basic fee for
services.
(8)
The Consultant will be required to provide all
information and drawings necessary for the proper
coordination and document preparation of the job
to the Consultant's consultants listed in Item G
above, for which the Consultant is. responsible.
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 4
/;2 - ;2JP
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
The Consultant and the Consultant's Consultants,
listed under Item G above, shall accommodate all
required meetings necessary to implement the work
and any required approvals under this AgreeInent~~
within their fee for basic services.
within the established fee for basic services, the
Consul tant and the Consultant's consultants 1 isted
in Item G above, will be responsible for providing
all architectural prints required for internal use
between the Consultant and consultants.
It is contemplated that a qualified general
contractor may be utilized for preconstruct ion
services, including but not limited to, the
preparation of a detailed hard construction
estimate. The Consultant shall be required to
assist in the selection process of a pre-
construction contractor and to cooperate in
regards to the final determination of the
:-qualified general contractor for the project.
Once a general contractor is selected, the
Consultant agrees to cooperate with the chosen
general contractor and any of its various
subcontractors during the preparation of the
contract documents, and to assist in compliance
with the stipulated budget for construction of
the project, in accordance with normal industry
standards of practice.
If, during the architectural document preparation
period, it is determined by the city, general
contractor or construction manager that the
project construction costs exceed the established
limit of construction costs mutually agreed to by
the ci ty, contractor, proj ect manager and
Consul tant, the Consultant shall modify the
contract documents (including any value engineered
items) within the fee for basic services, to
ensure compliance with the originally stipulated
budget, and within the fixed limits of
construction costs. This obligation shall apply
to the Consultant and the Consultant I s consultants
for those items which the Consultant and The
Consultant's consultants are responsible, which
caused the project budget to be exceeded. For the
purposes of this Agreement, that fixed limit of
construction costs shall be $6,633.729.00. For
clarification purposes, the fixed limit of
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 5
1;2 - .2;5 I
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
construction costs shall include but not limited
to the following:
Demolition of Existing
Site Development
Substructure
Exterior Walls
Foundation
Plumbing
Interior Finishes
Electrical
Landscape
Hardscape
Structures
Building Specialties
Superstructure
Special Construction
Roofing
Interior Construction
HVAC
Art Work
Irrigation
Fire Protection Systems
It is envisioned that the city will retain a
qualified project manager to assist with the pre-
construction and construction phases of the
project. The Consultant agrees to cooperate with
the chosen project manager and to provide him with
any specific information or clarification that may
~be required for the project manager to complete
his or her responsibilities.
Included in the Consultant's Basic Scope of
Services, demolition drawings of structures on
site shall be prepared as necessary to enable the
general contractor or project manager to obtain
the necessary demolition permits required by the
City.
The construction phase/administration of the
construction contract shall commence upon the
beginning of construction and shall be limited to
a period equal to one hundred and ten percent
(110%) of the total allowable time for the
contractor's completion of the work (inClusive of
all required interior finish, fixture and
equipment procurement).
The personnel of the Consultant shall be comprised
of licensed architects, registered engineers, a
staff of specialists and draftsmen in each
department. The Architectural firm itself is not
a licensed architect but represents and agrees
that whenever the performance of this Agreement
requires the services of a licensed architect or
registered engineer, such services within the
parameters of this Agreement shall be performed
under the direct supervision - of licensed
architects and registered engineers. If any
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 6
/2 -2~2
~
member of the principal team leaves the employ of
the Consultant,the City shall have the right to
review and approve the proposed team member
replacement.
(18) The City shall have the right to suspend work on
the project for a period of up to ninety (90) days
without suffering any increased compensation to
the Consultant or any of its consultants and this
temporary suspension shall not constitute a
termination of this Agreement.
(19) It is contemplated that this project may be
permitted under separate contracts to allow for
the "fast track" construction method. If it is
the determination of the City to obtain separate
permi ts, for foundation and/or structural, the
responsible consultants shall provide the service
within the fee for the basic services.
(20) 'The Consultant shall locate the facility to
minimize the effects of potential electromagnetic
filed exposure from existing overhead power
transmission lines, and shall design the facility
in order to conform with the School site Section
and Approval Guide, specially the established
siting requirements dictated by the School
Facilities Planning Division based on an electric
field strength graph developed by the Electronic
Power Research Institute (EPRI).
(21) The Consultant shall provide all necessary
drawings, specifications and documents to assist
the City in applying for an obtaining required
approvals from applicable State and local agencies
having jurisdiction over this project. The
applicable agencies shall include, but shall not
be limited to, the following:
a. city of Chula vista Design Review Committee
b. Applications to the City staff for a
Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the
City of Chula Vista Planning Commission and
City Council procedures.
(22)
The Consultant shall incorporate any
following the initial submittal of each
work, required by the State or local
following their review.
changes
phase of
agencies
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 7
/1- :(5J
(23) The Consultant shall provide technical assistance
to the project manager who will be employed by and
responsible to the City. The Consultant shall
consult with the project manager and/or the
general contractor in order to provide a marked
set of drawings indicating dimension and location
of below grade utility lines (record drawings)
which shall be forwarded to City upon completion
of the project.
(24) The Consultant will provide advice to the City
on apparent deficiencies in construction following
acceptance of the work and prior to the expiration
of the one year general contractor construction
contract guarantee period of the project.
If remedial or additional work is required to
mitigate such deficiencies, through no fault of
the Consultant, remedial or additional work deemed
;. necessary by the City or the Cal ifornia state
Library, shall be provided by the Consultant at
the discretion of the City. Payment for said work
shall be based on time and materials in accordance
paragraph I D of this Agreement between the City
of Chula vista and the Consultant.
(25) During the course of construction the Consultant
shall provide, on a monthly basis, construction
status reports as may be required by the city or
applicable state and local agencies within the fee
for basic services.
(26) During each phase of architectural documentation,
the Consultant shall provide to the City a set of
ten (10) edge bound blue lines with an
accompanying set of reproducible (sepias).
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK:
(1) SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
a.
Based on the agreed upon program, schedules
and construction budget requirements, the
Consultant shall prepare, for approval by the
ci ty, Schematic Design Documents consisting of
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 8
/.2 - :23~1
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
the following drawings
illustrating the scale and
project components:
and documents
relationship of
i. A site plan showing the library
building, parking lot, and access roads,
as well as the anticipated future
expansion of the building and parking
lot. The site plan shall also indicate
the direction of north.
ii.
Hi.
l
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
Schematic landscape design
planting species and size,
schematic irrigation plan.
specifying
including
A floor plan listing each space
designated 1n the Library Building
Program and identified by the area/space
name assigned in the building program.
This plan shall also provide a complete
furnishings and equipment layout (hard
lined to scale).
A tabulation of the square footage for
each area called for in the final
building program compared to the square
footage shown on the floor plan.
A tabulation of the number of books,
magazines and audio-visual materials
called for in the building program
compared to the number of books,
magazines, and audio-visual materials
which can be housed given the proposed
furnishings and equipment plan. The
tabulation should also provide the
conversion factors utilized (books per
double faced unit, or books per linear
foot, etc.)
A tabulation of the number of reader's
seats by area called for in the building
program compared to the number of
reader I s seats shown on the furnishings
and equipment plan.
Exterior elevations of all four sides
of the building showing general
locations of openings, roof lines, grade
lines, etc.
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 9
. ..--
12-;l'7L,
/- //
viii. Two sections through the building, one
longitudinal and one latitudinal.
b. Consultant shall provide outline
specifications describing the type of
construction by identifying the basic building
components (structural, mechanical,
electrical, plumbing, etc.), and the type of
occupancy. The Consultant shall reference
any applicable sections of the State statutes
and state and local building codes.
(2) DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE
Based upon the approved Schematic Design
documents and any adjustments authorized by
the City in the program schedule or
construction budget, the Consultant shall
prepare for approval by the City, Design
Development documents consisting of the
following drawings and other documents to
affix and describe the size and the character
of the project as to architectural,
structural, mechanical and electrical systems,
materials and such other elements as may be
appropriate:
a.
>
i.
ii.
Hi.
2PTY7-A.wp
June 4, 1992
site plan showing all buildings on the
site, access roads, parking, topography,
survey control points, bench marks,
drainage, roads and sidewalks, routing
of sewer, water, gas and other
utilities.
Archi tectural floor plans showing
complete functional layout, room
designations, all major dimensions, all
critical dimensions, all columns, and
all furnishings, equipment and interior
signs.
A tabulation of the square footage for
each area called for in the final
building program compared to the square
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 10
-< J ~
.' '1 .!::);zt
/,-L / ~.P
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
x.
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
footage shown on the floor plan. Any
changes from the approved schematic
plans shall be highlighted.
Reflected ceiling plan which indicates
the lighting system proposed for the
project. This lighting system plan
shall be overlaid on the furnishings,
equipment and signage plan. If
possible, both plans should be printed
concurrently, however, if this is not
possible, two separate transparencies
are acceptable. All sources of
artificial illumination should be
indicated in a clear and concise
electrical fixture legend.
Electrical and data distribution systems
plan overlaid on the furnishings,
equipment and signage plan (both plans
printed on the same plan is best, but
overlays are acceptable). Show all
power outlets, telephone, data
communications (computer) outlets and
audio-visual outlets with a legend that
indicates the type of outlets.
Fully dimensioned exterior elevations
Two building sections (one longitudinal
and one latitUdinal) indicating the
relationship of various levels, floor
to ceiling heights, construction systems
and materials.
Signage schedule indicating the size,
type and nomenclature of all interior
signs.
Detailed landscape design plans with
plant material types, locations and
sizes, lighting plan, outdoor
performance space, proposed site
features and furnishings.
A color and materials sample board
should be provided indicating all major
interior and exterior colors and
finishes to be utilized.-
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 11
/;) -,) 3 '/
b. Consultant shall provide draft specifications
using C.S.I. format with a narrative non-
technical text.
(3) CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE
a. Based on the approved Design Development
documents and any further adjustments in the
scope or quality of the project, or in the
construction budget authorized by the city,
the Consultant shall prepare for approval by
the City, Construction Documents consisting of
the following drawings and specifications
setting forth, in detail, the requirements for
the construction of the project.
b.
A complete set of construction documents
including all drawings, specifications and
contract language along with all other
documentation required as part of the bid
package. All building systems must be
descriptively diagrammed to fully illustrate
their proposed scope and functions.
(4) BIDDING OR NEGOTIATION PHASE
2PTY7-A.wp
June 4, 1992
a.
The Consultant, following the City's approval
of the Construction Documents and of the
latest estimate of construction cost, shall
assist the city in obtaining bids or
negotiated proposals and assisting in award
and preparing contracts for construction.
b.
The Consultant shall assist the City in the
preparation of the necessary bidding
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 12
I -" . ') '-Jt-
j - l-
."L J-/ ..
(5)
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
information, bidding forms, conditions of the
contract and the form of agreement between the
City and the general contractor.
c. The Consultant shall advise the City of any
adjustments to previous estimates of
construction costs indicated by changes in
requirements or general market conditions.
d. The Consultant shall assist the city in
submi tting any documents required for the
approval of governmental authorities having
jurisdiction over the project.
e. within the established fee for basic services,
the Consultant shall provide written responses
and clarifications to all bidders during the
formal bid process and preparation of addenda,
if necessary.
CONSTRUCTION PHASE
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
ADMINISTRATION OF THE
a.
The Consultant's responsibility to provide
basic services for the Construction Phase
under this Agreement commences with the award
of the contract for construction and shall be
limited to a period equal to one hundred and
ten percent (110%) of the total allowable time
for the contractor's completion of the work,
inclusive of all required interior finish.
b.
The Consultant shall be a representative of
and shall advise and consult with the City
during construction until final payment to the
Contractor is due. The Consultant shall have
authority to act on behalf of the City only to
the extent provided in this Agreement unless
otherwise modified by written instrument.
c.
The Consultant and his sub-consultants shall
visit the site at intervals appropriate to the
stage of construction or as otherwise agreed
by the City and Consultant in writing to
become generally familiar with the progress
and quality of the work completed and to
determine in general if the work is being
performed in a manner indicating that the
work, when completed, will be in accordance
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 13
/ ) - )"(c
-. -') ~ 7
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
with the Contract Documents. However, the
Consultant shall not be required to make
exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections
to check the quality or quantity of the work.
On the basis of on-site observations as an
architect, the Consultant shall keep the City
informed of the progress and quality of the
work, and shall endeavor to guard the City
against defects and deficiencies in the work.
d. The Consultant shall attend on-site, bi-
monthly scheduled meetings to discuss the
status of the on-go1ng construction with
representatives of the design and construction
team.
e.
Based on the Consultant's observations and
evaluations of the Contractor's Applications
for Payment, the Consultant shall review and
certify the amounts due the Contractor.
>
f.
The Consultant shall review and approve or
take other appropriate action upon
Contractor I s submittals such as shop drawings,
product data and samples, but only for the
limited purpose of checking for conformance
with information given and the design concept
expressed in the Contract Documents. The
Consultant's action shall be taken with
reasonable promptness as to cause no delay in
the work or in the construction of the City or
of separate contractors, while allowing
suff icient time in the Consul tant' s
professional judgement to permit adequate
review. Review of such submittals is not
conducted for the purpose of determining the
accuracy and completeness of other details
such as dimensions and quantities or for
substantiating instructions for installation
or performance of equipment or systems
designed by the contractor, all of which
remain the responsibility of the Contractor to
the extent required by the Contract Documents.
The Consultant's review shall not constitute
approval of safety precautions or, unless
otherwise specifically stated by the
Consultant, of construction means, methods,
techniques, sequences or procedures. The
Consultant's approval of a specific item shall
not indicate approval of an assembly of which
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 14
/1 - ;) 'If}
2PTY7-A.Wp
June 3, 1992
, h.
the item is a component. When a professional
certification of performance characteristics
of materials, systems or equipment is required
by the Contract Documents, the Consultant
shall be entitled to rely upon such
certification to establish that the materials,
systems or equipment will meet the performance
criteria required by the Contract Documents.
g.
The Consultant shall prepare Change Orders and
Construction Change Directives with supporting
documentation and data if deemed necessary by
the Consultant for the City's approval and
execution in accordance with the Contract
Documents, and may authorize minor changes in
the work not involving an adjustment in the
contract sum or an extension of the contract
time which are not inconsistent with the
intent of the Contract Documents.
within the established fee for basic services,
the Consultant shall respond, in writing, to
all requests for information statements
(RFI's) issued by the contractor on any
questions or clarifications that may arise
during the course of construction.
i.
The Consultant shall review the work to
determine the date or dates of substantial
completion and the date of final completion,
shall receive and forward to the city for the
City's review and records written warranties
and related documents required by the Contract
Documents and assembled by the contractor, and
shall issue a final certificate for Payment
upon compliance with the requirements of the
Contract Documents.
j.
The Consultant shall conduct a final walk
through review of the construction project and
note for submission to the City any
deficiencies in the work.
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 15
/ ..1-c/- L/ /
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Other:
C. Dates or Time Limits for Deliverv of Deliverables:
The Consultant shall provide the contract documents
within the stipulated time frames outlined as follows:
Execution of Contract:
June 9, 1992
Preparation of
Schematic Design
Package
135 days from
execution of
contract
Preparation of
Preliminary Plans &
Speciftcations (Design
Development)
30 days from approval
of Schematics by State
Library
Preparation of Working
Drawings/Specifications
90 days from approval
of Design Development
By State Library
The above time frames are exclusive of review time or
permitting process time required by the city or governing
agencies. For any delays that are caused by the City or
state Library's failure to approve drawings beyond the
control of the Consultant, the City agrees to
automatically extend the contract time frames as outlined
in this Agreement for such delays. At the time delays
occur, the city shall communicate in writing its
determination of the effect on the above dates which
shall be deemed conclusive unless the Consultant, in
writing objects, and states the reason for objections
within one week of receipt of City's determination.
If it cannot be mutually resolved within three working
days, the city's Contract Administrator is authorized to
direct consultant's continued performance with such
reasonable time delays, if any, as reasonably determined
by City's Contract Administrator, subj ect to ultimate
resolution at the conclusion of consultants performance
of all contractual duties.
The City will offset any claim made under this provision
with any and all amounts Consultant saves City through
Consultant's value engineering during the construction
administration phase of the project (except those
required under section B.13 of Exhibit A of this
Agreement)
2PTY7-A.wp
June 5, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 16
/2 -;2~2
D. Date for completion of all Consultant services:
November. 1994
9. Insurance Requirements:
(X) statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance: $1,000,000.
(X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
() Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included
in Commercial General Liability coverage).
(X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $500,000 (not included
in Commercial General Liability coverage).
() Performance Bond, $ (insert amount)
10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant:
Complete copy of the City's application for California Library
Construction and Renovation Bond Act Funds and all supporting
documents.
11. Compensation:
A. () Single Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For performance of all of the Defined Services by
Consultant as herein required, City shall pay a single
fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones
or for the Deliverables set forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount: , payable
as follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
B. (x) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each phase or portion of the
Defined Services by Consultant as are separately
identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 17
1. 'I / I-,
/c -oZ7/S
with each phase of Services, in the amounts and at the
times or milestones or Deliverables set forth
Consultant shall not commence services under any Phase,
and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a
Phase, unless city shall have issued a notice to proceed
to Consultant as to said Phase.
Phase
Fee for Said Phase
1- Schematic Design 30 Percent $188,204
2. Design Development 20 Percent 125,470
3. Construction Documents 40 Percent 250,939
4. Construction Administration 10 Percent 62.735
Total 100 Percent $627,348
In order for the Consultant to earn all of the fee associated
with each phase contemplated in the percentages above, the
State Library must have provided final approval of each
applicable stage of design documentation. However, in no case
shall the City withhold more than Ten Percent (10%) of each
applicable phase of work. If, for reasons beyond the control
of Consultant, the Project is abandoned by the City and does
not proceed, this earned 10% retention shall be released to
the Consultant.
C. () Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as
herein required, City shall pay Consultant for the
productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the
performance of said services, at the rates or amounts set
forth in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow according to the
following terms and conditions:
(1) () Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and
Materials Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of
time and materials in excess of said Maximum
Compensation amount, Consultant. agrees that
Consultant will perform all of the Defined
Services herein required of Consultant for
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 18
J 2. - J1JY
$ including all Materials, and
other "reimburseables" ("Maximum Compensation") .
(2) () Limitation without Further Authorization on
Time and Materials Arrangement
At such time as Consultant shall have incurred
time and materials equal to
("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be
entitled to any additional compensation without
further authorization issued in writing and
approved by the City. Nothing herein shall
preclude Consultant from providing additional
Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
Rate Schedule
Category of Employee
of Consultant)
Name
Hourly
Rate
Principal-in-Charge
Project Manager/Architect
John Mattox
Sean Towne
_Sl05_
_$105_
_$180_
Design Principal
Ricardo Legorreta
(
Hourly rates may
after (month], 19
caused by City.
increase by 6% for services rendered
, if delay in providing services is
12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement.
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant
in the performance of services herein required, City shall pay
Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
() None, the compensation includes all costs.
(x)
(x)
(x)
(x)
(x)
(x)
Cost or Rate
Reports, not to exceed $
Copies, not to exceed $
Travel, not to exceed $
Printing, not to exceed $
Postage, not to exceed $
Delivery, not to exceed $
See Below
See Below
See Below
See Below
See Below
See Below
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 19
./
/)-~/-1,;
,0 oL7J
(x) Long Distance Telephone charges,
not to exceed $ See Below
(x) other Actual Identifiable
Direct Costs: See Below
1. Expense of actual required travel expenses (excluding
time expended for travel).
2. Automobile travel shall be expensed at the rate of $0.255
per mile.
3. Expense for reproduction, postage and handling of
drawings, specifications and other documents.
Reimbursables shall be billed at a multiple of 1.1 times the
expense incurred by the Consultant. No first class air fare
shall be authorized by the City for any travel associated with
this Project. Whenever possible, Consultant shall attempt to
schedule air travel as far in advance as possible to ensure
that the lowest competitive rates for travel is charged to the
City.
Unless apprbved in writing by the ~ity, total reimbursable
costs associated with this Project, including the sub-
consultants for which the Consultant is responsible, shall not
exceed Fifteen Percent (15%) of the Consultant's fee for basic
services.
Any time expended for travel in conjunction with the required
work shall be within the fee for basic services. Actual
required travel expenses shall be billed as a legitimate
reimbursable expense.
13. Contract Administrators:
City:
Rosemary Lane, Library Director, Chula vista
Public Library, 365 F Street, Chula Vista, CA
91910, (619) 691-5167.
Consultant: John Mattox, Principal, LPA, Inc. 4350 La
Jolla Village Dr., #130, San Diego, CA 92122
(619) 587-6665.
14. Liquidated Damages Rate: $ NjA per day.
15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting
Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code:
(X) Not Applicable.
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No.1.
Not an FPPC Filer.
Investments and sources of income.
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 20
/;2-~~/1
( ) Category No.2. Interests in real property.
( ) Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property
and sources of income subject to the regulatory, permit
or licensing authority of the department.
( ) Category No.4. Investments in business entities and
sources of income which engage in land development,
construction or the acquisition or sale of real property.
( ) Category No.5. Investments in business entities and
sources of income of the type which, within the past two
years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista
(Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies,
materials, machinery or equipment.
( Category No.6. Investments in business entities and
sources of income of the type which, within the past two
years,. have contracted with the designated employee's
department to provide services, supplies, materials,
machinery or equipment.
( Category No.7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property
within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any:
16. (NA) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
2PTY7-A.wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 21
J;J - }. t/7
17. Permitted Subconsultants:
Leaorreta Arauitectos, Design Architect'
Mr. Marshall Brown. Marshal Brown - Interior Desiqn. Inc.
Burton Associates, Landscape Architect
Tsuchvama. Kaino and Gibson, Mechanical Engineering
R.E. Wall and Associates. Inc., Electrical Engineering
Nowak-Meulmester Associates, structural Engineering
18. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following
period, of time:
(X ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) other:
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( ) First of the Month
( ) 15th Day of each Month
( ) End of the Month
( X) Other: Last Friday of each month.
C. City's Account Number:
1. Consultant acknowledges that Legorreta Arquitectos will be
playing an active role in the initial schematic design of the
facility and will continue to review and amend, if necessary,
subsequent drawings to ensure that the initial design intent and
integrity are maintained through the working drawing phase.
2PTY7-A.Wp
June 3, 1992
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 22
).2 ~ ~tjr,/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Itell I~
Meeting Date 6/9/92
ITEM TITLE: Resolution I l#L.1 \ Approving agreement between the County
of San Diego, Southwestern Community College District, and the
City of Chu1a Vista for construction, maintenance and
operation of the Southwest~r~ollege Transit Center
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No~)
Council considered this item at its meeting on May 5, 1992, and directed staff
to provide the following additional information on the transit center project:
the traffic pattern exiting the college and transit center at Elmhurst St; a
more detailed cost breakdown of the project; the cost of other transit center
alternatives mentioned in the feasibility study; and solicit the City
Attorney's review of the contract to ensure that it contains adequate cost
control language. Attached for Council's information is the agenda statement
(including the feasibility study and agreement) considered by Council on May
5, 1992 (Exhibit 1). This agenda statement will present the additional
information requested by Council.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve:
1. Agreement between the County of San Diego, Southwestern Community College
District, and the City of Chula Vista for construction, maintenance, and
operation of the Southwestern College Transit Center; and
2. Conceptual site plan Alternative 1 as shown in the Southwestern College
Transit Center Feasibility Study.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Traffic Pattern
The conceptual design of the transit center has been sl ight1y modified to
provide better management of traffic on the college access road (Elmhurst
Street extended) and to its intersect i on with Otay lakes Road. As noted on
the attached diagram (Exhibit 2), a raised barrier island has been
incorporated into the design for the purpose of creating an exclusive
right-turn bus lane and to reduce confusion at the Otay lakes Road
intersection. The modified design creates better definition of the transit
center exi t dri veway and shou1 d result in opt imum safety performance of the
Otay lakes Road/Elmhurst Street intersection.
After it was determined that the best location for the Transit Center was in
the proposed location it was determined that a traffic signal would be
requi red at the intersection of Otay lakes Road and E1 mhurst Street in order
,~- ,
Page 2, Itell \.3.
Meeting Date 6/9/92
to permit bus traffic to safely and expeditiously make a left turn out of the
center to go north on Otay Lakes Road. It would al so provide the necessary
brake in Otay Lakes Road traffi c to allow busses comi ng from the south to
enter the Transit Center at Gotham Street.
Under this plan it is also expected that college traffic will be attracted to
the signalized intersection. Since the ranking of the intersection of Gotham
Street and Otay Lakes Road is based on the entering volume of traffic, which
is basically warranted by the college traffic and not the neighborhood
traffic, the diversion of traffic to Elmhurst would effect the number of
signal priority points that this intersection receives. It was concluded that
re-distribution of traffic due to the Transit Center would also reduce
confl icts at the Gotham Street intersection but would cause a greater impact
at the Elmhurst Street intersection.
Cost Breakdown
A cost estimate for the project is attached as Exhibit 3. Transit Center
construction, including the traffic signal and a 15% contingency, is estimated
at $745,000 or about 65% of the total project cost. The other major cost
components of the project are: the feasibil ity study, design, construction
inspection, and project management. Land will be dedicated by the College.
As indicated in the attached letter from Sharon Jasek Reid, Deputy Director
Public Works, County of San Diego (Exhibit 4), the two main objectives of the
project design were to develop a facility whose function would improve transit
service and auto access to and from the College; and al so be aesthetically
compat i bl e wi th Coll ege architecture and enhance exi st i ng development in the
area.
Cost of Alternatives
Detailed cost estimates were prepared only for Alternative 1, the recommended
site plan. All four alternatives share the same basic design components; the
only major difference among the alternatives that would affect cost is
location. The County staff and consultant for the project, Estrada Land
Pl anni ng, estimate that the recommended Alternative 1 and Alternative 4 are
comparable in cost, while Alternatives 2 and 3 would be more expensive.
Citv Attornev Review of AQreement
The attached letter from Ms. Jasek Reid (Exhibit 4) indicates that the
agreement allows all three parties cost control through the design and review
process. Sect i on I. C. requ i res the County to obta in City and College fi na 1
approval of project design and Section IV.A. states that the County will
submit 30%, 70%, and final working drawings and specifications to the City and
College for approval. The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and
concurs that the existing language provides adequate cost control for the City
on the project.
\;,'-
Page 3, Item )~
Meeting Date 6/9/92
FISCAL IMPACT: The total estimated cost of the Southwestern College,
Transit Center is $1,150,000, which includes the completed feasibility study,
engineering drawings, construction, inspection, and project management,
including a 15% contingency. Southwestern College will dedicate land to the
City for the Transit Center. The County of San Diego has programmed $900,000
of its TDA funds for this project, and the City will commit up to $250,000 of
its TDA Article 4.0 funds to this project, if needed after expenditure of the
County funds. It is difficult to estimate annual major maintenance and repair
costs or potential 1 i abil i ty costs related to center operations. However,
SCOOT maintenance and repair costs at the H Street Trolley Station Transit
Center (which is a comparable facil ity to the one proposed at the College)
have averaged about $800 annually over the past ten years and there have been
no liability costs related to the H Street Station Transit Center.
WMG:DS-030/DS-037
WPC 15571
, ~ I ~ /13. *
RESOLUTION NO. } 1010 l t
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, SOUTHWESTERN COMMUNITY
COLLEGE DISTRICT, AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF
THE SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER
WHEREAS, at its meeting of February 20, 1990, Council
approved an agreement between the county of San Diego, Southwestern
College and the City of Chula vista for a Southwestern College
Transit Center feasibility study; and
WHEREAS, the feasibility study has been completed which
concluded that the Southwestern college Transit Center Project is
necessary and feasible; and
WHEREAS, the agreement, and Alternative 1 Conceptual site
Plan, have been approved by the Southwestern College Board of
Directors; and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of the transit center
project is $1,150,000, including contingencies; and
WHEREAS, said agreement authorizes the County to proceed
with construction of the transit center and defines maintenance and
operation responsibility between the College and the City once the
center is completed; and
WHEREAS, according to County staff, the project will
follow California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines for
environmental approvals through use of a Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, Council, at its May 5, 1992 meeting, directed
staff to provide more information regarding traffic patterns, cost
breakdown and other transit alternatives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve agreement between the
County of San Diego, Southwestern community College District, and
the city of Chula vista for construction, maintenance and operation
of the Southwestern College Transit Center, a copy of which is on
file in the office of the city Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
\?-t;"
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
approve the Conceptual site Plan Alternative 1 as shown in the
Southwestern College Transit Center feasibility study.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\Transit center
\3-:-/P
LceJ
Attorney
Urbon V~ & Veronica E. Jones
891 otay Lakes Road
Chu1a Vista, CA 91913
May 28, 1992
Faxed to (619) 425-6184 on 5-28-92 4:30 p.m.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Chula vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Subject: Southwestern College Transit Center
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
This request is for a public hearing to allow input from the
public into the matter of the proposed transit center within the
Southwestern college Campus and along the West side of otay Lakes
Road.
As you can see by our address our home of the past 26 years
fronts on otay Lakes Road and would be immediately across the
street from the proposed transit center. We had 10 years ago a
transit stop in front of our home and got it moved to a commercial
area due to the fumes and increased traffic at our front door. In
the intervening years our side of otay Lakes was designated by you
the city for no parking during school hours as the impact on the
residences along otay Lakes was too great. Robberies have forced
us to put bars on all our windows and doors and this is in part due
to the growth in the area part of which was on again Campus
Property. Although our request is self motivated in part it is
also for the balance of the community.
It was in fact the effort of a neighbor some blocks away
from otay Lakes Road that alerted us to the approval of the project
by the Southwestern College Board of Trustees. His alert was more
of an alarm as the rest of the neighbors we have discussed this
with are equally concerned with the negative impact of this
project. The following are some of the concerns:
1. No EIR was filed on the project.
2. southwestern was originally planned to become a 4 year
college and in fact was promoted as such for the bond
financing to acquire the land and build the facility.
A. The efforts of the Board of trustees in selling
off parcels of land has reduced the land of the campus
to prevent the conversion to a 4 year school.
\~,(
B. Any further reduction in available campus land
will further prevent future expansion of the existing
institution.
C. A review of the original and subsequent bond
financing vehicles to check the propriety of the
boards actions relating to the selling of land
specifically acquired for the campus.
D. A review of the propriety of the Board to enter
into a joint venture unrelated to education.
3. Lack of adequate traffic studies before the Board took
action and prior to formulation of the proposal.
4. Air quality studies on the impact of Bus pollution.
5. Noise studies on the impact of noise on the adjoining
property owners and student population.
6. Environmental issue of reduction of
lieu of acres of concrete and asphalt.
Brazilian Rain Forest syndrome.
grass and plants in
Sounds like the
7. A study on the impact on crime due to increased
transient population.
8. A study on the need and feasibility if a 4 year campus
is built elsewhere in area thereby possibly reducting
student populations and ridership.
9. Increased danger to Junior High and High School students
walking, riding bicycles, and driving to area schools on
otay Lakes Road.
10. Increased danger and congestion to college campus
students both driving and walking to college from ajoining
community.
To our knowledge these issues have not been addressed. In
addition the lack of normal procedures to notify adjoining effected
property owners is apalling, unfair and reminescent of railroading
techniques of the Boss Tweed days. Before you QUE city council
passes judgement on the proposed project we are asking you to be a
truly representative form of government.
Please hear us, protect us, and in all sincerity represent
us.
Thank you and we look forward to getting your response.
Respectfully yours,
Urv~ N~
Urbon v: ~es
d~t~~t rLvUb:2/
Veronica E. ~~:'
,~...~
00>
Oi I \
I -....
f::: ; , 1 \
.... 1
F$i Gotham 1- .... -,
::r...
:E';' ....-
(I);
C1ncC
F$O>>
CD ~
9=-
d
0
0
=
=
CD
~
<>>
=={]
9
l>>
d
CIn
==.
F$
0
a>
d I
F$
(i) I
9 I
I
l~
I~ M Elmhurst
ii! E~: ~ . .
....
I ,.-
'iP .
I ill "'I &
I ~ ~ 'u 4~1: OD
,. C
...
...is I
c: :7
;; ,.
I /'
./ /I//!
7////
\3.-q
Thomas A. Davis
1657 Gotham Street
Chula Vista, CA 91913
421-6577
May 21, 1992
The Mayor and City Council of the City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor and members of the City Council:
In February of this year I wrote to you regarding a
decision by the city staff not to install a traffic signal
at the intersection of Dtay Lakes Road and Gotham Street.
When that letter appeared on the City Council agenda for
February 18, 1992, the city staff provided you with a brief
written information report to substantiate their reasons for
not installing a traffic signal at the intersection, and
recommended that you receive and file my letter without
further action - which was done.
After the Council action I corresponded with the City
Manager, requesting further details that supported the staff
decision not to install a traffic signal, e.g., traffic
warrants and traffic analysis, and so on. I also asked to
know why another intersection further north on Otay Lakes
Road, at Camino Del Cerro Grande, had a traffic signal
funded and installed, along with extensive curb and cross
walk improvements, ahead of other intersections (Gotham
Street being one of these) that the city staff itself had
established as having greater need.
I did not receive a reply to my request for information
until May 12, 1992, more than two and a half months later. I
can understand that the city staff has many important func-
tions and duties to perform, and that responding to citizens
requests for information intrudes on this process, but it
seems odd that it took so long to answer questions that
should have already had answers if the decision not to
install a signal at Dtay Lakes Road and Gotham Street had
previously been documented. While this time delay is irri-
tating, it now appears to be a minor issue.
The overriding reason for not installing a traffic
signal at Otay Lakes Road and Gotham Street are city, col-
lege and county plans for the construction of a Transit
Center in place of the front lawn at Southwestern College
along Otay Lakes Road. The City of Chula Vista, San Diego
I s -II
City Council. May 21, 1992. Page 2.
County and Southwestern College staffs have been negotiating
for some time among themselves to develop a plan for the
construction of the Transit Center that will draw $900,000
dollars from county transportation funds and $250,000 dol-
lars from similar City of Chula Vista funds.
The front lawn of the college seems to have been chosen
as the site for the Transit Center in a roundabout way.
Southwestern College controls adequate undeveloped land on
the corner of Otay Lakes Road and East H Street to build the
Transit Center. If this site were used, the cost might even
be less than putting it on the front lawn since there are
already traffic control devices installed in the immediate
vicinity of the corner location. However, the Southwestern
College administration wishes to reserve this undeveloped
site for some future joint development venture with a
yet-to-be-determined partner. As a result, the college has
chose~sacrifice the aesthetically pleasing and environmen-
tally benign front lawn and convert it into an acre and a
half of concrete, asphalt, transplanted palm trees and fake
"Aztec-like" pillars.
When I appeared before the City Council in February and
appealed to you to reverse the decision not to install a
traffic signal at Otay Lakes Road and Gotham Street, the
city staff informed you that their decision was sound, based
on a significantly reduced traffic volume at that intersec-
tion. The staff position was further enhanced by certain
financial benefits to the city derived from funding provided
by the county for the construction of the Transit Center.
The staff, it turns out, had not done a traffic study at the
Otay Lakes Road/Gotham Street intersection, or the area, in
a number of years - the information provided to you in
February had no basis in fact, and was guess-work.
It was not until April 28, 1992, according to the
traffic warrants provided to me by the Director of Public
works in his May 12, 1992 letter, that a traffic survey was
actually done, some two months after I appeared before the
City Council. No accurate traffic data appears to have been
used in the Transit Center planning to this point, either.
The statement that staff made to you in February that the
traffic count at the Gotham Street intersection had declined
to 1100 vehicles per day was wildly inaccurate. After the
April traffic count the previously reported volume turned
out to be in error by 378% - the April count indicates the
average daily traffic volume at Gotham to be 4160 vehicles
per day!
\3-12
City Council. May 21, 1992. Page 3.
It distresses me that the city staff was so careless in
providing you with accurate information. I feel that this
severely prejudiced your action on my February request. It
was made to appear that there was no substantiation or
justification for my appeal, and naturally you acted accord-
ingly. However, almost every aspect of the staff position in
February was not supported by accurate facts (in some cases,
none at all). The situation appears little changed now, even
after receiving the "answers" to my questions addressed to
the City Manager.
The Director of Public Works, for example, indicates in
his May 12th reply, that the traffic survey done in April
demonstrates that the intersection of Otay Lakes Road and
Elmhurst Street is now busier than the one at Gotham Street.
My examination of the warrants clearly shows that the traf-
fic volume at Elmhurst (the minor street) has a volume of
2000 fewer vehicles per day than Gotham Street. Somehow,
with a traffic count half that of Gotham, Elmhurst was
awarded a maximum of 12 points for vehicle volume - as
opposed to 6 points for Gotham Street. This kind of suspi-
cious manipulation of figures produced a forced total of 55
points for Elmhurst and only 43 for Gotham Street.
Another weakness in the traffic study is the failure
to take into account that traffic flow has been severely
reduced along Otay Lakes Road between the Gotham Street
intersection and Telegraph Canyon Road because of road
construction. For over a year much of the traffic that might
otherwise use Telegraph Canyon is, and has been, opting to
use East H Street rather that fight the construction and
congestion on Telegraph Canyon Road.
I also note that the city staff has never produced
factual justification for the installation of a traffic
signal and side walk and curb improvements at the intersec-
tion of Otay Lakes Road and Camino Del Cerro Grande/Surrey
Drive. Failure to support this decision with facts makes it
appear more and more likely that the decision to fund a
signal at that intersection was made arbitrarily, and ahead
of intersections having a greater need.
There are two request that I wish to make of the City
Council. First, I would like the City's involvement in the
matter of the Transit Center, and the commitment of funds
for its construction at the site in front of Southwestern
College, to be impartially reexamined. This project has
\ S,\3,
City Counci 1. May 21, 1992. Page 4.
never properly involved the residents in the vicinity of the
college, and it has not received a realistic or accurate
examination of the effect of its construction on Otay Lakes
Road traffic flow. Second, I would request that a accurate.
straightforward, determination be made of the traffic and
pedestrian situation at the Otay Lakes Road/Gotham Street
intersection, with serious consideration being 9iven to the
installation of a traffic signal there at the earliest
possible time.
Thank you for your indulgence once again of this mat-
ter.
A"'ik.
~avis
I ~-/4
11t
Robert C.
874 Xavier
Chula Vista, CA 91913
(619) 421-3320
Muff
A venue
-~
Mayor Tim Nader
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 91910
27 May 92
SUBJ: Proposed Transit Center - Southwestern College.
Dear Mayor Nader:
1 have just recently learned about the proposed transit center being planned for the
"front yard" of Southwestern College.
As a concerned citizen and close neighbor to SWC. I stronwly oppose any plans to
alter the beautiful landscaped area in front of the college bordering Otay Lakes Road.
As Chula Vista rapidly expands eastward. Otay Lakes Road is becoming more and more
commercialized. One of the last remaining garden spots in this immediate area is the
SWC campus. Much time. effort. and money has been spent planning and
maintaining the front approach to the campus. I would hate to see the trees and grass
removed to make way for lots of concrete to support a handful of noisy and polluting
busses.
Alternatives must be considered:
1. Empty lot - southwest comer of Otay Lakes and East "H" Streets.
2. Another area on campus. possibly in the existin~ parking lot above & west of
the stadium. (This approach would save lots of concrete...and taxpayers money)
Unless you have forecasted and documented a dramatic increase in passenger traffic
into and out of Southwestern College. I seriously question the necessity to increase
the capacity of the current bus stop.
Request you reevaluate this transit center requirement before we College Estates
residents lose this beautiful area to yet another concrete jungle.
Sincerely.
~Q~~--Cki9-
Robert C. Muff ~
Copy to:
I. County Supervisor BiIbray
2. SWC President Conte
3. Star News Editor
\~.. JS
June 1, 1992
Mr. Joseph Conte, President
Southwestern College
900 Otay Lakes Road
Chula Vista, CA 91913
Re: Proposed Southwestern College Transit Center
Dear Sir:
Recently it has come to our attention that San Diego County and South-
western College are proposing to build a transit center at the present
front entrance to the college. After reviewing the plans, we are list-
ing below a number of reasons why we, as residents of College Estates
(the residential area immediately to the Ea?t of the college) are
opposed to the transit center:
1. Present economic conditions for Federal, County and City do
not warrent this expendure of tax payers' dollars (estimated
cost $1,150,000.00). Budget deficiencies have forced many
public employees to accept their jobs on a part-time basis,
or face lay-off.
2. In future planning this Center may be a plus for East Lake
developers. However, it will empact the residential com-
munity that exists all around the campus (North, South,
East and west) by the additional traffic that would be
created; as well as adding to the pollution. Furthermore,
zoning has been changed at the East Corner of Otay Lakes
Road and H Stret, making this property available for another
shopping area. Together with Ralph's shopping center and
the 7-11 strip mall at the other end of Otay Lakes Road, plus
the Fire Station at Elmhurst, the eventuality for an intolerable
congestiDn of traffic in this immediate area is very probable.
3. We seriously question how the Transit Center would benefit
the students who attend Southwestern. Our home being
directly across from the main entrance to the campus, and
also the fact City buses stop almost directly in front of
our house, we observe a very small percentage (perhaps as
small as 10%) of the students using the buses as their means
of transportation to the college. We ourselves also use the
buses frequently (*704 and #705), and find there is a very
small percentage of residents taking advantage of them. It
is a well-known fact that students of highschool and college
age are car-oriented; and most of John Q. Public for that
matter.
4. We believe there is a safety matter to be considered also.
with a Middle SchOOl, a Highschool, and a College along
Otay Lakes Road, there are a large number of their students
who walk along this busy highway to and from school. The
possibility for serious accidents to happen with the increased
flow of traffic the Center would bring should not be taken
lill!!Uy.
\?,- I(
Mr. Joseph Conte, President
Southwestern College
June 1, 1992
Page 2
5. Although this opposition to the Transit Center is more of a
personal consideration, it is also one that we are sure is
of considerable concern to all College Estate home owners.
We believe the Transit Center would mean a great deal more
traffic than what we already contend with when attempting
to enter Otay Lakes Road; would mean more air pollution
and litter; and a lowering of our property values.
6. The proposed location of the Transit Center at the main en-
trance to the Southwestern College would mean destroying
the beautiful setting it now presents to the public.
It is our understanding after talking with persons in the City of Chula
Vista administration that this project has been in the planning stage
now for two years. However, it only came to our attention ten days ago.
Certainly more advanced information would have been appreciated by those
of us living in the area.
Thank you to give our objections your serious consideration.
C~~
Robert F. Kelley, Sr.
~~~o~' E.~e~~
875 Otay Lakes Road
Chula Vista, CA 91913
482-1809
CC:
Brian Bilbray, Supervisor, City of Chula Vista
Tim Nader, Mayor
Jerry Rindone, Councilman
Leonard M. Moore, Councilman
Shirley Grasser Horton, Councilwoman
David Malcolm, Councilman
John Wilson, Southwestern College
Tom Davis, resident College Estates
1.3- \t
C.f(OIA V f">j If ~17Y GJo~J
~PlJOI( 11E~ =tf:..r3
~IQI'l""
'I -
A PETITION OPPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSIT CENTER ON
THE FRONT LAWN OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Name fr."",+ Address Date Si gnature
/j""'''''- -;: J~'U'"" _
_ _~~~~_ _ _~ ~~ JI/~!jJ:l&_Jb!.:: ~ _ _~:r ___~~ _ _ _~_ -.2. 9'~~'"
PdL-:)U,Sf!.fL __ __ Q3.:2..-Wy1f/1'<-Av..e.....k ~ 8:.,_11.. _ ~~./
I1 '~JodnnCj~ f-l1Jfl.ud!:t.c.__{g:l-:1Au_ - ~.tc
"
...
.,
~"'''J C;DOO.J'',.) · "" ", ~k .
- !r----------------------------------------- -- -- ~
, [. . +.I, fr,-J-'77- V~
L1 .. !t...5_ n(~.:~^h"'~u-<:t'-J:t_J;lf}r:.-::r::-tt------- ~~~u_
_ n_un. /J-(.~nn(~---~".)JP"':J~rJ.:!-,!:.f;~~1!~..s
_~__ ~8::?~__nI.7X':~Cd.'---'t--<<~?k-/k2~~C'~
_ _?IM 1/1 _ _J);e.rJJCI.. _ _ _Ot_Q_ ];IHA.c/l_~] _ Jq~j1.z _ c?~.:'_~
- frd:(q~ ~- _~C?!fJ~ - - - -!.-?:?~ _:x.-t.b~&_ 4 - ~/21 ~ ?-~-7}~~
i:;~I:.6L-J-~~L'ZH:,].!HLt.CA _~L_bl-QI.J.~ ~jJ,u'~
_~~~~n n __ __ _.J{,?_3.. n~_ ff..uc;.<.Jc_~I_<p.,- -~~ _
_r:;:./((l<?~_~nG!.~r=E.j2.~:}~5!:-'=<<.e?-::-~-" ~ u. -
_~_~~_I::'F___~\l.~~_J1Q~ ~<2-~-~-~~~J~~-~~~wv
J!!:&JA _4)Mu~::" _ !(j5f.T!.q~"= F..' _ n _ _ _ _ n _ _ 6/r1it-:. _ _2f.-4_~ n
~~--~__L~J3-1fJYJ.-~-".:/;-~--'df./:l~n n ~
-~!-"'''--j;l.y~'''---J!if!-~~-''-t1li;;-,--~n~-?-- , ' :--
$~~~unnu jtf...8:./. n _...~_u -t4:- :,
_J~ 5.. n :-.1._ _ 7.a;;-.:iKM __Jc.5;J,:~L~~Od._ ~- -~ - ~'~
_ r..tL f..j)J!L:I _.J)EH..r~t'{!- iJ4.7!J. IiJt a..(e:. -~T..r _ JdJ/-1.?. ~J ,~
-t;~~;d~~~-;:J;-~~~~7:;-~~~~-c:~.~T$) .)
.. c?A/NY ~. J~seN 93& W-1yM3.-9VC ~/~j~9t41N,r
,
/(..5)
'--""
J\ ',./ (7'
. .'''''''-
II , 1
I'r'lll
Ct/u 1../3 "1"7; ~ ~/Tya,OllA
^G~M mr1l""l~
"["It "'t-
A PETITION OPPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSIT CENTER ON
THE FRONT LAWN OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Name
Address
Date
Signature
d' ,i , ,.t ./ t-' _~,; J ) t-, 7, ,'i 0 ;). '-')~"
_~_(:'W.:-~___~_2__-.:;~________::.__,",:: _ _ ~ ~
Yffi~A.~5..jfP_fJY_'~__n~~i7_~~TJt.~5i':.n___ft~Lt"L__ _ nn__~a '
?J;:;~;~;/~~if;~-~~-~~$;----~~i~~
~_ __________________,--------1?6 'I.fr:....__n__n'li_nn_ nn_,7tILtMA,' ~/
" ~~(Jr7~ -
-7 ' /,. -, \'
t1V~_,~;_~IJ:_~~/_~'~~ :~_ =_ __________ __ _ _ _________ ___ ~:I. , ~; ....-1,..-
'fjf;@-~f~~q!!J1Jt~~~nf1)1-~- _~n~ ~"7'C
~~,h5,~!~/;:c~~f6.uJ;.~ok,~#.;t~~ I'"-"-r-
, --- I I' '.,
I:b~~ !YA1!. fA. C -~~k7- J232l;:~~~ -' ~i:-:. f-:.!..f~-:' _ _ -:. _ _ _ _ ~.i..t.<-
I..ORL1_1Irl-,L.~L-d '. ,V;J A/AL..'''' l/,jj~./~./ 0.,12/
~___Q'''''''''__''____6''~__-<;'Y--'''-il.l<--'f'~-~''-+--Iq'-lf:Z2';"" ~.~" ,'~/
~" " ' , " ~ \ " ,- \' ''\ \' /(
~\<~~_~~lli_~cW.._~.:_~_\~~hn .. ~'A\fA-- '~~
jy:: '!. 'j~:;., ~V,!:-;_ L T:.2t!ML t.t'Zr:!_ .f./ft.-E$f: J~!- ~h _~tautti" _ ~ ,4;:[~
?f.. ,,/I . ~ / hi B:1, . .4,' -
_,_- ~~_ J-- _ ~~:.._ __ _ _~ L'i _ ~ _ _~ _ _:?~ '-:('/,}/L/'...iJ./Y'
___ L '- '. O:--?~ . (",J-""?
- ,. \ I, ! J JL '.'" C--' J , ~.' "."
~.1\;j&i>.i _ :'J~..J. ~_0:':" _ _~ L:;. _ L JAlL. _~___:..:=:?L.~~l:;,;; _ _ ~_/2..t,v,~
_~c'"-w, :.~~~~.?_'1__J.:.z.~, J:h_4-!2C'L5J...A-~B__~!'6Ig..2_;,5..l:U_iZ_~'6'Y<';l.:Y.~-,'- ~
, . , j
J~1. ;;'_>,."'-!.~';;, _ _~:'._..)aO.!2f'~_ _1 "'.7..3_ J-AY[, _'fI.. _ ~'4..-!i.L _ -::J:n.-l1u~ L90 '
qb' 'R JL:vj 0\'1 AI "." j(..>7~/jAh,Sl" 1/,r,/9- ,/) ka." l,l/! ;:
.....,.i L_ \~---:,...J~-'"'j)-\L--~n:.,-...rn-~- ';'.v. ~JT~-~c!.-~-=-;Z;l;~--<-'
ks'jL"-i3~T:/:: _ {:g.f,,_ J .:.':..6.f.JJcd.L!~ L~ X1.....( ~~L'_ -<< J:I ::u_ P~~l J,e;J;;o2-1"}-
Jr'.. ,-I: 2 _ J.:~,.l\. ~C;.,_ _ _ _ ~~7- ~_ f~cJ l: _ U__ _6/,t;i3~ _ _ _ _~.{r _ ::~~_/I,_ ,
lL l S.'i '::-_ tl_ ~~l t1.i~ n1 f:>_Q ~ _ (pi. ~- ~L _ _ ~'l ~ 1<2; n k(~( i-::-';' (
'-r- .' l ~ ., , ," . ,', , , " 2' / "', i /(
//_'~'.I'+---; - -,-';:"c::::- ......,' y/...J,:......~ _',- /,-<-;-)..l.... ", ___~- ,/ - /_
_______~_J___ _________________________~___~________~~J--.~ /-- ,
A' 'L r'" " .. ~ /Aq'l ':d"'-'
V('JI - 1_' - ,',.....-NY (",/ -;-.J- f.;:_C-<_L""" "'or ~(.
_ _ _...._ _.,.'" _..1-_ _011'::.1.:<.(/_ _ _ J..._~ _ _ _ _Lu. .Lc._ _~ L _ _ _ _ _ -'.... _ _",,;t' _ _ _ ~.((.,J"J ;:7d
~ (,; /f11' - " ,.,., ',-, ,,";"y, " c.+ ,<'\r.,::z 7 '}1"
~, ,/ -. '-'_ ~~""'I__ /,....)00'/1 1_' "~I' ,"'//.-,1,-.11 I l..-"--1 '7 'Y-LJ;(,/"'--' /. .','
/i '-......r. _ .' I . - I ....l-'._ \,..-'.... , c-,.', () '- -oj '.- ..... iV-,. ' :
- --' - . , .....
~
~- "
7~l- 1. ,!:;k--#P ) ]'c:l (',)
~&f1I~ '/I5ilt C/IV CDv.cJet.{
^,:'~II 0 ft tiE: (\1 #I: 1'3
~{ '1'''Z..
A PETITION OPPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSIT CENTER ON
THE FRONT LAWN OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Name
Address
Date
Signature
------~'=~5.:_cJ_. L~k>_~_,"-r_J___L?:zS:L~J~<<...~.?t--. (i:..?_-J_~_.-.6-./~.1 ;"~.;:-: j
J I, 'ie (' '/CJ?r V L>~'/' (r-?-r:}iW'/.^ ~ /- _:" c,-,' /('; 1rY?'"
'[,........,~ . .' ,..~ I., '......' .__~ \, 't._.z ' ./, '--- .Ii ..... (--<t..!;'-
:- -- - - -- - - -- -- - - - - ~I-- -- ~ -- - - -,--'" - -- ---- - - - - - - -- --7_--r -- - -:-.' -
2~)/1 I" ., _: ~'l, .-
1/- '" J, . ~ Go" - _ I~&'"~] '-~_ j" ' -. ~ ;'-'7~' '. /:J:J"&~
, :'/_~-!,-,.p..;;_,-___-",-___~~________e.-/~_'~..I__...:tt;_ ~...-::.. LUll .
'. ,-', I> ,,-., 'r:f~
So \ "",--) \:,):~\ <::: ',:\ \ ':\'~'1\': /0i')'?T"'-//Are'.>t<:.dV7i'
____~--~_ _J::i..___.----,---.J......---- , ""=''''''",,,:::___. m ..... _-'.<1..___..(__ ' rCI
n -;-;'~" ,'"" , .! ,1--
---[\--;:---C -:-7'J:--~ ---- ~-- - - -~\- - - -- --S---C"~~:~~-:::;;- -Evl Ci~
___t=.u..c(.___~_____lv~X__, la.jL__j~_______L____-____ . :
C't: OJ' ".t' f' ~ I" '1 .' '1 r 'Lt ~ ,-if'... r':' ((L!:\~' /
J ....) 1...1"- r -" '"" I I '",- - ,1 , ,,"1 ' ,.-". / ")-
_____ __________ ______ __~__l _~~___~~_~_____~___~_____- ~ - .
jflff!I!"!_!:j{1&~{V!>!!d41-~ jifl:f-~L(!'_J/. f/!1d!iil~ _ ..~11
J:llih;-B~'!1"-~'u~ - j ~''''--~\<--dLCI!---1fzjtm,~lirl'
~D..J::t,.tly~J~ ~ti.I- _ J _~ L S_ J ~ _.: )_tCl_ _ _!?. L'Sj~~__ _ _ ~~-
_ -:Z;..t~I_( j,_e/!~ _ _'!2~_~ 'i f.-:!Is_ lfl..'/-_ .)Ii/..eJ./_ D-:. _ _ JL d i =- _ _~ ~ _ !;U;- ;t.'~:t.
It. . I. I ,~/. ~ kA ,c/ /-jf;./'l ~
_ i':!.:.._ i:.'G~!d:. b. :E.c!..'fL _ _.,. L {2!':L:#J.E. _:zt: - -- ~N-'~ ~ _ -'-..~ -~~<-
-{Jtrrr.. (}J.l'J:C-___.-. f.Z{ 2iA. _!:>~~~_j)~,-~ ~~-~/L,~~ __ r.. J~. ::~' ~~ _-k~\~-<:D {~.
I j ;;t r.:.O x: . j e/'/ h. . Vi' /;-/ -P-
_~w_~l'.L' _O.:.-_L__1JI!t:f!14!:..__1'J:._____'(:_____~_ __eM- '
_ i1A~,- _ ~ _ ~fA;~ t'c.~/f.:. _ ~ _ _ ~.:!q~'Z?:-_ _ I;:c~:-:!'c: St/I T/I
_ J?~ j:':i _CY:_ _l~"!'!-J~ _ _lj~ ~ ~J~!!~~ J:'ll" __~: _~-J.d: _ e ~_:. n/J/7.
(t ." r~
_L'1'!.1_!H~ ):2f",<:;)Y'! ~~ _ _1I/jj__1;:!-,-f!~,~,-,,- :-0/_ _ _ ~~ _ _ 0~\!~': _ _~0-;.~~ ~i ~ _ !,,"k t,yc,:)
_ DAt1.:cL _ _C'Z?~C _ -'_~"17- ~-I..~'2~_ ~ _ 9Y_ - f:.}~l! ~- - 'bJ ---- ~ "
:if::::.~:~l~:;:;:;)~~:I:~~~~apsfth - ::' 'rY
___~_Q~-;./..~:J'..Z_~~A,.f:/"""J.)-"O--~ ~- ~~
o
7~ 1; t.:t-?'i/-' /j,-02 /
(!1/",)l.4 "IslA- ClTf CIIUflJe,
~~lUi)1'l ~Tt!tt1"" I~
I./f!qz..
A PETITION OPPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSIT CENTER ON
THE FRONT LAWN OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Name P';i\. + Address Date Signature
_(!/yI~,;",~;;; __l'€iiJ2 ..,!k.I2Lk.~-f~_ ~~~..J
,4h~_~L-J/-Y- AufLl!,"G.:-?::~~d
_~_~~_n__}~~-~~- __&~_0n~nti_-}:~f..<M)- 1
~ G6~/_ScI1..~ _ n J..2_~YAy~ _d~tjn ~{( n~: ~_~~_ _n
u~~r_-::!??:!::o/n{..~t!.-_1;.1'/~C!-_~111L~-:'n(-~--~-~--~-"_5i9 -' -- -'
~~1*~,~ AeX}Q~S'-;__~!.:!Li2,r12L h~::h,iZ~,__'t -c{~'-'cBt ~
(]SM_;-'.9.,1!C_~'].?./..,fiffF.!~J:!:.CL~I~~-9-~:.. -- --~' ~~
~ ~ -, , 1 r ,. -' -I ./ -- ) } --;-'
r!-J,Il'-jJ}-'.fiUJ.:.!?-'.!'S/s5.._id_.!c.!!:;i/~;;'~'- '=-~ :n'<: :..1~ ~!-Z.[J-X;::_L_~ A _S~c ,fc L '"
QCA.r8J~ - ~~s.1_L ~ L~_ I:fiuLc:..,~___1I _ C Y_"_-..t-:7~
.&1~'t.. ~f!. '?'L ib~l~;r-t:Aq~_:iA j;.j2_ _4.:tf?-_ . _ ____
_1Af.ct:~<=:-_ fq,~c}!~_ _ ~ It}_~'?. _ :f_ ~ ~'3~ _?T.. _ 9. Y_'n ~.:_? ,--_9..?"_ . ~
_ -~1~J~-~!f2~ VnJI/H- Jjl]qc@_:"lL,L:..\l._ - ~ :il~ J~~ a~
----~-Qz:7~5-:-~L2.?--c:~b:.'T-~.f:-~--X::-;-...~--:.~' 171~"<'C
_ ~Cf.~ _;.d~~_J7.2h..JiL.u...Jl_ (J/..JLZ:'1_;J"ETtL ",,-,
b bl dej_ A -' fg fJIJe'..t::_ _ L73_z-_ JjfJ4ca. _S.i '- J2_:i _ _~: _Q: _'[2-~) ~
'::,t.1a1~ J:I.. _~e[fjg~L - fl:J~ _l{t(,.tt!A _-Sz: - - ~ t - t-: -<I-':J~I( 5/d;.
_ ilicl.o~~-~.: LJll! ~ k_ _ _ ~_L ?~L _ J: tbg.~~_ _ ~t_'_L\.: _10: _ ~_ ,!?-"iI~~JJ,~
~ U"i1\ S/. () - !{~92. .p - "
4. C; A !1.. iV-)wun - - L73.&];-t:k ~~ n'.r-n~!I_ nEn n n - n~l7-<o(~,D:
_ _ ':. -rr: ~= - - - - - !.?l_ I!.?/1K~ - ~z._ - ('~<- - _~~1--_ r!-_ - ~~. ~
_ i~.w_~~nn_LJ.s9_~-~_~_--~-Ji=~.?:~~ G ~(A
_u _d.:.. _~_n :li2,;:., _.rL~d(1'n(t n(/{u P-: 1. -: :~_ G 1!-,4(e- A ,71A<
- )
l~~
"", (,.V-;;)
. . i c.
!.j ,7
"
/~\
J /)
.. ~
,.
('/fCll)', VIsTA (!/Ty(!ocJrUe,(
hGGAJOlf ~TE~ ~I'
~/"!"-
A PETITION OPPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSIT CENTER ON
THE FRONT LANN OF SOUTHNESTERN COLLEGE
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Name Pr ",t
Address
Date
Signature
'-~J. u u _ ~ _ _If ~.! }_1{ L'e.!'.f'.jf~:;. [!. t.. {~11.. ~ _ 0 'P/i?.-;,. _ u ~cc{? 7iLr
C~-r1-JU~j?..dLCd _ ~b2rJ.. _ _ J. ~':iL SS !~,:!?;. _~ i ~~.: X_ _ _ ~_~~_ 5. ~_ _~.: ,<+-/ II;&~
)'J:!:'- -1- ,f~F{ld5..J;'dl:,,,,_"<ZJ;;L--fx L~,,- ff ~~
:;.J'1- u<i~-ji2ZK~~5.ff.-{L1.:1:_?!:::e-7
fD. GRISSO'" J/? ~ .~__J.i.6_?u_0ad.-fA__ ~~_Q~~~fJ._ - $k;b
( . - - u_____lt..1Qui/:. u~r_Qi_"JJ1J..Cju r:~
j? r J:;'?--~!ZJ-'2Ji7uG6 __[1t}5.:Iu~z__Z1~_ t; ~
u__~~~:-I.k.flu{rl1fA?LJl:.u(:.C.l..::;u_ _~ '
_r~ Y1J_~:J:._L_~_:r_f_~L&~j;~th5_"'2 _5-tu ?__7:<].?.._~ _
- '- ~uA.--GAf,J.fd-L62";>~1io:i:A4.I:1'Js..t1+lf.
__ ~_Y_~u_L.(_/..1._r;;_a1t/-A42Lr!1/_1.~ __ '. ,
. -/ y! / .. J.. 1/ c; '-)~-I-I ," '" (, / /") __ '? 1 -..f} '-/' '9/
'--~if-";''''----~~.~~7-'''' _",_./A~_I-:J.u...;..':,u_~_Lu::.____L ''''. v{.
J:R' :pY.:kG-r ' 1.-, '. '" ~ 1(.' 'f.t. ,1 " I!'~!'
: :::1iilli.:ft C,<,=:~'::~:ri:.::Y;~;~=::{~:: ::1.J~LS 10 7~,
_ _ 4~Y~ - - - - B.:iLk - - r; J-.J:: _: ~@ _Sl_ _ ~T: _ _ ~ _ _ _ _'iL c:. 1.:::"_
u~~~u_J:._u~~~i,j~?!.t.__Z1.~_4:.C:.!:;.__C;.::..:_?! 'j 13
~ ~ ~
j:i/.JiL1J?.i31JjE.y__~?:hfpl!llttJ.Au-,_t..J!:uu6___L2_?:u~-I!._~_ y:'c . ~
.54~ K" "fitll.f;.'/. _ ~1 S5.t;~~Jk<L ~y-- - - ~=Uj.d_ A.n~ I(~
. ~ \
j;h,.,) 13L-A"51o(D '60 1-olZ.j)tffllt( /kG ~If ta-1-<fz-- ,M...-~~~ r.
?;;~~~K~~ff;~Z;d1~~~A~~~4-~l~
-7-~~ - _J!:?.'-u5-A._L~./..h4...l;>A.#.mAK_C;d_ ~~?~~ ~
. .
,
Z-- \\
("' /7 !/~
7\1~') "jF'~' ~ J ("'-..:2 <..:
"(J, -! ------ ~;> ,'./ .-/
C/Ic)LA- '(lSi~ ~rrl( ar)ClIfJ~,(
AG.e#JOA IIe"".. 1'3
'Iff' "t..
A PETITION OPPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSIT CENTER ON
THE FRONT LAWN Of SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Name
Address
Date
Signature
~t/N.L~-Ji?~_L~.a.Ye7J:U.j~___~k,.!p__ ::1t.~./~~~
iJ11~~ _ uS.P-"~ _ L'- L'LCg.k(,L!"L~lj! 5i _C-..h./L.H'lY f's 7 f')
~i ;{ ~. _uuuuuf6./.d._{f:~/~~_~Lt%&.~ WY/3
I _ 'u__!~!!I.._c::~~_"'_'7!J.!j'fus..;;.rQ!/::-:':J.x!.-!.'7t-t!f.!5
, _L~_~?-_Gn\_~t"(lb.!A S TI-'J~~~_;. Chu L~JLI~/A
_ u_ _ u_/~?:4..C:ifllJ7bfL?.LJ:J:1I.!la1li:JllL'1/~/3
_ _~_u~~~'f. _~~~-,_~4.dq.<:o..~ 9/7/3
IJJ r-:- - ( (I ~.' d /J H'- It!1" '. )C~.,
.J /, ,.' __7- .. I I I II .. 7 ? - 4
'. ' i~ A/ / '~-..: ....-, (.....? /-1l-t.J..J//1t.. '''C'./j v ,'~/( -1, _ ~ __71 _ )
_ ~t_Y~___[.____________..__________ ____ . :l.fi,,"~.Jf!;:. I " I -
~_. ( . 4u. ~1.;;;._..,____-'f.}Q._.S::~~~~~11'_~I-__~l:.W.l.!'_V:"SJ~S_Ji_' 91'113
. ., f "\ . J q '13
. re?_~:'~'~~:;<;;'::':..~_'_-L2.E~ut111fi1JB.tUtIiQu_c;.'::'~~_':!I.$p:!/A . 0--
. _!j~ ~~.... _ ~?.Q _ J~.l&ll\.lJ_ ../'!:-it:;. _ _ ~('iL ulj Lf.l_ LA. _ _q I~( 3
\_~__/~~.. u__:.5'!.!uf!.'!.$!.1c__t.(~u(J!~fut:J..1l:__q! ql"; 13
I,~':,-,-l L\~i, - -, '0-\ :i (~/7/ (,) ({ r .:::,
_ j:. ~j.;.LJI,_~L:: _ .!.J:Y-N_',=-'_ __:. j__ __ t__.: _ _.: _ _ _..:~ _'':' ___ __ _ ~_ '-5-'h _<Jh ' If I
_~~::{ ~ ~ i.i,*_ ~~~ _fj~xJ..~ _ 5/:_ __ _ 9AAjH(~~~ li.. _ 1/..r 13
cJl.~ _~ _ __ __ __d:.2 L _(.-:?:/!."./.:',!-:, -:!;::~~ _ f:.!':.t:!,,-~: _ yj:?./.7I
"..'-.JL~l::,:! _l':':. :.-j!.',..: ~:...;~ _ _ _ __ _ 2 _ _'-,~ 4: _ _~.: t_ _ _ :1:.'3:1..__ K:J Pi"
-; ~% \~ /tt: ",I' f.) -L- ~~ f cHt
(._':'Z2C_0-;:~.!-::.",~'-:Lr.~___C;=-~_______-' G
'~'.,/"I _, /'" .';)/, ~-/....., ..,,,~, -';''::''"7.''
_ .!..vh~~ ~ L'=1~ _ _ _ _ _ .LiI.'':')_ _ ~_fJ.,::_ -- - - _ i- h ~:. _ __ __ ",;::.:-L -:?_:::'_~_
,. -- -
;.. _ '::'z:..:. ",7~~__,,;. ~:.('~':: _ _ _ _ __ .:-_ ~ _-~-;;;-~ :i~,,,;.....';';..-': ~i..- _ _ _ _'L':--L"-': _;PC_ __
, .. ;l rN>~_I/_ 0 n p ,J rlj..u0f-:r, '-' '" L-'- (I '] ,}
L j_r2!:~~:'6~7ffJt,:~is~~~~~m~-~~d'~
Crt
<] ~ .-,-,-7.J /5-;;2,1/
\~ .f':;j'-F'( '/
Cli{uI..J\ Vlsin CITY ~AJe/(
4~!~A 1=76.1'11 ~ '3
(, If/'f"l.-
A PETITION OPPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSIT CENTER ON
THE FRONT LAWN OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Address
Ih - ~ [) L I~
U1?.EJ2 U _ 4a..vi~__'ii'_qt QrtPD-;.~xfJ _13.,D 1J2 _-:.'E_--jL_~_
X~~r:!t!t_(:/lE~_Ji~ff>_8.JL0lt'l~~~l'J2'K[).-1E; - u-; () <
_~ 0p../in!. f'J3P.fi L~ uli 2Jllflj ldt/R!0. _~-fjl-:: _?!_ _ u _ ~
_(;/!/i~~..1!.. _ fA. !-_~~:.1u __r!. ~ _ ~_~L~~_ ~~ - ~ff~~ :~_t!!i/~;....
_ !:f.ra (:'1 R 1. fJg.r.g.Ac~j-:r:. /ildl. (1_ _ ~? J )Jia.;- /:!9/<.. f.~ - B-d.:__L
r:!r-/_s3_--,c.p~.1A'-i... JA~J-fr.L~-- _:i'.J;L.r2L~_Y _b.JIf~J?:L 17.- u - --
-1 fAJd~ J !t-..i!0:.Q u_ u Lfe7J.~_ r:hm1t01SJ{)L u Y-~ _ I
J~~I_~g:u~:?->__u~~~~__Q9~u~'Y__~..t__ ~?r
_ft-.1li.JAI4j;;rf-eL___jf2.J2.:,_CX.rffi..Lh~-i~C.L:y",-:t~a . ,
Ii 0-..r: ~.J~ _ _ _ tLj_~ - _IJ.;. t?_ _([-2 j:.1!..~~ - -:;;!. uC '- L} _1YJ-!-!:- ~ - c!. uqz ^m'
~_!2t;?.iJ2__! 2<?L J.5:qTd"4'?!/__ ~/J_ ~~_~~
_ -€:;i~i!i!d{~~- LKP- __~(2f/!q!1j" 57!.: - - - g:~ - - - - u__
_ _~rr..()6..~ L1AD_;~fh.~~ -..:~__------
)~~~QLI;wkc-j_l~?jQ-~L~1.WX~-0~~~~
_ .:Jt.1.e.t:::.. _Cd. _ !i':!,;::rr ~ u u~";uu_ _-..;~~{:::: _:..'-?:.-.. ;~:~~=e..f f-
..?Pa.d_ _~ __ __ __ __ _1-( _?}_ _drv.!lftL1d__L _c._ ~ ____
, . . ~':"'u(AL ;&iJ::JD.I'LGJ:~L{j~~_Cf!.. ""
hid J. Y!fd-2t1:zc.!..~ u L1Jf..ll:~1JMm_SC_-u(~ - u t~kJj{.L ~f
_:21~~~u__~JJ..f..~~~.:~Xi.._C~u-0~!Y P~Jm
u~~_~:~u'_-I?_~_~_0.\L-'_'_~;>YI. __
I \ .
J ~
-----------------------------------------------------------
~ ..;J
..-/
1~ '\ cFT-~- / ~3
r) . _____
.." , c.j
~ .~/
c'l/IIlA ~I.,r" r!f1I{ IllOC1e',t
^GELIOIt Irf"~('3
~{Cflq'l..
June 3, 1992
Phi~ip Ed. Ryan
1631 Gotham St.
Chu~a Vista CA 91913
Mr. Tom Davis
1657 Gotham St.
Chula Vista CA 91913
D..ar Mr. Davis,
I may not b.. ab~.. to mak.. it to th.. m....ting on June 9th du. to
working ob~igations.
I support you in your xight against the installation ox a bu. depot
on the front lawn ar..a oX Southwest..rn Collag... You make many valid
points about th.. proj..ct, especia~ly th.. lack ox consultation with,
and information pass..d to th.. p..opl.. in th.. neighborhood that will
b.. exx..ct..d.
Ix I can make it to the meeting on th.. 9th I will go but ix I can
not pleas.. us.. my lett..r to you as a voic.. against th.. bus depot.
Sincerely,
'-IO~
-~~r~
-/
~--
~
/-'~'lt/
(" /.
/ _' c::-
~t1/JfA I/l5ill- (!t?yC"()IfI~/'-
AGeuPIfJ i i'fM 13
(P/~(riL
A
PETITION
OPPOSING THE
THE FRONT LAWN
CONSTRUCTION OF A
OF SOUTHWESTERN
TRANSIT CENTER
COLLEGE
ON
By the residents of College Estates and surrounding areas
Name
Address
Date
Signature
~L~~16~ii~~~j~~~~~
/)- --~ --1/;:~-~~!2z0_dt..~:dz~
----------C{&?~~-j?J'-~-c;P-~IJt---~q--~
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
)~
~
>
'l ...--)
~/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 6/09/92
ITEM TITLE:
Report regarding the request by Roberto Gratianne, M.D., for a lien
agreement in lieu of posting a cash bond for the deferral of public
improvements at 360 H Street
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager YJ (4/5 Vote: Yes_No..xJ
V
The owner of the property at 360 H Street is converting an existing single family dwelling on
the site to a medical office. The City has required that he widen and install public
improvements along the frontage of H Street. The owner has applied for and was granted a
deferral of this requirement with a condition that he post a cash bond in the amount of $9,700.
The owner has requested that the City accept a lien on the property instead of posting the cash
bond. As directed by Council at the 5/12/92 meeting, staff is currently revising the policy
regarding the handling and approval of lien agreements. However, because this request was
already in process before the Council Referral, staff is submitting this request to Council for
consideration so as not to hold up the applicant.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and deny the applicant's request to
enter into a lien agreement in lieu of posting a cash bond.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Recently, Roberto Gratianne, M.D., owner of the property at 360 H Street submitted plans for
converting a single family dwelling into a medical office at that site. As the plans were routed
through the Engineering Division, the requirement to widen H Street to it's ultimate half-width
was imposed, since the valuation of the work was estimated at $50,000.
Dr. Gratianne requested a deferral of this requirement. The deferral request was approved by
the City Engineer on the grounds that the installation would create a hazardous condition, would
be premature because of existing conditions surrounding the area, and that the best means of
installing them would be as an overall improvement project. One of the conditions of the
approval of Dr. Gratianne's request was that he post a cash bond in an amount equal to the costs
of installing the improvements, the survey, design and construction staking for the work, plus
a 10% contingency, totalling $9,700.
14- I
Page 2, Item 1'1
Meeting Date 5/12/92
Dr. Gratianne has submitted a request (copy attached) that the City accept a lien on the property
instead of posting a cash bond and stating the reason for this request as being financial hardship.
Dr. Gratianne has been requested to submit adequate information upon which a finding of
financial hardship can be verified by staff. His letter of June 2, 1992, a copy of which is
attached, still does not provide sufficient justification in staffs opinion. Further, from staffs
viewpoint, when a deferral is granted for a commercial project such as this, the goal is financial
gain from the venture and should be required to secure the future improvements with a cash
bond.
Based on the facts herein stated and the intent of the attached Report to Council dated 11/05/92,
staff recommends that Dr. Gratianne's request for a lien agreement be denied and that he be
required to submit a cash bond.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
RH
PD-144
Itf,.z
~ECE;''''-ED
i.l~ i CS,C'-";; A 'I" fA
~oberto 9ratianne, ::(hfi,'/#;":';;-~ DE~T
Neuology 1992JJN -3 AJl 9' 06
AdUI and PedaIrtc Neuology
Eleclroenc:ephalog~
BecllOmyography
Evoked Polenllds
June 2, 1992
Mr, Cliff Swanson
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: File No.PD-144
Dear Mr, Swanson:
I am writing this letter to you as required, in order
to submit my file to the City of Chula Vista on June
6th, regarding bond for the amount of $9,700.00 for
construction cost for inprovement of "H" Street,
I am unable to pay the City of Chula Vista the amount
required, due to the fact that I am presently paying
approximately $3, 000.00 Dollars extra per month for
this property(loan,taxes,maintenance, etc...) and
,
remodeling cost will be higher than initially estimated.
Over the past year the practice of medicine has gone
thru a lots of changes, our reinbursement has dropped
between 15% to 25% from the previous year, for this
reason at this time I am requesting to obtain a lein
on the above mention property.
Sincerely,
~~~
Roberto Gratianne, M.D.
RG/bm
HAND DELIVER
1i/--3
450 Fou1h AVenJe. Slite 209. ChUa VIsta. Callfomla 91910 Phone (619) 585-7227
2017 FWst Ave. SIe. 206 San DIego. Co 92101
~oberto 9ratianneJ .?t1. fJ).
Neu'ologv
AdUt and PedalrIc Nellology
Eleclroenc:ephaIog~y
Electromyography
Evoked Potenftals
April 2, 1992
Re: File No. PD-144
m ".~
~ ; ~~
~ ..; C):J
'*' tt'~"" fn
'''11 (") ("';.
, ,vx.rn
w
~c:<
""'0 .-) r In
::a:: . :J-
t.:' <", lJ
s:- ''1-
.- "en
g -i;
Mr. Cliff Swanson
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Swanson:
This letter is in regards to the bond that I was asked to pay to the City of Chula Vista in
the amount of $9,700.00 for construction costs for improvements of "H" Street. At this
time, due to financial reasons, I am unable to pay this amount, and I am requesting to
obtain a lein on this property. I promise to the City of Chula Vista the amount paid
when required in the future.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely yours,
7
jll.-C> ~. J..C-,
Roberto Gratianne, M.D.
/
.J
RG:mc
I Lf-lf
450 FolI1h Avenue. SU1e 209, ctUa VIsta.OAr...mlo91910 Phone (619) 585-7227
2017 RrltAve. ste. 206Sal Dlego. Ca 92101
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
~~
.
.
.
Item
'Meeting Date 11/5/85
ITEM TITLE:
Report on placement of liens on personal and/or other property
for guaranteeing future installation of ~~d improvements
Director of Public Works/City Engineer )/'
City Manager (4/5ths Vote: Yes____No~)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At its August 13 meeting, Council requested that staff prepare a report
regarding the following:
1. Placement of liens against personal and/or other property as a guarantee
of future installation of improvements.
2. Past probl ems that the City has had wi th surety bonds as guarantee of
faithful performance.
The following is that report with recommendations included.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and that Council direct
staff to prepare Ci ty Code revi si ons to impl ement recommendati ons contai ned
herei n.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Background
Historically, when a developer of a parcel of land applies for a deferral of
the construction of public improvements and is granted such, he is required to
post security to guarantee future performance of the deferred work. The
security generally is in the form of:
1. A cash bond submitted to the Finance Department.
2. A lien in favor of the City against the property being developed;
3. A bond issued by a company deal i ng in securi ti es and which must be
approved by the City Attorney;
According to the City Code, all these forms of guarantee are acceptable to the
City. The most desirable, from our standpoint, is the cash bond. It can most
readily be used for construction of the improvements should it become
necessary for the City to do the work.
!'f-s
.
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 11/5/85
The findings required for the granting of a deferral by Section 12.24.070 of
the City Code make it obvious that the deferral is a temporary re1 ief from
construction of improvements. This temporary nature wou1 d be reinforced by
requiring a cash bond, since there would be little :Incentive to pursue a
deferral as a means of avoiding the expense of doing the work.
If the appl icant chooses not to post a cash bond, our next preference is a
lien against the property being developed. The lien is a solid form of
bonding as the City has a legal hold on real property and the lien is recorded
with the County Recorder.
Third on the list of guarantees is the surety bond which is valid only if the
premiums are paid, usually on an annual basis. A search of our records shows
that the City has not needed to collect on a surety bond for a deferral that
has been terminated.
The City has not to our knowledge accepted a 1 i en on anything other than the
real property that the owner is developing. The prospect of placing a lien
against someone's personal property is not appealing. It would be impractical
to accept title to personal belongings such as vehicles, etc. It would be
possible, however to place a lien against real property other than that being
developed if it is under the same ownership.
Bonding Problems
1. Cash Bonds: This form of guarantee is the least popular with developers
and owners because they prefer to not tie their cash up for an indefinite
period. A record-search reveals only five instances where a cash bond has
been submitted in the approximately 90 deferrals that have been granted.
Cash bonds pose the least problem for the City. Even though the original
amount may be outdated after a few years, the interest gained by the City
will have helped offset the effects of inflation. Since justification for
a deferral is based upon physical surroundings (i .e., no improvements on
block thus because of drainage, impossible to install improvements now)
rather than availability of private financing, a cash deposit should be no
more restrictive than installation of the improvements.
2. Liens: The major problem with liens is that placing a dollar amount in
the lien without an inflation factor leads the property owner to believe
that his obligation is limited to that amount. In fact, the property
owner is responsible for the installation of the improvements regardless
of the estimated amount of the work at the time of the deferral. This was
the opinion of the City Attorney in 1975.
Another probl em, more mi nor in nature, is that it takes court acti on to
foreclose on a lien should such a foreclosure be necessary. However, the
City Code provides for the inclusion of attorney's fees in the lien amount.
3. Surety Bonds: The largest problem with this form of guarantee is that the
bonds are valid only as long as the premiums are paid. The most cOlllllon
premium peri od is one year. Some surety cempani es send the Ci ty status
inquiries on the bonds each year to see whether they must be renewed.
Many of the companies do not.
It/- to
.
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11/5/85
The bond amounts do not include an inflation factor, therefore, the owner
may not be aware of his true total financial obligation.
Recommended Action
Section 12.24.070 of the City Code states that the City Engineer may grant a
deferral for a specified period and, from time to time, may extend the
deferral. Therefore, staff recommends the following:
1. Limit all deferrals of public improvements to three years, with the
stipulation that the deferral may be terminated upon written notice by the
Ci~ Engineer at any time within the three-year period.
2. Accept only cash bonds except incases of demonstrated hardshi p, when a
lien on real property may be accepted.
The lien agreement would be worded in such a way as to bind the owner to
the full cost of install i ng the improvements at the time the deferral is
called up and not the amount estimated at the time the deferral is granted.
3. Initiate a tickler system whereby staff will be alerted in sufficient time
so as to 1 et the appl; cant know hi s deferral is about to expi re and
further action ;s necessary on his part before the date of expiration.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
JWH: fp /PO 001
WPC 1678E
1'1-7
~;L4) -l --Z1~<4c. /1 Y I')
page 1
qiC'Iuru[{o[s, 9rf.'1J., Inc.
general Practice
RECEIVED
401 :J{ Street, Suite 103
Cnura 'Vista, Ca 92010
(619) 426-4546
PLANNING
6-4-92
Mayor Nader, City of Chula Vista
City of Chula Vista Council ~embers
274 4th Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Nader and City Council Members,
I am writing to you to request a waiver on the money
being requested by the City of Chula Vista to do street
repairs needed for the expansion of "H" street. I am
requesting that instead of placing borrowed money on an
account for future expenses, that the city put ,a lien on
my property based on extreme economical hardship on me.
I am including copies of some of my expenses that I
have incurred since this monetary nightmare began 3 years
ago. To help you understand my unexpected expenses, I am
breaking them down as follows:
1) Mr. Rich Clark, the 1st architect
$46,000 (including landscaping, soil studies
and extras) .
2) Mr. Hector Zuniga, the 2nd architect
$37,000
3) Mortgage payments on the property(to June 1992)
covering the time beyond the date the building was
supposed to have been inaugarated - $47,463.90
Total to date: $130,463.00
This amount is money spent and not even one new brick
has been laid for the new building. Please help.us finish
this beautiful medical building which will definttely enhance
that corner and needless to say increase my property tax
share paid to the county and the city.
)Lj//
page 2
continued. . .
We are having a very difficult time, economically
and emotionally with this building and would very much
appreciate your cooperation. We need help and we are
counting with our city officials to assist us.
Sincerely,
GT /bv 1
) ;1- / V
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item \ s
Meeting Date 6/09/92
ITEM TITLE:
Report regarding the request by Victor M. Uranga, M.D., and Oil
Turullols, M.D., for a lien agreement in lieu of posting a cash bond for
the deferral of public improvements at 374 H Street
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Pub~ wor~'p
REVmWED BY: City Manager if (4/5 Vote: Yes_No.xJ
The owners of the property at 374 H Street are demolishing an existing building on the site and
constructing a new medical office building. The City has required that they widen and install
public improvements along the frontage of H Street. The owners have applied for and were
granted a deferral of this requirement with a condition that they post a cash bond in the amount
of $20,500. The owners have requested that the City accept a lien on the property instead of
posting the cash bond. As directed by Council at the 5/12/92 meeting, staff is currently
revising the policy regarding the handling and approval of lien agreements. However, because
this request was already in process before the Council Referral, staff is submitting this request
to Council for consideration so as not to hold up the applicant.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and deny the applicant's request to
enter into a lien agreement in lieu of posting a cash bond.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Recently, Victor M. Uranga, M.D., and Oil Turullols, M.D., owners of the property at 374 H
Street submitted plans for construction of a new medical office building at that site. As the
plans were routed through the Engineering Division, the requirement to widen H Street to its
ultimate half-width was imposed, since the valuation of the on site work was estimated at
$271,834.
The owners have requested a deferral of this requirement. The deferral request was approved
by the City Engineer on the grounds that the installation would create a hazardous condition,
would be premature because of existing conditions surrounding the area, and that the best means
of installing them would be as an overall improvement project. One of the conditions of the
approval was that the owners post a cash bond in an amount equal to the costs of installing the
improvements, the survey, design and construction staking for the work, plus a 10%
contingency, totalling $20,500. A case history is attached for reference (See Exhibit A).
is-I
Page 2, Item I c:;
Meeting Date 6/09/92
The owners have submitted a request (attached) that the City accept a lien on the property instead
of posting a cash bond and stating the reason for this request as being financial hardship. The
owners have indicated that the design of the facility has cost them more than anticipated because
the first design did not take into account the dedication of 18 feet along "H" Street.
As indicated in Exhibit "A", the Street Standards were approved by Council on October 17, 1989
with public input obtained as early as June 1989. Their building plans were not in the Building
Permit process at the time the street standards were adopted and consequently their architect was
not notified. The first time the City received a submittal was on May 3, 1990 (Preliminary
Design Review). All requirements were outlined in a memorandum to the Planning Department
(dated May 7, 1990) which was given to the applicant as well as a letter sent Dated May 9, 1990.
It was at this time that staff indicated additional right-of-way was needed. The architect
contacted staff on June 5, 1990 and complained that he was unaware of the street Design
Standard changes. He also indicated that he had contacted the City prior to designing the
building and did not know that Design Review was required until January 1990. While it has
taken two years to get to this point, the timeframe does not appear to be a concern. The delay,
if any, appears to be due as much to the applicants timeframe as any other factor.
The applicants architect should have been aware of the new standards before designing the
building since the street standards had been approved well in advance of the first Design Review
submittal. Staff, although acknowledging additional costs, do not see that a financial hardship
was caused by the street improvement requirement. Further, from staffs viewpoint, when a
deferral is granted for a commercial project such as this, the goal is financial gain from the
venture and should be required to secure the future improvements with a cash bond.
Based on the facts herein stated and the intent of the attached Report to Council dated 11/05/85,
staff recommends that Dr. Uranga's and Dr. Turullols' request for a lien agreement be denied and
that they be required to submit a cash bond.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
RH
PD-113
t"5 "'2-
CASE HISTORY
1. Resolution 15349 adopting Street Standards 10/17/89
2. Preliminary Design Review Application 5/03/90
3. Memo to Planning Department 5/07/90
4. Letter to applicant 5/09/90
5. Second Preliminary Design Review Application * 3/29/91
6. Building Permit Application 9/04/91
7. Building Permit comments from Engineering 10/15/91
* Note:
A second Design Review Application was required in order to meet the
street sections approved by Council on 10/17/89 as Resolution 15349
and the General Plan. The first design did not meet these standards.
EXIHIBIT A
1~~3
..
DIPLOMA TE OF AMERICAN
BOARD OF SURGERY. FAG.S
TELEPHONE 279-5115
nE..';~;'lE:
..T.i": '( C~ r'HJi t. \"'"
J:' , _': ,..'-_ .:,. 1.... 11~ 11:.
_~J:",J.. '- ~'.'\''f .:;t:r"'-
!99Z APIb~g'~~~i4' CIRUJIA
VICTOR M. URANGA, M.D., INC.
7930 FROST STREET. SUITE 4Q4
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123
April 21, 1992
City Engineering Department
ATTN: Cliff Swanson
274 4th Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Lien on Property
374 "R" ST.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Cliff Swanson:
On behalf of my partner, Dr. Gil Turullols and his wife
Sylvia Turullols and myself, I am writing to you, to request
that the city place a lien on our property, to cover for the
future expenses of the street and sidewalk improvements.
We are in the process of obtaining financing for our office
building, and it would really be a hardship for us, to corne
up with a cash deposit for such improvements.
As long as these improvements will take place years from
now, Mr. Nader Mayor of Chula Vista, instructed Dr. Turullols
personally to pursue this route as a reasonable one, provided
this is approved by the City Council.
We request the benevolence of the city, as the process to
comply with zoning rules and changes implemented during our
planning process, has made us spend at least double of what
we had originally budgeted. We are about to start construction
as soon as financing is obtained, and would appreciate a
favorable ruling, as the city would be perfectly covered for
the future expenses.
Thank you very much in advance for your attention to this
matter.
Sylvia Turullols
\C5 -~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
cjL~
.
.
.
Item
. Meeti ng Date 11/5/85
ITEM TITLE:
Report on placement of liens on personal and/or other property
for guaranteeing future installation of ~~d improvements
Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~r-
City Manager (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No~J
SUBMImD BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At its August 13 meeting, Council requested that staff prepare a report
regarding the following:
1. Placement of liens against personal and/or other property as a guarantee
of future installation of improvements.
2. Past problems that the City has had with surety bonds as guarantee of
faithful performance.
The following is that report with recommendations included.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and that Council direct
staff to prepare Ci ty Code revi si ons to impl ement recol111lendations contai ned
herei n.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Backg round
Hi stori cally, when a developer of a parcel of 1 and appl i es for a deferral of
the construction of public improvements and is granted such, he is required to
post security to guarantee future performance of the deferred work. The
security generally is in the form of:
1. A cash bond submitted to the Finance Department.
2. A lien in favor of the City against the property being developed;
3. A bond issued by a company deal ing in securi ti es and whi ch must be
approved by the City Attorney;
According to the City Code, all these forms of guarantee are acceptable to the
City. The most desirable, from our standpoint, is the cash bond. It can most
readily be used for construction of the improvements should it become
necessary for the City to do the work.
1'3-'5
<
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 11/5/85
The findings required for the granting of a deferral by Section 12.24.070 of
the City Code make it obvious that the deferral is a temporary rel ief from
construction of improvements. This temporary nature woul d be rei nforced by
requiring a cash bond, since there would be 1 ittle incentive to pursue a
deferral as a means of avoiding the expense of doing the work.
If the applicant chooses not to post a cash bond, our next preference is a
lien against the property being developed. The lien is a solid form of
bonding as the City has a legal hold on real property and the lien is recorded
with the County Recorder.
Third on the list of guarantees is the surety bond which is valid only if the
premiums are paid, usually on an annual basis. A search of our records shows
that the City has not needed to coll ect on a surety bond for a deferral that
has been terminated.
The City has not to our knowledge accepted a 1 i en on anything other than the
real property that the owner is developing. The prospect of placing a lien
against someone's personal property is not appealing. It would be impractical
to accept title to personal belongings such as vehicles, etc. It would be
possible, however to place a lien against real property other than that being
developed if it is under the same ownership.
Bonding Problems
1. Cash Bonds: This form of guarantee is the least popular with developers
and owners because they prefer to not tie their cash up for an indefinite
period. A record-search reveals only five instances where a cash bond has
been submitted in the approximately 90 deferrals that have been granted.
Cash bonds pose the least problem for the City. Even though the original
amount may be outdated after a few years, the interest gained by the City
will have helped offset the effects of inflation. Since justification for
a deferral is based upon physical surroundings (i .e.. no improvements on
block thus because of drainage, impossible to install improvements now)
rather than availability of private financing, a cash deposit should be no
more restrictive than installation of the improvements.
2. Liens: The major problem with liens is that placing a dollar amount in
the lien without an inflation factor leads the property owner to believe
that his obligation is limited to that amount. In fact, the property
owner is responsible for the installation of the improvements regardless
of the estimated amount of the work at the time of the deferral. This was
the opinion of the City Attorney in 1975.
Another problem, more minor in nature, is that it takes court action to
foreclose on a lien should such a foreclosure be necessary. However, the
City Code provides for the inclusion of attorney's fees in the lien amount.
3. Surety Bonds: The largest problem with this form of guarantee is that the
bonds are valid only as long as the premiums are paid. The most common
premium peri od is one year. Some surety companies send the Ci ty status
inquiries on the bonds each year to see whether they must be renewed.
Many of the companies do not.
\s ~ l.
.
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11/5/8b
The bond amounts do not include an inflation factor, therefore, the owner
may not be aware of his true total financial obligation.
Recommended Action
Section 12.24.070 of the City Code states that the City Engineer may grant a
deferral for a specified period and, from time to time, may extend the
deferral. Therefore, staff recommends the following:
1. Limit all deferrals of public improvements to three years, with the
stipulation that the deferral may be terminated upon written notice by the
City Engineer at any time within the three-year period.
2. Accept only cash bonds except incases of demonstrated hardshi p, when a
lien on real property may be accepted.
The lien agreement would be worded in such a way as to bind the owner to
the full cost of installing the improvements at the time the deferral is
called up and not the amount estimated at the time the deferral is granted.
3. Initiate a tickler system whereby staff will be alerted in sufficient time
so as to let the applicant know his deferral is about to expire and
further action is necessary on his part before the date of expiration.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
JWH: fp/PDOOl
WPC l678E
\S~l,
~ Cof6--
RESOLUTION NO. 15349
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING A STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
POLICY
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan includes a Circulation
Element which prescribes a network of streets categorized by size
and function based on anticipated future traffic demands, and
WHEREAS, the street network shown in the Circulation
Element is designed to complement future land developments with
the intent that anticipated travel can be served adequately, and
WHEREAS, the Circulation Threshold Standards stipulate
generally that peak period traffic demands resulting from
proposed developments should not be allowed if the traffic
volumes produced on the development will cause excessive delays
and congested conditions, and
WHEREAS, the street design standards are now being
updated to specify the width, number of lanes and other design
features necessary to insure that there is sufficient capacity to
accommodate anticipated future travel.
the Ci ty
Standards
herein by
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
of Chula Vista does hereby adopt a Street Design
Policy, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated
reference as if set forth in full.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Director of
61/i1~
n, City Attorney
Jo
Pu
5820a
(
I'S-r
Resolution 15349
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chu1a Vista,
California, this 17th-day of October, 1989 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Counci 1 members
Council members
Counci1members
Counci 1 members
Ma1co1m,McCand1iss, Moore, Nader, Cox
None
None
None
~ ~J;~"
ATTEST:
Beverly . Authe1et, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authe1et, City Clerk of the City of Chu1a Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 15349 was duly passed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 17th day of
October, 1989.
Executed this 17th day of October, 1989.
~~ (JrIU~
ever A. ut e e ,Clty erk
\s-~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 10
Meeting Date 9/12/89
ITEM TITLE:
Resol uti on 15349 Adopti n9 a Street Desi gn Standards
Policy
Director of Public work~
City Manage'96~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No2-l
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The City's General Plan which was recently adopted includes a Circulation
Element which prescribes a network of streets categorized by size and function
based on anti ci pated future traffi c demands. The General Pl an is a dynami c
pl anni ng document intended to be the basi s for the orderly growth of Chul a
Vi sta. The street network shown in the Ci rcul ati on El ement was desi gned to
complement future land developments with the intent that future travel can be
served adequately. The desi gn of the street system took into account the
City's Circulation Element Standards which stipulates, generally that peak
period traffic demand, resulting from proposed developments, should not cause
excessive del ays and congested condi ti ons duri ng peak hours. The proposed
street desi gn standards pol i cy specifi es the wi dths, the number of 1 anes and
other desi gn features necessary to insure that there is suffi ci ent roadway
capacity to accommodate future travel. Staff presently relies upon the street
design criteria shown in the Subdivision Manual for the processing of
Subdivision Maps and other land development projects throughout the city. The
adopti on of these standards wi 11 update the standards to conform wi th the
newly adopted circulation element of the General Plan and allow flexibility in
the sizing of roadway facilities shown in the Circulation Element.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the attached Street Design
Standards Policy.
BOARDS COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The transportation objectives stated in the'Circulation Element of the General
Plan establishes policies and guidelines to be used in developing the various
components of the Circulation Plan. The recommended circulation system shown
in the General Pl an was desi gned to accommodate anti ci pated traffi c growth
resulting from future land use developments. The land use plan describes the
recommended combination of land uses for the City of Chula Vista and its areas
of i nfl uence.
\C;~)O
Page 2, Item 10
Meeting Date 9/12/89
The street desi gn standards used in the past were based on the Ci ty I s 1990
General Plan adopted in 1970. These street design standards which are part of
the Subdivision Manual do not reflect current standards nor the
recommendations shown in the General Plan. A comparison of the existing
street geometri c desi gn standards and the proposed street geometri c desi gn
standards are shown on the attached table. Adoption of the new standards will
ensure that the size of the new streets are capable of accommodating
anticipated traffic growth expected from future land developments. The
standards for streets shown on the attachment are applicable primarily to new
streets, but can be used as gui del i nes whenever improvements are made to the
existing streets system. The street design standards are categorized by
street function. The following is a description of the functions of different
types of streets in the order of their ability to accommodate traffic.
Expressways
Expressways are designed to move high volumes of traffic (70,000 vehicles
per day) to and from the freeway system and provide intercommunity
access. Expressways are similar to six-lane arterial streets except that
grade separations are provided at major street crossings. No parking is
allowed except for the emergency parking/bike lane on the shoulders. No
driveway access is allowed. Curb-to-curb width is 104 feet.
The expressway is a new standard for a six-lane facility that includes
grade separations at a high volume crossing and is designed to handle
traffic volumes up to 70,000 vehicles per day. The highest volume
capacity street shown in existing standards is a six-lane prime arterial
which is limited to 50,000 vehicles per day.
Six-Lane Prime Arterial
Six-Lane Prime Arterials are also designed to move high volumes of traffic
(50,000 vehicles per day) between major generators. Typically, major
i ntersecti ons shall be spaced at one-half mil e i nterva 1 s. Curb-to-curb
width is 104 feet. Access to and from prime arterials from minor streets
or abutting properties shall typically be restricted.
The six-lane prime arterial standard will remain basically unchanged.
Six-Lane Major/Four-Lane Major
Si x-Lane and Four-Lane f4ajor streets are desi gned to di stri bute
subregional traffic and are designed to carry up to 40,000/30,000 vehicles
per day, respectively. Signalized intersections will be spaced at
half-mi 1 e interval s. Medi an openi ngs may be permi tted wi th approval of
the City Engi neer. No di rect access from si ng1 e-family resi denti a1 homes
is allowed. Parking shall typically be allowed, however, at critical
locations it may be denied as deemed necessary by the City Engineer. Bike
lanes will require an additional 10 feet of right-of-way if parking is to
be retai ned. .
l S.., \
Page 3, Item 10
Meeting Date 9/12/89
The six-lane major street is a new standard similar to the six-lane prime
arterial and is used in commercial areas. It allows driveway access and
median openings in certain locations and therefore its capacity is less
than the six-lane prime arterial. The new six-lane major street is
designed to handle 40,000 vehicles per day, 10,000 vehicles per day less
than the existing six-lane prime arterial.
The four-lane major street standards remains basically unchanged.
However, current state of the art capacity data revealed that a four-lane
major street has greater capacity than the 25,000 vehicles per day
previ ously reported. The capacity rati ng for major streets have been
increased to 28,000 vehicles per day in commercial areas with frequent
drivel'/ays, and to 30,000 vehicles per day where there are infrequent
dri veways.
Formerly the Ci ty I s standards i ncl uded a four-l ane coll ector and a two-l ane
residenti a1 co11 ector. The new standards provi de for additional c1 asses of
co11 ector streets to better respond to sl i ght1y hi gher vol urnes of traffi c
without going to a full 64-foot-wide collector. The new classes provide for
less costly alternatives for intermediate volumes of traffic.
Class I Collector
Class I Collectors are designed to carry moderate traffic volumes and
channel traffic between local and major streets. Class I Collector
Streets have four 1 anes and a conti nuous two-way 1 eft turn 1 ane. No
direct access to single-family residential homes is allowed. However,
access to commercial and planned residential developments are allowed.
Parking is permitted, but at critical locations it may be denied as deemed
necessary by traffic conditions. Bike lanes will require an additional 10
feet of right-of-way if parking is to be retained. Curb-to-curb width is
52 feet.
The Class I collector is a new standard designed to replace the existing
four-l ane coll ector. It di ffers from the previ ous standard by provi di ng
an addi ti ona1 10 feet for a conti nuous 1 eft-turn 1 ane. The C1 ass I
Collector can serve 12,000 more vehicles per day than the replaced
four-lane collector. It has the traffic capacity to serve up to 22,000
vehicles per day.
Class II Collector
Class II Collector is a new standard and is intended to circulate
localized traffic and distribute moderate traffic volumes to other
arterials and collectors.
Unlike a typical two lane residential - collector street, a Class II
Collector street includes a median area reserved for left-turn movements.
Class II Collector is designed to serve up to 12,000 vehicles per day.
\S~l2.
Page 4, Item 10
Meeting Date 9/12/89
Class III Collector
This is a new designation for the residential collectors and refers to two
lane residential streets with a width of 40 feet measured from
curb-to-curb. The new designation identifies a special feature for
residential collector streets designed to accommodate up to 7,500 vehicles
per day. In this case, no driveways to single-family residential homes
are permitted. However, access to planned residential developments
serving common driveways are allowed. Residential collector streets,
where dri veways serving si ng1 e-family resi dentia1 homes are permi tted,
continue to have a capacity rating of 5,000 vehicles per day. However,
the mi nimum curve radi us has been increased from 200 feet to 450 feet.
This increase in curve radius provides greater comfort and improves
visibility at driveways and intersections.
Residential Street
Residential Streets circulate localized traffic. This two lane facility
is narrower than a residential collector street and therefore is designed
to serve up to 1,200 vehicles per day. Parking is typically allOl~ed,
however, at critical locations it may be denied as deemed necessary by the
City Engineer. Curb-to-curb width is 36 feet.
The residential street standard remains basically unchanged.
Industri a1 Road
Industrial Roads circulate commercial traffic. This two lane facility is
designed to serve up to 2,000 vehicles per day. Parking will be allowed,
however, at critical locations it may be denied as deemed necessary by the
City Engineer. Curb-to-curb width is 52 feet. It widens to allow trucks
to enter and leave driveways.
The industrial road standard remains basically unchanged.
SUMMARY
Copi es of the draft standard pol icy were sent to local land developers, 1 and
development engi neers and traffi c consultants for the purpose of sol i citi ng
their comments. In general, staff received a favorable endorsement of the
Street Design Standard policy. Where appropriate, suggested changes were
incorporated into the final draft.
Additionally, the Planning Department has reviewed the proposed Street Design
Standards Policy and concurs with its content. '
Adoption of the Street Design Standards Policy will enable staff to apply the
new street design standards to development projects, thereby assuring that the
evolving circulation system will provide adequate capacity to serve
anticipated travel demand associated with future land development projects.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
HR:ll b/nr/mad
WPC 4226E \S" 13
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 15
Meeting Date 10/17/89
ITEM TITLE: Resol uti on 15349 Adopti ng a Street Desi gn Standards
Policy
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~ ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No~)
BACKGROUND:
The City's General Plan which was recently adopted includes a Circulation
Element which prescribes a network of streets categorized by size and function
based on anti cipated future traffi c demands. The General Pl an is a dynami c
planning document intended to be the basis for the orderly growth of Chula
Vi sta. The street network shovm in the Ci rcul ati on El ement was desi gned to
complement future land developments with the intent that future travel can be
served adequately. The design of the street system took into account the
City's Circulation Element Standards which stipulates, generally that peak
period traffic demand, resulting from proposed developments, should not cause
excessi ve del ays and congested condi ti ons duri ng peak hours. The proposed
street desi gn standards pol icy specifi es the wi dths, the number of 1 anes and
other desi gn features necessary to insure that there is suffi ci ent roadway
capacity to accommodate future travel. Staff presently relies upon the street
design criteria shown in the Subdivision Manual for the processing of
Subdivision Maps and other land development projects throughout the city. The
adopti on of these standards wi 11 update the standards to conform wi th the
newly adopted circulation element of the General Plan and allow flexibility in
the sizing of roadway facilities shown in the Circulation Element.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the attached Street Design
Standards Policy.
BOARDS COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The transportation objectives stated in the Circulation Element of the General
Plan establishes policies and guidelines to be used in developing the various
components of the Circulation Plan. The recommended circulation system shown
in the General Pl an was desi gned to accommodate anti ci pated traffi c growth
resulting from future land use developments. The land use plan describes the
recommended combination of land uses for the City of Chula Vista and its areas
of i nfl uence.
,s-ILf
Page 2, Item 15
Meeting Datelu/II/B9
The street desi gn standards used in the past were based on the City I s 1990
General Plan adopted in 1970. These street design standards which are part of
the Subdivision Manual do not reflect current standards nor the
recommendati ons shown in the General Pl an. A compari son of the exi sti ng
street geometri c desi gn standards and the proposed street geometri c desi gn
standards are shown on the attached table. Adoption of the new standards will
ensure that the size of the new streets are capable of accommodating
anticipated traffic growth expected from future land developments. The
standards for streets shown on the attachment are applicable primarily to new
streets, but can be used as guidelines whenever improvements are made to the
existing streets system. The street design standards are categorized by
street function. The following is a description of the functions of different
types of streets in the order of their ability to accommodate traffic.
Expressways
Expressways are designed to move high volumes of traffic (70,000 vehicles
per day) to and from the freeway system and provide intercommunity
access. Expressways are similar to six-lane arterial streets except that
grade separations are provided at major street crossings. No parking is
allowed except for the emergency parking/bike lane on the shoulders. No
driveway access is allowed. Curb-to-curb width is 104 feet.
The expressway is a new standard for a six-lane facility that includes
grade separations at a high volume crossing and is designed to handle
traffic volumes up to 70,000 vehicles per day. The highest volume
capacity street shown in existing standards is a six-lane prime arterial
which is limited to 50,000 vehicles per day.
Six-Lane Prime Arterial
Six-Lane Prime Arterials are also designed to move high volumes of traffic
(50,000 vehicles per day) between major generators. Typically, major
i ntersecti ons shall be spaced at one-half mi 1 e interval s. Curb-to-curb
width is 104 feet. Access to and from prime arterials from minor streets
or abutting properties shall typically be restricted.
The six-lane prime arterial standard will remain basically unchanged.
Six-Lane Major/Four-Lane Major
Si x-Lane and Four-Lane r~ajor streets are desi gned to di stri bute
subregional traffic and are designed to carry up to 40,000/30,000 vehicles
per day, respectively. Signalized intersections will be spaced at
half-mil e interval s. Medi an openi ngs may be permi tted with approval of
the City Engi neer. No di rect access from si ngl e-fami ly resi denti al homes
is allowed. Parking shall typically be allowed, however, at critical
locations it may be denied as deemed necessary by the City Engineer. Bike
lanes will require an additional 10 feet of right-of-way if parking is to
be retained.
\"5"15
Page 3, Item 15
Meeting DatelO/17/89
The six-lane major street is a new standard similar to the six-lane prime
arterial and is used in c0l1ll1ercia1 areas. It allows driveway access and
medi an openi ngs in certai n 1 ocati ons and therefore its capaci ty is 1 ess
than the six-lane prime arterial. The new six-lane major street is
designed to handle 40,000 vehicles per day, 10,000 vehicles per day less
than the existing six-lane prime arterial.
The four-l ane major street standards remains basi cally unchanged.
However, current state of the art capacity data revealed that a four-lane
major street has greater capacity than the 25,000 vehicles per day
previously reported. The capacity rating for major streets have been
increased to 28,000 vehicles per day in commercial areas with frequent
dri veways, and to 30,000 vehi c1 es per day where there are infrequent
driveways.
Collector Streets
Formerly the City I S standards i nc1 uded a four-l ane coll ector and a two-l ane
residential collector. The new standards provide for additional classes of
co11 ector streets to better respond to sl i ght1y hi gher vol urnes of traffi c
without going to a full 64-foot-wide collector. The new classes provide for
less costly alternatives for intermediate volumes of traffic.
Class I Collector
Class I Collectors are designed to carry moderate traffic volumes and
channel traffic between local and major streets. Class I Collector
Streets have four 1 anes and a conti nuous two-way 1 eft turn 1 ane. 'Jo
direct access to single-family residential homes is allowed. However,
access to commerci al and p1 anned resi denti al developments are all owed.
Parking is permitted, but at critical locations it may be denied as deemed
necessary by traffic conditions. Bike lanes will require an additional 10
feet of right-of-way if parking is to be retained. Curb-to-curb width is
52 feet.
The Class I collector is a new standard designed to replace the existing
four-l ane co11 ector. It differs from the previ ous standard by provi di ng
an additi onal 10 feet for a continuous 1 eft-turn 1 ane. The Cl ass I
Collector can serve 12,000 more vehicles per day than the replaced
four-lane collector. It has the traffic capacity to serve up to 22,000
vehicles per day.
Class II Collector
Class II Collector is a new standard and
localized traffic and distribute moderate
arterials and collectors.
is intended to circulate
traffic volumes to other
Unlike a typical two lane residential collector street, a Class II
Collector street includes a median area reserved for left-turn movements.
Class II Collector is designed to serve up to 12,000 vehicles per day.
\S"'I~
Page 4, Item 15
Meeting DatelU/11/89
Class III Collector
This is a new designation for the residential collectors and refers to two
1 ane resi denti al streets wi th a wi dth of 40 feet measured from
curb-to-curb. The new designation identifies a special feature for
residential collector streets designed to accommodate up to 7,500 vehicles
per day. In this case, no driveways to single-family residential homes
are permitted. However, access to planned residential developments
serving common driveways are allowed. Residential collector streets,
where driveways serving single-family residential homes are permitted,
continue to have a capacity rating of 5,000 vehicles per day. However,
the mi nimum curve radi us has been increased from 200 feet to 450 feet.
This increase in curve radius provides greater comfort and improves
visibility at driveways and intersections.
Residential Street
Resi denti al Streets ci rcul ate local i zed traffi c. Thi s two 1 ane faci 1 ity
is narrower than a residential collector street and therefore is designed
to serve up to 1,200 vehicles per day. Parking is typically allowed,
however, at critical locations it may be denied as deemed necessary by the
City Engineer. Curb-to-curb width is 36 feet.
The residential street standard remains basically unchanged.
Industri al Road
Industrial Roads circulate commercial traffic. This two lane facility is
designed to serve up to 2,000 vehicles per day. Parking will be allowed,
however, at critical locations it may be denied as deemed necessary by the
City Engineer. Curb-to-curb width is 52 feet. It widens to allow trucks
to enter and leave driveways.
The industrial road standard remains basically unchanged.
SUIIMARY
Staff had a workshop with local land developers, land development engineers
and traffic consultants regarding Street Design Standards Policy. In general,
staff received a favorable endorsement of the Street Design Standard policy.
Where appropriate, suggested changes were incorporated into the final draft.
Additionally, the Planning Department has reviewed the proposed Street Design
Standards Policy and concurs with its content.
Adoption of the Street Design Standards Policy will enable staff to apply the
new street design standards to development projects, thereby assuring that the
evol vi ng ci rcul ati on system wi 11 provi de adequate capacity to serve
anticipated travel demand associated with future land development projects.
\<;"11
Page 5, Item 15
Meeting DatelO/17/89
According to State law, tentative maps which are submitted after the publ ic
has been notified of proposed changes in standards can be required to conform
to the new standards once they are adopted. Generally, staff has included in
the conditions of approval of the affected tentative maps the requirements
that they comply with the new standards once they are adopted. There have
been situations where it was not deemed practical to require a tentative map
to fully conform to the new standards. In these situations, the conditions of
approval have indicated where exceptions to the new standards would be allowed.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
HR:llb/nr/mad
WPC 4226E
,
ttA/J~(n~d.
by the City CC~!ncil of
Chula Vista, California
Dated ;().-/7. 29
~
\ S-I g'
~
o
... '" 0 0 0 . . .. .. l'l ;
~ 0 ~ - ... ... ... , , , , .
a. . .. . .. . . ... ... ... ... ...
c ... - - . . . . . . . "
. a. . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
... 0 ':"5: a.., 0 0 0 0 .
" ~ ., =., It ... ... ... .. .
... ... '-"-100 ... ... 0 '" '" <
. ... ~ ftl -= ,... ... 0 0 . . " .
... . lD lIlI It., 0 0 ... ~ ~ ... ..
... It,...*=_ 0 0 ... ... 0 0 a
'" .. ., III n 0 ... ... 0 " " 0
0 " 'C.-,,< .. ... ... 0 0
. .. 0 0 ... 0 0 ... " " ..
a. ~ ......a, 0 0 ... 0 .. ... "
000 0 .. 0 " " ~ ..
0 o a. 0 ... 0 " 0 0
.. 0 . 0 " . 0 ;!.
. . , ... ..
. . .
...
N
r"
. . .. . 0
N N N ~ .
.
. 0
~
f--.
... N ~ r"
N ... ~ .. ~ .. ...
.. " .. .. .. ...
.. -...
.. .. .. .. .. .. .....
.. .. .. .. .. .. -~
-
... ... IU
....
.. .. .. .. 0; 0; a. a.
......
" ~ ~ ~ ~ ....
.. ~
.. " " " c- "
.. ~ ;! ;! ...
.. ... .. r n,...n
~ ... . '" '" .. .. '" .. '" _ co C
~ 0; ~ .. .. .. ': ~ lil ': lil a..".,
.. .. .. ..... ...
'" '" '" '" '" ... ,
.. .. .. 0 C- o
. "'''0
... N ... ~ ~ -:.:"0 ell
.. ~ .. .. ~ ~ IS e lIlI
"'....
a...
~
-
N ... N ... ... ... '"
.. .. 0 .. ~ ~ ...
~ ~ ~ ~ .. .. ~
.. ..
, , ,
N ... ~ , , '"
.. .. .. N N .
~ ~ ~ .. .. a.
.. .. ...
~ ~ c
.
-
... ,"'"
... ... " .
.. ~ N .. ;: - . .
.. .. .. .. .. a..
.
r'"
. 0
~ .
N N N N N . . .. .. .. .
. 0
~
... N '" ... . ~ - '....
N ... ~ - N N l'l .. .. .. .. jl:J e
.. " .. v. .. .. .. .. .. ....
~ .. .. -...
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....
.. .. .. .. .. .. 0 .. .. .. .. -~
a
..
.. r'"
... 0 ... ... ... ~. .
... ... a. 0.
.. .. .. .. .. .. ~ .. .. .. .. .. ~.
...
" ,
"
...
n ... ... ... r 0"0
.... l:: 0 C
~ ... . . '" ~ .. .. .. .. .. c.., I.,
N .. .. .. N . ... .. . . . .... ..
... ... ,
'"
0
...
..
'" . ~"..
"'... 0
... N ... ... ... . '" . ~ ~ .. 0 .
.. ~ .. .. .. ~ , ~ '" .. :::g,o;'
'"
~ ,
. N . . ... " ... ... ... ... ''''
~ .. ~ '" .. ... ... N .. Ii
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ': .. .. .. ..
.. ': .. ..
. . .
. ... , ,
'" :; N N N
~ .. .. '"
.. 0 .. 0
. .. .. 0 '0
- . - I.
'n :r
... ... - ... ~ h ;.;
;; ~ N N .. '" ;; ;; ~ 0 x
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ,0.
- -
N ...
- -
.
.
.... "'''0:-
.. ".
lIIl' .....,
< O'.
... ,
0......
Coo
. c c
:;? .,
., ~ <
~~~
. 0 !i
::t iitt
. . 0.
Q,~/D
......
o .
.~~
-t,=
..z.
"'...
.~~
. "
...... 0
a..a
~a-cl
.....
... .
.0..
...~
00'"
00 g
::::~ .,
.. .
~~ci
0....
., g r;
~ ~
0....
a.o
o~
...
. .
....
"
<
...
o
.
,..
'.
...
.
..
...
~
"
..
.
~
a.
.
"
a.
. a
'"
..
..
'"
"...
....
"'0
l'l'"
::10
....
....
""
......
""
"'..
...
""
..."
~..
.."
"0
'"
....
"'"
o
..
..
..
l'l
o
o
o
~
0.
...
..
...
o
,
.
..
~
...
.
<
o
...
o
~
.
.
"
<
...
o
.
...
.
.
.
.
..
~.
.
...
.
n
..
o
"
..
..
"
o
o
.
.
0.
"
..
.
,
0.
.
"
a.
,.
\5-10
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CALIFORNIA
STREET DESIGN
STANDARDS POLICY
t C;"'I-O
STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
These are mlnlmum standards prepared by the Engineering Division, Public Works
Department, for the information and guidance of both City staff and those
professionals in the private design sector responsible for the design of the
Ci ty I s streets.
The street design standards establish uniform policies and procedures to carry
out the City I S General P1 an, and Ci rcu1 ati on E1 ement goal s. It is neither
intended as, nor does it establish, a legal safety standard for these
functions.
These standards are app1 icab1 e primarily to areas wi thout unusual
problems (hillsides) and in developed areas of the City where
buildings do not create obstacles in obtaining needed right-of-way.
terrain areas (hillside).
terrain
existing
In rough
In rough terrain areas (hillside) and in developed areas of the City where
existing buildings create obstacles, flexibility of the Street Design
Standards may be appropriate. In these cases, deviations may be approved only
if it can be demonstrated by a registered civil engineer that the City
standards are not achievable. The deviation must conform with common
engineering practice and standards in consideration of public safety.
The widths and configurations of streets shown in this manual are related to
the estimated future average daily traffic (ADT) for level of service (LOS)
IICII.
Streets must be designed as required for the various functional
classifications. Whenever expected ADT is greater than the approximate
maximum ADT stated, the street shall be designed to a higher satisfactory
functional classification as shown on the attached table.
In cases where a more preci se di screti onary acti on has been taken by Di rector
of Planning with regard to landscaping and slopes, that action shall prevail
over the standards herein.
10/12/89
-1-
\ S~)...\
. 1. EXPRESS\,A Y
Design ADT
. Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Right-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
70,000
60 mph
104' (includes a 16' raised median)
128'
6%
1,500' with 5% superelevation to 2,500' with
no superelevation
Expressways are desi gned to move hi gh vol umes of traffi c between major
generators and to di stri bute traffi c to and from the freeway system and
provide intercommunity access.
Major crossings shall be spaced no less than one mile intervals except
upon approval of the City Engineer. These major crossings shall be
controlled by grade separated urban interchanges. Also, at locations
where the expressway facility crosses regional freeways, special
interchange geometric configurations may be required to carry the high
volumes anticipated on the expressway facility. A raised median is
. requi red to separate the two di recti ons of travel and to improve the
~ visual appearance of the expressway corridor. No median openings shall be
pemitted.
Access to and from the expressway from minor streets or abutting
properties shall typically be restricted. Limited street or driveway
access will only be considered by the City Engineer if all other feasible
means of obtaining alternate access have been exhausted. Expressways
shall provide landscaped buffer areas. Pedestrian crossing demand should
be well planned, focused and controlled to allow the periOdic placement of
mid-block overpasses to link major generators and attractors where
appropriate. All non-motorized travel and parking on this facil ity shall
be prohibited with the exception of emergency parking.
There are three primary design features which contribute to higher roadway
capacity on the expressway facility. These capacity increasing features
include one mile spacing of major crossing intersections, grade separated
urban interchanges and restricted access.
t t
20'
128'
12'
44'
s' a'
44'
12'
20'
( LANJDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT OR
OPEN SPACE
LANDSCAPED -S
BUFFER ARE A
EASEMENT OR
OPE N SPAC E
t*)6'II.1AX
.. 20/0.
~ - --=-- u..
/ , 2" MAX
EMERGENCY
PARKING
64'
64'
5'
5'
2%
I
2%2%
--
-, . r~
J
<L
2%
-
2% I
- --=.. ---
8'
12'
12'
12'
12'
12' 12'
2" MAX
8' EMERGENCY
PARKING
EXPRE SSWAY
* Landscaped slopes greater than 5: 1 may be acceptable as determi ned by the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-2-
\S/2.2..
\<
2. SIX-LANE PRIME ARTERIAL
50,000
55 mph
104' (includes a 16' median)
128'
6%
1,150' with 5% superelevation to 2,000' with
no superelevation
The prime arterials are designed to move traffic between major
generators. Typically, intersections shall be spaced no closer than 660
feet unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer and signalized
intersections shall be spaced at one-quarter mile intervals. A raised
median is required to separate the two directions of travel and to improve
the visual appearance of the arterial corridor. No median openings shall
be permitted except at major intersections.
Design ADT
Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Right-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
Access to and from prime arterials from minor streets or abutting
properties shall typically be restricted. No direct access from
'- single-family residential homes is allowed. Should a property have
frontage only on the prime arterial facility, driveway or minor street
access shall be permitted at locations deemed appropriate by the City
Engineer. These access points shall be limited to right turns in and
right turns out only. Also, these access points shall require additional
roadway wi dth to provi de for accel erati on and decel erati on 1 anes. Prime
arterials shall also provide landscaped buffer areas. Pedestrian crossing
demand should be well planned, focused and controlled to allow for
crossings at major signalized intersections as well as the periodic
placement of mid-block overpasses to link major generators and attractors
where appropriate. Parking on this facility shall be prohibited with the
exception of emergency parking. Bike lanes shall be provided on these
prime arterial facilities according to the routes identified in the
bi cycl e pl an.
Widen all approaches to intersections as per Exhibit "A" in order to
provide for additional lanes, as per Exhibit "B."
It
It
20'
12B'
20'
LANDSCAPED BUFFER
AREA EASEMENT 12'
OR OPEN SPACE
......,..5:1 MAX 5' 7'
64'
64'
-
LANDSCAPED
12' S BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT OR
, OPEN SPACE
~ ~1AX
- - 2:IM~""""""'"
B' EMERGENCY
PARKING/ BIKE
44'
s' 8'
44'
20/0
- ---~ ~
20/0
2%2%
_-I~
20/0
..-/
_ 2:1 MAX
EMERGENCY 8'
PARKING/ BIKE
It.
12' 12'
12' 12'
12' 12'
6-LANE PRIME
*
Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-3-
)c;~23
. 3. SIX-LANE MAJOR
Design ADT
Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Right-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
40,000
45 mph
104' (includes a 16' median)
12B'
7'1,
1,100' with no supere1evation
'-
Major streets are primarily designed to distribute localized trips.
Typically, intersections shall be spaced no closer than 660 feet unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer and signalized intersections shall
be spaced at one-quarter mil e interval s. A rai sed medi an is requi red to
separate the two directions of travel and to improve the visual appearance
of the major corridor. One mid-block median opening may be permitted with
approval of the City Engineer. Such intersection and any resulting
signals shall not negatively impact signal progression and traffic flow on
major streets. This opening shall typically be spaced at the mid-point
between the major intersections (approx. 660'). The specific location of
these median openings shall be determined by the City Engineer.
Access to and from six-lane major streets from abutting properties
(commercial) shall typically be controlled but not restricted. No direct
access from single-family residential homes is allowed. Full access
medi an openi ngs wi 11 be permi tted on these facil iti es only at 1 ocati ons
specified by the City Engineer and under conditions estab1 ished by the
city. Parking on these facilities shall typically be allowed. However,
parking at critical locations may be denied as deemed appropriate by the
Ci ty Engi neer. If a bi ke 1 ane is to be provi ded in conformance with the
Bicycle Element on this six-lane major facility and parking is to be
retained, an additional 10 feet of right-of-way will be required to allow
for a lO-foot widening of the roadway cross section. Six-lane major
arterials shall also be provided landscaped buffer areas. Pedestrian
crossing demand should be well planned, focused and controlled to direct
pedestrians to designated crossing points at signalized intersections.
Widen all approaches to intersections as per Exhibit "A" in order to
provide for additional lanes, as per Exhibit "c" and "D."
~ t
20'
12S'
20'
12'
64'
44'
64'
20/0 20/0 20/0 2%
~I~ I
It.
PARKING
2:1 MAX s' 12' 12' 12' 12' 12'
LANDSCAPED
c- SUFFER AREA
121 -.J EASEMENT
s' I
~ ~i~,'/X
~ ---~ .
8' 8'
44'
PARKING
12' 8'
6-LANE MAJOR
* Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined hy the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-4-
IS--2lf
It It
s' ...
112'/116' S'
.. .. )
10i'12' 39' 7' 7' 39' 10'/12'
2:! MAX .. ...
....... I 1 S.s'/s' S,S'/s' r-
20/0 2% 2% 2% 2% 20/0
~:ri;s - I -
NO It. NO
LANDSCAPED PARKING PARKING
BUFFER AREA 17' II' ,,' 14' II' ,,' 17'
EASEMENT
""6' RIGHT-OF- WAY DUE
TO S' SIDEWALK IN
COMMERCIAL AREA
6-LANE MAJOR
(DEVELOPED AREA W/O I-S05)
'-
** Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the
Director of Planning.
4. FOUR-LANE r1AJOR
104'
7'1,
1,150' with 5%
superelevation
to 2,000 with
no
superelevation
Major streets are primarily designed to distribute localized trips.
Typi cally, i ntersecti ons shall be spaced no closer than 660 feet un1 ess
otherwise approved by the City Engineer and signalized intersections shall
be spaced no closer than one-,quarter mile intervals. A raised median is
required to separate the two directions of travel and to improve the
visual appearance of the arterial corridor. One mid-block median opening
may be permitted only with approval of the Ci ty Engi neer. Such
intersection and any resulting signals shall not negatively impact signal
progression and traffic flow on major streets. This opening shall
typically be spaced at the mid-point between the major intersections
(approx. 660'). The specific location of these median openings shall be
determined by the City Engineer.
Design ADT
Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Ri ght-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
Commercial Area
(frequent driveways)
28,000
45 mph
80' (includes a
16' median)
Low Density Area
104'
7'1,
1,100' with no
superel evati on
30,000
55 mph
80' (includes a
16' median)
(10/11/89)
-5-
Is"~s
Access to and from four-lane major streets from abutting properties shall
typically be controlled but not restricted. No direct access from
single-family residential homes is allowed. In developed area of the City
direct access from single-family homes could be allowed with approval of
City Engineer. Full access median openings will be permitted with
approval of the City Engineer on these facilities only at locations
specified by the City Engineer and under conditions established by the
city. Parking on these facil ities shall typically be allowed. However,
parking at .critical locations may be denied as deemed appropriate by the
City Engineer. If a bike lane is to be provided in conformance with the
Bicycle Element on this four-lane major facility and parking is to be
retained, an additional 10 feet of right-of-way will be required to allow
for a 10-foot widening of the roadway cross section. Four-lane majors
shall also provide landscaped buffer areas. Pedestrian crossing demand
should be well planned, focused and controlled to direct pedestrians to
designated crossing points at signalized intersections.
"_ Widen all approaches to intersections as per Exhibit "A" in order to
provide for additional lanes, as per Exhibit "E."
It
....
100'/104'
It
20'
20'
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT
)"'*5:1 MAX
.---...
I -
.-
2:1 MAX
PARKING
10'/12''''
"
10'/12'
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT
",.
"5;1 MA:~
-'
2:1 MAX)
-1
2%
-
32'
.,..
5.5'/ B'
8' 81
32'
2%
2% .r&
1<-
5.5/B' r-
20/0 20/0
- .
tt.
I. 12' I, 12' I~ PARKING
B'
12'
12'
"'104' RIGHT-OF-WAY DUE
TO B' SIDEWALK IN
COMMERCIAL AREA
4- LANE MAJOR
** Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-6-
Is..Jjo
5. CLASS I COLLECTOR STREETS
22,000
45 mph
74'
94'
8%
700' with 5% supere1evation to 1100' with no
supere1evation
Class I collector streets serve primarily to circulate localized traffic
and to distribute traffic to and from arterials and major streets. Class
I collectors are designed to accolll11odate four lanes of traffic, however,
they carry lower traffic volumes at slower speeds than major arterials,
and they have a continuous left turn lane separating the two directions of
traffic flow. Typically, intersections shall be spaced no closer than 660
feet unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer and signalized
intersections shall be spaced at one-quarter mile intervals.
Design ADT
Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Ri ght-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
Access to and from this Class I collector street from abutting properties
shall typically be controlled but not restricted. No direct access from
single-family residential homes is allowed. In developed area of the City
di rect access from sing1 e-fami 1y homes cou1 d be all owed wi th approval of
City Engineer. Parking on this faCility shall typically be allowed.
However, parking at critical locations may be denied as deemed appropriate
by the City Engineer. If a bike lane .is to be provided in conformance
with the Bicycle Element on this Class I facility and parking is to be
retained, an additional 10 feet of right-of-way will be required to allow
for a 10-foot widening of the roadway cross section.
In special cases if no abutting property access is allowed, the strip's
median, with approval of City Engineer, can be reduced to 4 feet.
With approval of City Engineer, in developed areas, with less than 74 feet
curb to curb (64') no widening is required except at approaches to
intersections as per Exhibit "A". Approaches shall be designed as per
Exhi bit "F." Left turn into an i ntersecti on dri veway will be prohibited
by a raised median. Further modifications may be allowed to this standard
as a result of the existing and projected traffic volumes.
It
s'
*SS'/94'
It
S'
LANDSCAPED ~
SUFFE R AREA
EASEMENT 4.5'
10'
iO 34'/37'
*"34 '/37'
10'
SLANDSCAPED
SUFFER AREA
4.5' EASEMENT
5.5'
5.5' .
S"'I
5:1~~
(2:1 MAX --- SGJ
y/ PARKING s'
20/0
I
I
It.
I
~
4'10'
2 o~o
I
2%
w:
PARKING
12' 8'
"'"THE MEDIAN
WIDTH MAY SE REDUCED
TO 4' WITH THE APPROVAL
OF THE CITY ENGINEER
.......
5:1 MAX --
/
I
12'
12'
12'
CLASS I COLLECTOR
** Landscaped slopes greater than 5: 1 may be acceptable as determi ned by the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-7-
1t;;').1
6. CLASS II COLLECTOR STREETS
Design ADT
Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Ri ght-of-way
Maxi mum grade
Minimum curve radius
12,000
30 mph
52'
72'
10% residential zone
300' with 4% superelevation to 450' with no
supere1evation
Class II collector streets with two-way center turn lanes serve primarily
to circulate localized traffic and to distribute traffic to and from
arteri a1 s, major streets and C1 ass I coll ectors. C1 ass I I coll ectors are
designed to accommodate two lanes of traffic, however, they carry lower
traffic volumes at slower speeds than Class I collector streets. This
type of facility provides access to properties and circulation to
resi denti al nei ghborhoods. Minimum di stance between center1 ine of
i ntersecti ons shall be 250 feet. Devi ati on from thi s mi nimum di stance
requirement may be approved by the City Engineer only if it can be
demonstrated that 1 eft turn demands do not create an adverse traffic
condition.
Access to and from this Class II collector street from abutting properties
shall be permitted at locations approved by the City Engineer. Parking on
thi s facil ity shall typi cally be all owed. However, parki ng at critical
locations may be denied as deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. If a
bi ke 1 ane is to be provi ded in conformance wi th the Bi cycl e El ement on
this Class II facility and parking is to be retained, an additional 10
feet of ri ght-of-way will be requi red to all ow for a 10-foot wi deni ng of
the roadway cross section.
With approval of City Engineer, in developed areas, no widening is
required except at approaches to intersections as per Exhibit "A".
Approaches shall be designed as per Exhibit "G." Further modifications
may be allowed to this standard as a result of the existing and projected
traffic volumes.
It
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT
72'
It
5.5'
10'
26'
26'
LANOSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
10' 5.5' EASEMENT
~5:1 MAX
4.5'
5.51
5.5'
4.5' -<
"5:1~)
---.!"-- /
PARKING ~ MAX
/
2%
-
=--
2%
2%
-
PARKING
It.
e'
13'
10'
13'
e'
CLASS II COLLECTOR
* Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-8-
l~ --22
7. CLASS III COLLECTOR STREETS
Design ADT
7,500 No driveway access to single-family
homes. 5,000 with driveway access to single
family homes
30 mph
40'
60'
12%
300' \~ith 4% superelevation to 450' with no
superelevation. Superelevation is only
allowed where there are no residential
dri veways taki ng access and is approved by
the City Engineer.
Class III collector streets also circulate localized traffic as well as
di stri bute traffi c to and from arteri a 1 s and other coll ectors to access
residential areas. Class III collector streets accommodate low volume
levels and the use of this facility as a carrier of through traffic should
be discouraged by its design. No driveways to single-family residential
homes are permi tted except in areas where the traffi c vol ume does not
exceed 5,000 vehicles per day. However, access to common driveways
serving planned residential developments are allowed. ~linil!lum distance
between centerl i ne of i ntersecti ons shall be 250 feet. Devi ati on from
thi s mi nimum di stance requi rement may be approved by the Ci ty Engi neer
only if it can be demonstrated that 1 eft turn demands do not create an
adverse traffic condition.
Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Ri ght-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
Parking on this facility shall typically be allowed. However, parking at
critical locations may be denied as deemed appropriate by the City
Engineer. If a bike lane is to be provided on this Class III facility and
parking is to be retained, an additional 10 feet of right-of-way will be
required to allO\~ for a 10-foot widening of the roadway cross section.
It
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT
60-'
It
5.5'
5.5'
20'
20'
5.5'
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT
>--~ I 2%
~~~
C5:1 r:;:;./
4.5'
4.5'
/'
~ 1...-1'
~2:1 MAX)
~5:1 MA~/
2%
20/0
I
I
11.
CLASS "' COLLECTOR
* Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by th~ .
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-9-
\'<S ~ :t-9
8. RESIDENTIAL STREET
Design ADT
Minimum vertical design speed _
Curb-to-curb
Ri ght-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
1,200
25 mph
36' (34' single loaded)
56' (50' single loaded)
15%
200' with no supere1evation
1. Grade segments in excess of 12% shall not exceed 300 feet in length.
Average grade over any 1,000 foot segment shall not exceed 10%.
2. Port1 and cement concrete pavement shall be requi red for grades in
excess of 12%.
3. Mi nimum di stance between center1 i ne of i ntersecti ons shall be 150
feet. Deviation from this minimum distance requirement may be
approved by the City Engineer only if it can be demonstrated that
left turn demands do not create an adverse traffic condition.
4. Cul-de-sacs wi th a maximum 1 ength of 500 feet may have a mi nimum
curve radius of 100 feet and a maximum central ang1 e of 45 degrees.
Minimum tangent length between horizontal curves with 100 feet radius
shall be 150 feet.
It
It
50'
LANOSCAPED BUFFER
AREA EASEMENT
5.5' .5.5'
20'
14'
5.5' 5.5'
LANDSCAPEO BUFFER
AREA EASEMENT
'-....... .
~ 2%
(2:1 :A/_~
~ 5:1 MAX/ .
4.5'
2%
0.5' ~
2% 2% I .--<'
_ -~~2:1 MAX)
~5:1 MAX ~
RESI DE NTI AL
SINGLE LOADED
It
It
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASE ME NT
56'
~~20!.
C 2:1 MA?/T '::p
5--"'5:1 MAX""-
5.5'
IS'
IS'
5.5'
5.5'
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT
4.5'
4.5'
/'
2% 1,4
-_~2:1 MAX,
- C.......... I
~ '-...... /
5:1 MAX.......... '<
2%
2%
-
I
l
RESIDENTIAL
* Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-10-
\S - 3D
9. INDUSTRIAL ROAD
Design ADT
Minimum design speed
Curb-to-curb
Right-of-way
Maximum grade
Minimum curve radius
2,000
30 mph
52'
72'
7'1,
450' with no superelevation
Minimum distance between centerl ine of intersections shall be 300 feet
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
It
't:ANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
EASEMENT
72'
It
5.5' 10'
5.5'
26'
26'
LANDSCAPED
BUFFER AREA
10' 5.5' EASEMENT
5.5'
4.5'
20lc
---.e....
2%
20/0
20/0
-
5: I MAX4
/ .
~x
,
I
t
INDUSTRIAL ROAD
* Landscaped slopes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the
Director of Planning.
(10/11/89)
-11-
)5- 3 \
ADDITIONAL DESIGN CRITERIA
1. No transition shall be allowed on horizontal curves except upon approval
of the City Engineer.
2. Horizontal curves shall be IJsed for all horizontal changes of centerline
direction.
Vertical curves shall be used when change in grade exceeds 1% in sags and
0.5% on crests.
3. The angle between centerlines of intersecting streets shall be as nearly
right angles as possible, but in no case less than 70 degrees or greater
than 110 degrees. Streets shall intersect only in tangent sections. The
tangent length shall extend a minimum of 100 feet and maximum grade of 6%
from the point of curb return (PCR) on each leg of the intersection except
as approved by the City Engjneer. The tangent length of 100 feet is not
required for residential streets intersecting another residential or
collector streets if an adequate intersection sight distance is provided.
4. Intersection sight distance shall meet CalTrans Highway Design Manual.
5. A minimum of one on-street parking space (20 feet) shall be provided along
the frontage of each residential lot. However, in cases where the minimum
on-street parking space requirement cannot be met, credit may be given for
surplus on-street parking in front of nearby lots upon approval of the
City Engineer. With approval of the City Engineer, residential lots which
previ de three or r.lOre off-street parking spaces may be exempt.
In cases where a more precise discretionary action has been taken by the
City Engineer with regard to parking, that action shall prevail over the
standards herein.
6. All private streets with controlled access devices, such as gates, shall
contain the following features:
a. Ga tes shall be 150 feet away from the extensi on of the i ntersecti ng
street curb line, except upon approval by City Engineer.
b. A turnaround shall be provided at the location of the gate. The size
and location of the said turnaround and gate shall be approved by the
Ci ty Engi neer.
7. Compound curves shall not be allowed.
8. All box/landscaped planters along a raised median shall be placed no
closer than 3 feet from the face of the median curb.
liPC 4034E
(10/12/89)
-12-
1 5 ' "3.2..
INTERSECTION STANDAROS
'-
NAIMINe INTERSECTINS LEFT TURN UNE RIGHT
STREET STREET REOUIREHENTS TURN
UNE
.
CUSS II COLLECTOR CUSS II COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
CUSS 11 COLLECTOR CUSS I COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
CUSS II COLLECTOR NAJOR SINSLE NO
CUSS 11 COLLECTOR PRINE SINSLE NO
CUSS I COLLECTOR CUSS II COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
CUSS I COLLECTOR CUSS 1 COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
CUSS 1 COLLECTOR NAJOR SINSLE NO
CUSS 1 COLLECTOR PRINE SINSLE NO
NAJOR CUSS 11 COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
NAJOR CUSS I COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
NAJOR NAJOR DOUBLE NO
NAJOR PRINE DOUBLE YES
PRINE CUSS II COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
PRINE CLASS 1 COLLECTOR SINSLE NO
PRINE NAJOR DOUBLE YES
PRINE PRINE DOlJ8LE YES
-.
EXHIBIT 'A'
(10/11/89)
-13-
)~- 33
.I
~
( -
I.
. I
I
I . (
'" I I 1
- ~
I I ~ '"
I I -
~ ~ ~
++'" f\I ~ ~
- - '"
~ +01-
J I I
~
~ I 1 I
~ ,
~~ ~ I 1
" I ~
~~ ~ I ,
~~ ~ ,
~ 1 1 ~
,~ ~
'~ , "
.. ~~ I I I ~
, ~
!l~ I I
d I 1 ~
.~ I ~
1 ,
I
I 1 I
~ 1 I
~ I
I
~ I 1 ~
'I ~ ~
I' ~
.; ~
0' 1 I ~
~ ~
,
,
( I I I (
I 1
.; I
0' , I II >-
~ ~,
I 1 I' ~~
II ~~
I I ~~
~ d I I ,,'
1.1 1/ ~,
- .g
~ ~
~ 1""'1 II ~~
, ~a
.. -
~ ~ ~I ~,
- ~.~
, .'
. .. ,I ~ ~~;:;
~ ~ ;. ~a
. - 1.1
~....lu
~ ;. .~.
- ~l4Ij
"'1lI~
"
,
( ~
L
(10/11/89)
.
:0 ~
" ~ I I I
ill ~ , I ,
;;j
tj I I I ,
, d
I I ./ ,
,
~
:::
~
,,'
I:;
....
\!.II ~
~ ~
~ ;
..
....
~
"
i!i
~
i!:
~
'-
14
Ic;~3Lf
~ < I I .
I 1
~ ,
~ , .1.1
~ ~ ~ ~ ;. I ,
'-l..-l.. -
I
I I ,
< I I
I ,
,
1 I I
I I 1 , ~
1 I
I , ~
, ,
I , I , ~
.; 1 I ~
0'
~ I I
- I I
~
~
..
~
-
~
'"
(
J
( ,
, , I I
, I
, I I
d I .
, I .1
t I I ,
, 1"1
1 .
,
'"
-
1.1
'" I. I
," ~
. 1.1 '
() C\i" I I
"'~ ... ~ ~ ~;,. .
rr' I +~~
I It U
~\~ I
~
(
(
l
~
~
~
.
:0
"
ill
~
~
~
ti::
~
~
~
....
...
~
tj
i!:
~
>-
t
~
~~
~~
~~
,
~-
.~
~~
'..
~ H
, ~q
~ ~~i
~ ~(~
~ ~"'iI
~ ~ ~ '
~~~
~
~
,
J I
, , ~
.'
( < I I -!. -I I . (
< .. - +
I I I I .
-- q.~~ ~- ~~
, < .
I I 1 IIIIlJ .
'l~ ~ ~ . . .
~'++ , +~~~':..
_'L_.. 1- ------,.
I I I I
< , .
I I I I 1 l
< .
~ ~ 1 I , I I ~
~~ ~ < I . ~
5~ ~ /' . I 1 I I ~
~~ .
I
." . I I I I I .
. " < , 1 d I I .
. " f' I
~~ . I I I I .
.. ..... ''/
I
~ . I
~ 1 1 I I .
~ < !
~ I 1 , I , .
, ~ I';"'" ~
.' I I . I
I ~
< . ~
,
I I ;,,1 I I
~ . .
.. I , , I
~ . .~ \ ,
I I , I I (
. I .
(
.-- I I I I .
, ,
~ I I 'I 1 I ,
..
~ I I I' I I .
II
I I I I ,
d
~ 1.1 II I , .
~
, .
~ ~ I" 'I I I
.,
.
S ~ ..... ~I ~
. II .
. ~
~ ~ .1 I I. I
~ - ~- ,
. ~ ~- ~ .. ~'-- ~
. .
~ I I Q II~ lit I f\, I ~ {
( q. n, n, n, ~
..... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ,~ ~
j lrn t1~+~- (
l
I I ,I 'I
~. '-~
~,
(10/11/89)
. I I , .
I ~ I .
< .'
I
~ < I I . (
. I , I .
. t ;" ~ ~ . .
~ , " I ,', , ~
.... ~ ....
!i: ~ < . !i:
~ I .++ I .+.+. ~
i;j . . . I . . .
~...'" ... ... ... ... .flt.. '"
I I I I
,
~ I ~
i~ ,
5~ I ~
~. ,
j;\ ~~ ,
~ ,~ . , I .
.'
... ~~
~ ~ , I d I .
. ~ I
.... .~ I I j;\
[S ::. ~" . .
... , ~ ~
"'S ... I I . "'S
~ i! ~ ~
'" ~
~ .
~ I ~ ....
~ ~ ~ ~ ::.
~ ,.' ~ ...
... ... ~ ~ ... ...
\Q ~ . ~ i!
\Q '"
~ <.
~ ~ . ~
.... ..
~ ~
~ ~ , .
~ , (
~ ~ I
. '" .
~ ~
~~ , ~
, I 'I I . ~~
~~ ~~
. ~.
~~ . , I I .
~ . d ~~
.: , 1.1 I I . ."
~g ~ ~i
~~ , JIIII"'I I . ~~
~ ~
H ,
. , !,
~" ~ ~ ~" ~
~' ~,
,,~ ~ . .~ ,,~
" . ~ ," ',.
~d . ~ ~d
~...,~ ~ 1.1 1.1 , "'.., ~
~~j . ;" " " ;., ~ ~ ~ .
, ." ." , ~1O~
~~~ . I. I. .11. I I ~
~ ~ III fII 'b 'b . . . ~ ~
, ...I\j ............ ... .. ...I'tl ~
~ ~ -'0..... ++' ( ~
, J ~la' l .
I I , I
-t!.
-15-
lc;" 3S
~
"
~
"
,
~
.
~
~
~
J
~
~
~
5
~
~
~
~
" I
" I
~
... 1"'~1
" I I
.
I
I
d
./
;,
I
J
I
I
I
.
1,,101
,
,
,
~
~
~
"
"
"
. I
". I. I.
~ ~ ~ ~
.j~J..
" I
"
"
"
I
,
I
d
I
~
"I
>
I >
I .
I >
>
~
~
~
~
,
>
>
~
.
I ,
I ,
I >
I ,
I >
,
I,~I :'~: c I~ I
. I. I. ~ ~ "
c:::.~~~"''''''~ ~
'(-:-rrl~ ! -r-~I " I
t" 'ull ~
. ,"
'4~
4r--.
,
,
00/11/89)
~
,
.
~
~
~I.
~~
.
~~
~~
h
~~
ia
. ,
!;: ~ ~
~ "Il ~
. ,
"l:~~
~~~
-. ,
~ Ii lQ
~ ~ :j
~ ~ ~
~
~
,
,
~
....
;;:
~
2l
"S
~
~
""0::
)'I
IQ
~
~
~
...
lu
~
OJ
i!:
S1
'"
16
Is, 3.6
~ ~
~~ ~
5g ~
~. ~
,~
'~
~~
~
. ~
.~
~.
~
~
~ ~
. ~
;,
,
,
~
I
~
,
.
~
,
~ ~
.
~
I ~
J
11 ~
~
I I ~
~
I I ~
..
I I ~
l!sJ;!
I I 2l ;;;~
"S ~~
I I ~ ">",
~....
1.1 ~ ~ ~l:;
" ~~
~ ~ ""0::
)'I ~
~ ~~
, ll::l ~~
<
"'~
",,,,
...
~
~
J
.
,
,
~.
.
,
. J
~
I.
. .
,
I I
...;.,+. I
, ,-
... ...... I
I
,
I
I
.++
, , ,
, , ,
I I
I I
I
I
d
I
I
~
t,
~
t I
'!" I,
-~
.
I ~I I, i: I I i. I
:'----.: c:a '--
"l '''1
i 'I II
:, J
; ';';:~!i-'? 'L
' "
:11
-<t,--
-
"
I I
, , .
-.-~
~
,
1>
....
;;:
~
"
ti
I .,~ I I
~
I" II
.1 ,i .1 '
t -~ ,~ r ,:;
~
~ I ': 1
~ - ~~,,~ .1 ~-~-
~ I II III I ~
.: ~
~ .~ f.:+-.- ~
g f\, f\I ~ ~ fO) f\, () ...
'II ,'" ... ......... ... 1Ilf!, ':l.:
j ) (n:il: ~
/ -Jt.
~
~~ r
5~
~~ ~
'~ ~
Ii.-- ~
, ~
Stt
~
..
~
~
~
~
--
~
J
!
~
~
~
~
"
.I
~
.'
I I
.. I .1 I"
~ '- or ~
'I .,.-, ,
- ~7~--1..-~7~-
,~ I '
,
I
, ~
I-I,
I
I
,
I
ti
,
-:+.
~,,~ ~
I
I
+-'
~ ..~ l-
I
<
<
l
~
~
< I
I
< I
I I
< I
I I
< I
~
~
I I ~
,,)
,V
I I
I'
~
~
~
,
I
,
< I I I
~.,...., -,-I-~-
111 'll I_
I
,
< I
< I
I
~
I .'
<
~
I
,
II
~
I
I I
, I
I I
if
"-~
(10/11/89)
~
~~
~i
i~
~-
l\~
@~
i~
i~~
~~i
~~~
~~~
~
~
.
l"
....
!il
~
'"
i'l
~
...
~
~
"'S
~
~
~
~
~
....
i:;
...
...
~
C:l
~
~
~
...
~
....
;J;
ll!
i1i
~
'-
-17-
) s- 3,1
.
~~
5~
~~
,~
~~
~~
, -
~~
~;;;
~
~ ~
It ~
~
,
~
~
!
,
~
"
~
~
< I
I
~
~
.'
"
'I.
,
~
< I
~ ~
... -I ,,,
I
<
.-1-.
~ ,
'illl.... ...
1
.+.
, ~
-. ..."'t
I
~
~
~
~
< 1
< 1
ti
,
< 1
I
,
I
~
I
< ,
,
.' ,
<
~
I .'
<
~
< 1
I
I'
,I
< I
ti
< 1
I'
II
<
~
,
,
.-
I
~
. I
,
.'
,
,
.'
I
~ ,
.' ,
T
, ~
, .'
~
."
,~ .. ~
I
I ,
I '
1 I
I I
I '
I I
, I
I I
I I
,
I.'
I
I
,
~
,
,
,
,
,
~
~
,
~
L
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
....
~
~
'"
~
"'S
~
~
~
~
~
"'
~
~
...
~
....
i:;
...
...
~
C:l
i1i
~
'-
~
,
~
~~
~~
i~
..
~i
@t:
d
i~~
~~i
~~~
~;j
l\li~
~
~
~
~
~
!
.
~ i ~
.
~ ....
~ . ~
~
I ~
~ l:l . ~ It.j
~
~ . ~
~ i I .
"
~ < I
~ I ,,;"
~ ." ..
~-l-
!
i ;
I
; . ~
a ~
~ ...
. ~ .....
~ ~
; . ~ ~
~ ....
.; ; . l:;
It ~ .....
lu
~ ; . ~ ~
.. ~ ~ :;j
< .
~ ~ i!2
< . ~
~
; I I .
>..
~
~ I I . ~
l:l ~l
",,,
< - I I . ~~
" ~
<:> ~~
; ." I .
~ I ~-
" ",'"
.; J L
~ ~ \1: ~~
'" ~~
" . I .
I "'...
~ ~~
.; ~ 1:5"
~ -I I- .. ~ ~ ~
- ~" ll:
" <:> <:> " ~
" .. ." ~ .' .. ~:3
- - I. ~ "" '"
~ it ~
t;:) C\i f\l C) ~ .,.; ~
~ r! ~ "+" ~ ~ ~~
~ ;j
j l u~
~I ~
'"
"!~ ~
.
18
(10/11/89) IS-3~
/
;
. ~
~~.
~i . ill
~, , .
I ~ r
~ rJ~+ .
.. ... :: "
I '
~
.
l'-
~ ...
,~ 01
I I ~
... ~ .
I l"
I I ' I' ...
ft ~~ 01
. I I ~
I
I . ~~
, ~ I ~
~ .... ~ ~~
I ig
I ~ 'I'
I;;: ...
~ ltl l!s .....
~ I ~ ~ w ....
. ~ ~
~ ~ ~ .!,
I
I -oJ ~ " ~ ~ ~
~ ,
8 ~ '" 10:;:: ~
I ..... ~ ~ ~ ...
I ..., (
l!I ~ ;;j ~
-l- ~ '" ;,
. " . .J... ~ ;:: ~ ~ ~ ~
',' ~ ;, '"
, tj ~ ~
I ',' t:: ~
i ~
~ ...,
'- !t) l!I i
1/ ~
I l~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I ~~ , ~ ~ ...
~ ~ eI
...'" ;, i.
"'!!i '-
~ ~... , ~ ;,
, ~~ , d
~"'
. ~, I ,~ ~~ ~
~ ~l!i
~ ' "'f;l ~~
~j .......
I:l~
,/,-1- I!; co ,~
Q .. . . .~ ...... ~
.. .. 'II Q ~ ' r ~I:l
L' ~J ' . . ",f;l
"ll ~'"
>it:! ig
I ...:::
, :![t' ~I:l
, ~' ~~
>ico
(10/11/89)
19
)c;- 31
DESIGN REVIEW. ROUTING FORM
;;ZG -:< /6
"'5/3/ q 0
Precise Plan Application (P- )
.. 'PPi2-c.; II
Design Review Application (:mt:-IO .-
Town Centre Design Review Application (TC/DR-
DATE:
TO:
, Alex Saucedo
I Caro 1 Gove
'Bill Ullrich
, Robert Sennett
Pam Buchan
Maguel Tapia
Fred Kassman
,Ed Batchelder
FROM:
Luis Hernandez
SUBJECT:
D
~
o
[J
Other
,
,
Building & Housing Department
Fi re Depa rtment
Engineering Department
City Landscape Architect
Community Development
Community Development
Community Development
Planning Department
Planning Department
The Planning Department has received the following proposal:
(YJ!0JSTYLuCT It:
'2Q12 Sq. Fl.
V'M{'.,.A- .
~FY0
'BLDc"
M mt CA- L. (')Ft"f Cr::
'PM) pocJ PI) 6,'\j
13 L vC;
,2-7- AC
,
Please review the attached application and return comments with this form
by -5-n-~()
This proposal is scheduled for
the Design Review Committee meeting of
J74 'H ' Sf.
~preliminary Review
D Regular Submission e..c{
-r If, S' (C ..u;/I he.. ,,>;~;" ,
Iraff1c- ".,1" re-e..> j ~ ;J ............
, "J c G' )ov-er coul he.- VClG<-<7ecf ~
/0 - 0 01 j(/tv q/o"'Jz.: 2I1iJ~e..5-1,,,,J<I,.J Jr/vew'f'q/froqe-l\e.
to he If mcun~lrl /0 -f 5/ . . ., "
3 -01-0 'I If /11) re'1u;rd(!I<I/I.5:;'~f~ eM ;I 5-1r-e-er/.
,...sO It ,I.th SIde.tJC,lf. !f:O,r1jJS
t.J. 0'-0" Side- """It r<Z-9.'/~ .v, . . tI ..., ~.
7- 0 I I?' J7 /' e.o"l~ 0.... H 5-1- ~
~ /'1 - 0" f\au"",a mect/on r / ~..LI"""~) /J
6', 'It>' 1/<< N's fr~ -r ;D" ve..rn e-11 -I ,-'-f?I5''': fjJ5C{ 1)/'1 H 5./: //..-;.- '" 90
This application is for:
/,
2.
vl~.'f VI '-J.,....'..... y '........ . """""::J - ~r-
,
Design Review
P.reliminary Review Application
q PRECISE.PLAN
D.2AIDRC_.
PROJECT NAME ~ & Glover Medical Office
,. .-
PROJECT LOCATION Chula Vista
PROJECT ADDRESS 374 'H' Street Chula Vista CA
Obtain from Engineering Department
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER(S) 573-010-09
COM/>IUN !TY
PROPERTY OWNER
ADDRESS
..
ZONE CO
Dr. Gil Turul101s and Dr. Victor Uranqa
402 'H' Street Ste. #3
ZIP 9201~ PHONE 426-4546
PHONE 426-4546
Chula Vista, CA
CONTACT PERSON Gil Turullo1s
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Schuss, Clark & Associates
ADDRESS 9474 Kearny Villa Road, San DiegO, CA
CONTACT PERSON Rick Clark .
92126
PHONE 578-2950
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. LAND USE: EXISTING Cammerical.Office PROPOSED eammerical Office
2. LOT SIZE: 9,648 S.F. ACREAGE .221 AC
3. PARKING PROVIDED: OPEN 14 COVERED 1
STD SIZE 9 x 19 COMPACT 0
4. MULTIPLE FAMILY (IF APPLICABLE): EXIST TO REMAIN N/A
EXIST TO BE REMOVED
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
NO. OF UNITS
(PROPOSED)
STUDIO
1 BR
2 BR
3 BR
TOTAL OPEN SPACE: COMMON USABLE
USABLE AREAS (DESCRIPTION)
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES (DESCR I PTIOIj)
N/A
5. COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL (IF APPLICABLE) FLOOR SPACE/BLDG. qross area = 2992 ~.f.
6. PROPOSED EXCEPTIONS TO ZONING REQUIREMENTS (PRECISE PLAN)
, 5;4-1
"I~
\S-Lf2
.
.
.
Ii [ j
~A~
May 7, 1990
File # ZG-216
TO:
Ken Lee, prinCipalifla ner
Clifford L. Swans Deputy Director of
Works/City Enginee
1",,1
William A. Ullrich, Senior civil Engineer?vCOV1
Harold Rosenberg, city Traffic Engineer~
Design Review Application for A Medical
Building at 374 "H" Street
Office
VIA:
Public
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Public Works Department has reviewed the subject proposal.
We do not propose the inclusion of engineering conditions of
approval for the design review. However, we request that you
provide the applicant with the following list of items which
will be required in conjunction with the building permit.
These items will be required under the authority of the City
of Chula Vista Municipal Code:
1.
Sewer, development impact, and traffic signal fees will
be assessed when the building permit is issued.
2. A construction permit will be required for any work
performed in the street right of way.
3. Public improvements include, but may not be limited to:
A. Driveway approaches
B. Sidewalk on "H" Street, 8 foot wide, curb and gutter
C. A 14 foot raised median on "H" Street C 'h R('QV'l<eo)
D. Widen "H" Street to 46 foot half width
E. Sidewalk ramp
4. A public improvement plan
5. Dedicate sufficient right of way on "H" Street for 58
foot half right of way.
A street vacation of 10 feet of right of way along Glover
Avenue is available.
HSB:jg
(RJ\FORMS\DRA#5.DOC)
IS-\.{3
~ ~ ft..
~~~~
--------
~~~~
tiY?:b
/1 ;..--1
, ,
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
"
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
May 9, 1990
File No.:ZG-216
Dr, Gil Turullols and Dr. Victor Uranga
402 "H" Street - Suite 3
Chula Vista. CA 92010
ENGINEERING CHECK LIST FOR PENDING REQUIREMENTS AND FEES FOR YOUR
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
The Engineering Division has reviewed plans for a proposed commerical
building at 374 "H" Street. which you recently submitted to the Planning
Department. We would like to take this opportunity to forward to you a
check list (enclosed) intended to provide you with information regarding
this department's requirements and fees as related to your project.
You should
finalized,
check list.
be aware. however, that until the plans for your project are
items may be added to or deleted from those indicated on the
Please read the enclosed information carefully as you may not be aware of
the many City requirements and fees at this point in the preparation of
your plans. Additionally, we urge you to contact the Department of
Building and Housing for information regarding other requirements and
fees.
We hope
surprises
Engineering
have.
this notification will
at a later date.
Permit Section at
be of benefit to you and help prevent
Please don't hesitate to call the
(619) 691-5024 for any questions you may
JOHN P. LIPPITT
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
l, /1/ // ////- ;;{,7'
By: f1/(Mt1#1 (/ut?C.~A'1
WILLIAM A. ULLRICH. SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER
Enclosures
WAU/glh
1~~44
276 FOURTH AVENUE;CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 920101619) 691-5021
,.
File No. _?Jl.' ,2,1(._
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, ENGINEERING DIVISION
DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST FOR MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENTS
~~""""'--..............,...."'_........."'''''-''''---~-~.....~
According to the
items noted below
the authority of
check list, please
plans you recently submitted to the Planning Department for review, the
will be included as conditions of approval of your building permit under
the Chula Vista Municipal Code. For further questions regarding this
contact our Permits Section at (619) 691 5024.
"'ay ~ "H" r--. ~
1. M Dedication of street right of w <r ~
2.
~ A construction
City's street
the following:
Permit from
right of way.
this department is required for work performed in the
The work may include, but not necessarily limited to,
I?'iI
C><l
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Curb & gutter
Driveway approach
PCC paving of alley
Storm drain
Street light(s) (See Page
Replace existing driveway
P'<l Sidewalk
~ Street widening
~ Handicap ramps
[ ] Sewer extension
5 for information)
wi curb, gutter, sidewalk
1><1
[ ]
[ ]
Kl
[ ]
Median island (11Z.ulJ",-,>
Signal relocation
Alley-type approach
AC & base in street
To obtain the construction permit, the following items must be fulfilled:
~ Have a registered
office fQF review
weeks per check)
civil engineer prepare an improvement plan to submit to this
and approval. (The City's average processing time: 3 to 4
~ Pay the prescribed fees: Plan-check fee is 1.26% of engineer's estimate of the
work to be done; Inspection fee is 5.04% of the final estimate.
[~Submit security in the amount of 110% of the final estimate. Security may be
in any of the following forms: surety bond; letter of credit; cash; savings
passbook; certificate of deposit; cashier's check (NOTE: personal, company or
third party checks are not acceptable)
[>0 A properly licensed contractor must obtain the permit. He must first submit a
certificate of insurance WITH THE CITY NAMED AS ADDITIONAL INSURED and With the
followillg mInImum liability limits as set forth in "Specifications for Public
Works Ccnstrtlctlon" (Commonly referred to as the "Green Book"):
Bodily in,Jury: $250,000 eactl person
$500,000 each occurrence
$500,000 aggreqate products and completed operations
P~operty dJmaqe: $100~OOO each occurrence
$250,000 aggregate
(A combined single limit policy with the aggregate limits in the amount of
$1,000,000 Will be conSidered eguivalent to the reguired minimum.)
~OTE:
See Page 5 for information regarding DEFERRALS of the requirement
to install public improvements.
\S"'l{--s (Over)
3.
[ ]
Since the plans
proposed grading
that a grading
requir-ements)
submi tted for
of the site,
permit will be
Planning"s review showed no information regarding
it may be determined at the building permit stage
required. (If this is the case, see Item 4 for
4. [] It appears from your plans that a grading permit will be required. The following
items must be fulfilled to obtain the permit:
d. A grading plan must be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to
this department for reView and approval. (City"s average processing time: 3 to
4 weeks per check)
b. Fulfill landscaping requirements as set forth by the City Landscape Architect.
He may be contacted at (619) 691-5101.
c. Submit a deposit in the amount of $1,000 (minimum) for plan-cheek in accordance
with the City"s Full Cost Recovery Program.
d. Provide security in the amounts of: 25% of earthwork costs and 100% of the
costs of appurtenant structures (i.e. retaining walls, culverts, inlet
structures, etc.) as determined by the approved engineer"$ estimate. This
surety may in the forms as stated under Item 2.
Please be advised that a building permit cannot be issued until certification of
the rough grading has been completed by your civil and soil engineers and submitted
to the Engineering Division"s Inspection Section.
5. [] Undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines on site.
6. [] Undergrounding of distribution lines and other overhead utilities in the right of
way adjacent to your site.
7. [] An encroachment permit for your proposed facilities within the City"s street right
of way and/or easement. (Call for procedure)
B. [] The subject property falls within the 100-year flood plain.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CHECK LIST OF ENGINEERING FEES
TO BE PLACED ON BUILDING PERMIT
~""'............................""~"............"'......"""""'.....""""............."""............"""................."'................'\..~,,.....'"
Tr,€ followinq
the tlme at
Vista's M<.'\stet'"
fees il1dicated are applIcable to your project and are required to be paid at
Issuance of the Building Permit under the authorIty of the City of Chula
Fee Schedule and other fees and assessments as approved by the City Council:
SEWER CHARG~2
[ ] Administr~tlve fee ot $17.00 fnr Sewer Connection Permit
(Cont j neit page)
Pc1qe 2
l S-lf~
SEWER CHARGES (Cont"dl
CNO Sewerage Participation Fee of $2,000 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU)
[ ] Sewer lateral installation fee for lateral from main to property line:
4-inch: $884.00 plus $24.00 per foot of chargeable length over 35 feet
6-inch: $884.00 plus $27.00 per foot of chargeable length over 35 feet
Tap into 10-inch or larger main: Add $36.00 to above fees
Tap into main located in easement instead of street: $180.00
[ ) Sewer assessment per Ordindnce 997: $16.00 per foot of frontage
[ ] Sewer Repayment District No. (Call for details)
[ ] Spring Valley Sanitation District: $130.00 per acre
[ ] Montgomery Sewer Service Charges (Call for details)
TRAFFIC SIGNAL FEES
[] All projects proposed in the City are subject to a Traffic Signal Fee based on
expected trip generation and is calculated at $10.00 per trip. (See the schedule of
Trip Generation Factors on Page 4.)
~ Your plans call for enlarging the existing facilities on site. The trip generation
factor will be based only on the proposed additional area.
[ ]
Your
factor
USes.
plans call for changing the use of the existing facility. The trip generation
will be calculated based on the difference between the existing and proposed
[ ]
Your plans call
factor will be
building to the new.
for
based
replacement of an existing structure. The trip generation
on the estimated increase in trips (if any) from the old
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
[ )
Your proposed
fees to cover
as follows:
project lies within the City"s Eastern Territories and is subject to
the costs of improvements on various roads in the City east of 1-805
Proposed Tyoe of Project
TotaJ_
Single-family detached
Single-familyattached-(Duplexl
Multi-family (Ap~rtments & condos)
Commercial acre
Industrial acre
$ 2,850
2,280
1,710
114,000
57.000
[J fOtlr proposed project lies WIthin the EastLake Development Area and is SllbJect to
the fpes as follows:
~dstLake Impact Fees inclLlde the above fees plus fees to cover the cost of park
development as follows:
(Cont"d on t-everse side)
Page 3
lS-~l
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES (Cont'o!
Prooosed Tvoe of Project
Single-family detached
Single-family attached (Duplexes)
Multi-family (Apartments ~ condos)
Commercial acre
Industrial acre
Park Total
$ 286.00 $ 2,387.00
230.00 1,911.00
172.00 1,432.00
85,041.00
63,635.00
t J Your proposed project is subject to the following fees to cover the costs of
expanding the City's facilities:
Procosed Tvoe of Project
Residential (per unit)
Commerci al (per acre)
Industrial (per acre)
WEST OF 1-805
EAST OF I-80S
$1,047.00
10,462.00
6,277.00
$1,374.00
13,734.00
8,240.00
NOTE: This check list is based only on the plans submitted and does not necessarily
include all final requirements. It is intended as a way to inform you, as a
developer/owner, of the general requirements and costs you can expect to encounter as your
project develops. The requirements and fees contained herein are only those imposed by the
Engineering Division. You should contact the Department of Building & Housing for
information regarding additional fees. Please do not hesitate to call this department for
further information. (Phone: (619) 691-5024
VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION TABLE (ONE-WAY TRIPS)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA COUNCIL POLICY NO. 478-01
The Traffic Signal Fees are based on the trip generation factors contained herein. The fee
is calculated on $10.00 per trip generated oer day.
Land Use Cat~y
Single family detached.........................
Dup 1 ex , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Multi-familv (Condos ~ apartments)... ,., .......
Senior citi:ens (Condos ~ apartments) .0.... "0.
Mobile home.......,............................
Hotel. . . I . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0 . .
Motel. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . I .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hosoi tal '*. .... . . I .. . . .......... . .... . ... . . . . '"
Nursin~ h:.me.....................,.............
General office building........................
Med i call d en tal bu i 1 ding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Cont'd oext oagel
Pace 4
)S~Y-?5
Trip Generation (per day) Factor
(IITn = tLill 11 /11 = cer)
, ? T/Single family dwelling
..
12 T / Un it
8 T/Unit
6 T/Unit
6 T/Scace
10 T/Roam
10 T/Room
12 T/Bed OR 17 TI1000 S.F. of structure
, T/Bed
"
12 T/l000 S.F. of leasable area
75 T/l000 S. F . of leasable area
,...---
..A'
., .
TR~P GENERATION TABLE (Cont ,I
Land Use Cate~ory
Trip Generation (per day) Factor
("T" = trios "/'1 = per)
Shopping center:
Up to 49,999 S.F.......................115
50,000 to 99,999 S.F....................... 80
100,000 to 199,999 S.F....................... 60
200,000 to 499,999 S.F....................... 50
500,000 to 999,999 S.F....................... 35
Over 1,000,000 S.F....................... 30
Commercial shops............................... 40
Church*... ..................................... 15
40
Church school................................. .1.4
Bank.......................................... .175
Savings & loan................................. 75
Discount store................................. 65
Low turn-over, full meal restaurant............ 55
High turn-over, coffee shop restaurant.........165
Drive-in restaurant............................550
Lounge........................................ .100
Se rv ice 5 ta t i on. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .750
Supermarket....................... ........... ..125
Convenience market (Open 16 hours).............320
Convenience market (Open 24 hours).............575
Industria1*.................................... 5
60
General light industria1*...................... 5
50
Industrial park*............................... 8
70
Manufacturing*................................. 4
55
Warehousing*-.................................. 5
60
T/1000 S.F. of leasable area
T/1000 S.F. of leasable area
T/1000 S.F. of leasable area
T/1000 S.F. of leasable area
T/1000 S.F. of leasable area
T/1000 S.F. of leasable area
T/1000 S.F. of leasable area
T/1000 S.F. of gross floor area OR
T/Acre of gross site area
T/Student
T/1000 S.F. of
T/1000 S.F. of
T/1000 S.F. of
TI1000 S.F. of
T/1000 S.F. of
T/1000 S.F. of
T/IOOO S.F. of
T/Day
T/1000
T 11 000
T/IOOO
T/IOOO
T/Acre
T 11 000
T/Acre
T/ 1 000
T/Acre
T/1000
T /Acre
T/1000
T/Acre
floor area
floor area
leasable area
gro$$ floor area
gross floor area
gross floor area
gross floor area
S.F. of gross
S.F. of gross
S.F. of gross
S.F. of gross
of gross site
S.F. of gross
of gross site
S.F. of gross
of gross site
S.F. of gross
of gross site
S.F. of gross
of gross si te
floor
floor
floor
floor
area
ar-ea
area
area OR
area
floor area OR
area
floor area OR
area
floor
area OR
area
floor area OR
area
*NoTE: Where alternative generatlon factors are provided, that which results in the higher
total vehicle trlp generatlon shall be used in computing the Traffic Signal Fee.
DEFERRAL INFORMATION
In accordance WIth Sec~ion 12.24.070 of
owner/developer may apply tor a deferral of
improvements. Deferrals may be qrantcd tor any of
the Chula Vista Munlclpal Code, the
the requlrement to install the public
the follOWIng reasons:
1. InstalldtiO!l of the improvements would create a hazardous condition.
~. [(~pravemerlts Installed at the project SIte WQllld be lncompatlble WIth the
present development at the area.
3. Installation of the Improvements would be prematLlre because of the existing
condltions of the sLlrroundinq area.
(Cont'd on reverse side;
~. It would De desirable to lldve Improvements Installed as an overall proJect.
I s _ 4qq 5
"
DEFERRALS (Cont'd)
(NOTE: Deferrals may not be granted for reason of financial hardship.)
To apply for a deferral, you must complete the necessary form available at the Engineering
Division counter. The application must be accompanied by a fee in the amount of $23Q.OO.
If the deferral is granted, a cash bond in the amount of 110% of the estimated value of the
work being deferred must be posted with the City.
PROCEDURE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTS
If the checklist indicates the requirement to install (a) street light(s), the following
steps are required:
1.
The developer, his
this department to
requi remen ts.)
engineer
install
or contractor applies for a construction permit from
the street light. (Also see checklist for permit
2. The Permits Section will check with the Traffic Section to determine the exact
location of the required street light.
3. Upon providing this location to the developer or his agent, the developer/agent
contacts San Diego Gas & Electric to obtain the desired service point location.
Q. The developer/agent must submit a plan/sketch showing all of the following:
A. Street light location
B. Servi ce pain t
C. Conduit size, type and location
D. Pull boxes
E. Wire sizes
5. The Traffic Section reviews for approval
6. Permits Section isslles permit with two copies to Inspection Section.
Check list by: _% U?'-<A L
Date:
Phone: (619) 691-.~__~_1:--
Page 6
\S..So
I~c":';) ~ 2-G--273
(; .'
:;;.~ (~
,I .' 'C, ,-^,. ~
~EV'~
DESIGN REVIEW ROUTING FORM
DATE:
TO:
. Alex Saucedo
'Carol Gove
. Bill un ri ch
, Robert Sennett
Pam Buchan
Maguel Tapia
Fred Kassman
,Ed Batchelder
FROM:
Luis Hernandez
SUBJECT:
D
a
o
o
Precise Plan Application (P- )
PDI2._ Q
Design Review Application (~ -to-1\
Town Centre Design Review Application (TCjDR-
Other
The Planning Department
{bf;:F::>TfZ--L{(T It
33~<j'~S ~. Fl.
17M C.-FL -
-"~I.
"-,'"
.- =- Ie., /11
Building & Housing Department
Fire Department
Engineering Department
City Landscape Architect
Community Development
Community Development
Community Development
t'lanning Department {AFPt_.t'Y'I/rcN C>^,L-O
Planning Department
has received the following proposal:
(\0 FvG
15L.Dc')
Milliidl: L Op--- ~ "B c.vf':,
--PM) PO'S FT) ;~ . Z"Z- AC:
Please review the attached application and return comments with this form
by €-r:t~4(:T
. /'.h~-
This proposal is scheduled for the Design Review Committee meeting of
This application is for: .
~Preliminary Review
D Regular Submission
IS-Sf
( 374 -H- STREET ) LOCATOR
ASSESORS PARCEL No.
~ORTH ( ZONE: CO ) 57301009
550 CASSEL-MAN
I~ - C::;l.
I
I
! ,
Ji
"
.i"
i,.,
..
w
~,
/
F!
, ,
,
;ii
---Y
't :1
~
. <
:~
: -';.1
.
.
.
7-l- - ?
I
,t
:I:
l-
n::
;:).
o
t...
@ ,
l \
H ST. PROJECT
SITE
'''' - ,. '" - L '.
. 3>'
6 @ 1&
....- .:...-,... W W
"" ~ >
~ 17 <
,
.
~ . II 1&
1 @~, (!2)~
t
~ ~'?~.S
~ . 3 10 . @ 15
~. "'7/02 '~~-p: ,
..PM 11 105 , O.f~ I-
... PAR I --
" '.02~ II 14 @ I-
.. Ql) W
'''':'.1-'1 ~ ~A('. c::
"- l" t. C c::
0: <
12 \oJ 13
. :> c
, '- fD.r: w 1- 0 )~J.&
^" ,. 0.:;."- ..J
C> ~
-
,.COI'<ClM
F"OIJRTH AVENUE F"OUR
DOC. 83-240008
(5EE SHT. 2)
@
,
Appendix A
City of Chula Vista Planning Dept.
Design Review
Preliminary Review Application
o DRC
q PRECISE PLAN
D-ZAIDRC__
PROJECT NAME MEDICAL OFFICE RIIT1DTNr.
PROJECT LOCATION 374 "H" ST. CHUrA VT<:;TA rA Q?n1!1
-
Pf<.OJECT ADDRESS 374 "H" ST. CHrJJ A VT<::TA rA Q?n19
(Obtain from Engineering Department
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUflBER(S) 573 OlD 09.
COMNUNITY CHUIA VISTA.
PROPERTY OWNER
ADDRESS
ZONE CO
DR'S. GIL TIJRlTI.1m<:; ANn VTrTnll 11lIAN(;A
401 "H" ST. SUITE # 3 CHUIA VISTA, CA.
CONTACT PERSON DR.
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
ADDRESS
CONTACT PERSON
GIL 1UlULLOIS.
HECTOR ZUNIGA
251 OXFORD ST.
HECTOR ZUNIGA
ZIP 92010 PHONE 426 4546.
PHONE 426 4546.
SUITE "H" CHUIA VISTA, CA. 91911.
PHONE 476 0616.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. LAND USE: EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING
2. LOT SIZE: 9,652 S.F.
3. PARKING PROVIDED: OPEN
STD SIZE
4. MULTIPLE FM~ILY (IF APPLICABLE):
STUDIO
1 BR
2 BR
3 BR
TOTAL OPEN SPACE: COMMON USABLE
USABLE AREAS (DESCRIPTION)
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES (DESCRIPTION)
NO. OF UNITS
(PROPOSED)
EXIST TO REMAIN
EXIST TO BE REMOVED
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PROPOSED MEDICAL CLINIC.
ACREAGE .22 ACRE.
COVERED 16
COMP ACT
NOT APPLICABlE.
NOT APPLICABlE.
5. CONMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL (IF APPLICABLE) FLOOR SPACE/BLDG.
6. PROPOSED EXCEPTIONS TO ZONING REQUIREMENTS (PRECISE PLAN)
3,289 S.F.
\s..S '3
APPLICANT FILL OUT INSIDE HEAVY LINES.PLEASE PRINT
IMPORTANT! USE BALL POINT PEN TO FILL OUT
APPLICATION. PRESS FIRMLY!
tt~t-~tt IU l:i~"'AHA I ~ t-~~ l:it.;H~UUL~ ANU
INSTRUCTIONS TO CALCULATE FEES FOR
ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING & MECHANICAL
AL. ~ . i-
JO~ ~o.!}ESl J II ...~ ':" ;:?tJ~J~r ~l~ ~y OF CHULA VISTA. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND HOUSING
'8/-7 11 S7J!E'E7 r;,' . ~~RTHAVE"CHUlAVISTA,CA92D1D -TEl.16191691.5DDT
~NE --. A S SOR'S PA~CE/L""O. _0.-
I'r; 7/'iC..JJfU-CJ"f,
CE RESOL\,#'rIO'7g~~ITIONAL ..;,...-
IUSEPERMIT ~
LOT AREA LOT COVER'yT COVER ~
>
SIDE YD. FRON~.SIDEYD REAR YD. ~
FRONTAGE sl.,li'G. SEPARATION NO. PKG SPCS ~
/" ~
!7ESONO IEXPLAIN) IND. UNITSIS/UNIT
. to ~, tV"_ PP-R
......'" r <.t / _"7'7'_
~~ NI d ~.L:.::;,. ~JU
.~~ ~,~~GD'~ rz.?tJ/ot,
lYll=.'1 Nr'.;.w/I0'6 '1' tJy, tlllAi1' ".
OWNER.S fDJOf-!.S; __ _ _ _ I'::Z..
-H' "0/ J/71=_.<J
~. , Yi5tA ';U'
ZqWIO TELe;;O~E :4s40 ~
z
o
~
<
.
<
"
u
.
o
CONTRACTOR'S NAMF
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP CODE
TELEPHONE NO.
STATE LICENSE
lCITY LICENSE
CLASS
~"S "AM' ""7L?~I'a.d
ADO"," r>r- _ ~ I
2\7 t}j(R:/IZO.:>/ ~
CI~ /'/ _ ;, /// < :I:.TE "t?A-
'qC;9-/1 m47bN~//!D
STATE LICENSE NO. ICLASS
- 1-
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (NOTE IF ATTACHE~
~~_ 7711';- <:;/tEfLI
~:~r~El!b'e'T
01Wo~t~{~
PBQP..DS4D.,u~E-, ,~ VALUATION
rYlL:/,//~ 0,.. 37S;~1!2.
THIS IS A PERMIT APPL. FOR: Jl'IfLDG
OPLUMBING OELECTRIC OMECHANICAL
~EW DALTER OOEMOLISH
DADO 0 REPAIR OMOVE
MASTER PERMIT FOR APPLlCAT!DN FOR
IDENTICAL BUILDINGS DYES 'IIlNo
NO_OFIDE~AL WATERSE~V
6L~S._ PIPE SIZE
-trPUSLlt: :;EWER NO_ OF LATS.
DPRIVATE DISPOSAL SIZE OF LA1:;.
;a.I~NGa~~#;~~ v~~ ~
~/A- tll677+ I ClAsTm ~
T1;ZE:015~
ZIP CODE
'/U?I C/
ELECTRICAL:
PLANS APPR. BY
CODE NO COST
PL.UMBING:
__ PLANS APPR. BY
TOTAL ODE NO. COST
I>..
I l--o W
4cc. (p ~
~ l l.o l<J
F!> iJ, ~,S iJ.4
If ~_~~ 1
1+-<<1
"-,
?>
<t1o-
tJ7--r ." /JIL~ ,,::,/1,
-
-0-
) 5- t5'f
.
o [ 0, ",,',,~y ,H"", Inat , Om I,cense" und.. P'<>-
,,",on, Of Cn"l".' 9 ,com'MOO'"; ""tn SeeM"
W 7QOO'o'o'''.'onJo'm.Bu..n.....no p,ot.",on.
l' COe)< .Mm'..cen....'"'",,'o.<..n"."O<1
g D.,..__Con".c''''~____
U
-
.
.
o
"
:;
.
.
.
Z
.
o
,"*,,,ov.I1,,,,, 10.' l.m..o",pt'.o",.n.Con
".ctP..l'c.'''.L...'p''n.ion''w'ng....M'S.C
103'.~ Bu..".... ond F>'o'us<onsCOde An, "~'I 0'
""""" wn,cn ,.o"or" I perm.' \0 conWuehon
.Il.' 'm~o.. <I.",o"sn ", rep." anI .""ctur.
0"0' ,,, ,"...u."O...." ''''",,'' 'h..op.,,,n' '0'
.~cn p.o'''''' to "'e. .'yn"" ""0",en, ,n., "e "
',e.n."",, pu",,'''' to t,,* p",."..o", 0' '''~ CO"
".cw. "0<:."'" L.... IC",P'O' ~ co",,,,.oo,og ...,to
s.ct'0070000'O""'0~10f'''.Bu"0,,,'MP'0.
I....on. CoOOI O' foot.. ~.~rnp' thO..'.om and '''.
bas,. 10' t". .tteg.d .'~"'P"on Any .,o,.M" 0'
s..:"0"70J',Sby.n.ppl'cont'0..,,..rn"'ubl.Ctl
"'.'PPhC."'to. 0"''' pII"'''y 01 "0' "'0'. 'o.n lo".
h"nd'.OdoU...,l5001
elt .. o..n., O'to. p.oo.... 0< "" ."'p'oy..,
..""...9.....,,,..,,.0,.co"'p.n.."0"..'"00'''.
"o,".nd,,,,,.,,u,,",.,.not.nt.n<l.do'o"...d'o'
"'. is.< 7~4.B",.n.-n.ndP'o'.'''on.CM.
T". Conlr'C'O"i.'C.ns. L'''doo-> "ot'Oply'O."
own... o'P'Ope~y"'M"""""O.,,,,p.""..t".,",,n
'n<l""o doo->."c"...O'" ",m..lfo't"'O"g"""o,,"
.",pIOy_. P'O.'d.d"'.t."c".mp'''''.m.nt....
not ,nt.~d"",, 0' olt.,.d '0< oa>. II 00...,., t".
~w'd'no 0' 'mp'",~m.nt '. ,old ..,t".n on. .... 01
comp'",o~ 1,,* o..n.,.b""d.' ..,II 0..... t".""",."
o'p,,,,,,nO'''.t ,,"d'dnotO",'do,.mp'''''.'O'tM
pu'PO..of..I.1
Ot .. OWO'" 01 '''. "'OlHt"y. .'" ..c'""'.'~
cont"cMo..'I"',c.n"dcont'.cto..tocoo",uc'
m. P'Otect.s.c 7()<< B".,,,....nd P'ofn.>oo,
Co<)OTO.COOt..olo'.L.C.O..L....oo...oO'.PP'.
'0 .n 0..0., 01 p<op&l1y ..00 Pu"d. o. ,"'p'o'~.
,n.,."n.od""ocOOt..ct.IO'..C"p,o,.ot.",,,,,.
coo".C'o<(.II'c."..pu'.u.n"o'''.Con''.e'o..
L.c.n..L."1
DI."'.'e"'p'uOO..Sec ____ B ,PC
fo"""....o"_______~
_O...___.O...ne<..___
,-
CJ'''''.bv'''''''''M''''''.'Cert",c...o.co",.n'
to ..".,,,,,,,. O' a con,t,e.t. ot 1"0"."
Compen,.t,on'n.".."c.o',o.."".Ocoo,'''''.O'
ISoeMlOOL.bo,COd.1
z
o
~
<
.
Z
.
.
.
o
u
.
.
.
.
.
o
.
POUCVNO_~..EXPUlES
CO"'PA'lV~
OC."'''""coP'''''''''''''l'''"''C''Y
o Ce<l,""",, cop, '. "e'.by I",n..o.o
CER'"'CAHOFEXEMPTtON'~O'''
I"OR~ERS CO"'P!'''SATtONIN5"RANC!'
.To., "'''00 n...O not ", CO"''''.'O~'' t'" p.'''','
"'0' ~". ""nO',,",, 0011... ,$'00, 0< ..'Of
0, c",,"v'O"' ,n'0.p."0.",.oeoo"~'''O'' '0'
..h.e" '''''P.,m,'" '''u,d ,,".11 """."'P'Oy'"Y
pe'.o~ ," 'Oy n"oo.. '0" '0 ".como ,ubi"'" ,~
t".Wo'V.. Co"'P."..t,o" ".., o+C.,,'o.n..
"OT'CETOAPPlICA"T ".".,,,,...ngm,,Co...-
"e."~' !'>.mp"O~ yo" '00"'0 OoeO"'. '"0,'01 to
,''OW"'.." COrnOo".."onp'u""oo,'.,"hOcaOO'
Coo. you "'"" loot".."n comp', ",.t" suoh
L- p.o...,on'O"""PO,m,''',,'''''_'''OO'OYo..,'
[01 "o.eb\-a.l.m'o.,,"O'. ,.con",uc,on
It '.oong.o."" 10' "'0 pe.to.ma"c. of,h. ",,,,. 10'
~ ..."c"'" , po.m, , ..u.~ '5eo 3097 C,>COdO,
Z LoMe,,"'_
. - -
..l Lo~d.'sAdO,,,,, _ _ __
I C.",ty'''OI I 0... ,o.d 1""'Ppt,cat,oo.no".to
,"",'ho.M". .nto,ma"oo ..CO"." "9'''''0
comp'v ",.'o.U C,ty'M County o'O"'a~e.' .~d
St... ,."'. ,.,.long t~ ~""d,ng con",uc"O" .00
M..bv .uIM"'. ,.P,....",.."... o' 1M cou"'v
0' Cllv '0 on'.' "po" to" .~"". "'~"Mn.d P'O.
pe..vlo..".poe"onp"'po....
_ ee:ei~- '~J:;,~~~~~;~~~~~~1ttt
MECHANICAL:
PLANS APPR. BY
TOTAL CODE NO. COST TOTAL
A-
"-
w
'3
't
+r
.1
I-
~
:p
I
;<;
;.~
"'f'>
'7-t.
DATE
AMOUNT PO
RECPT
NO.
~
,(./.t I//?~
TOTAL
<i9.PST. PE~qD.
iJltYES CJNO"""",
ENCRT. ~ER. REo'D.
DYES lILNo
LATERAL
INSTALL.
J'{
ADMIN.
'"
SEWER
CAPACITY
11-
ZJh'.j-
GRADING~..eR REo'D
DYES GJflLO
DIST. CURS TO P.L.
FRONT SIDE_
BACKWATER DYES
VALVE REO ~O
OTHER
TOTAL
APPLlCAPPR OATE
/ /
I~U~APPR OA1E ,.
1.113/'1'
OCC~P~INO;;::"RSITY~~ FLR. _~~_ELD.
LENGTH. WIOT,~, HGT. AREA
I ro' >0" "'It' U:;' ., ,"?'"
DWG AREA GAR ARE,"'iACC ARE NO, OF ROOMS
...,..,"f,I- -
aDRMS BATI~S iVALUATION
- '-I .*~)~
EXT. WALL COVERING
,~ .
,CO I, '2.-
TYPE ROOFING
1'1.",
s.:r;~ERS REQ'DlPROV.D.OI OCCUPAq4.0AD
SPEC, INSP_ RE-O.O 0 CONCRETE DMASONRY
OWE-LDING nHS, BOL TSOplLE ORIV.OOTHEA
~~~
Lo -
C7(ff APPlr I D~TE I ISillED SY
6~~~~D 8~:i~ Ig;SH?OL AI'C~IOSHA
APPR 0 ApI"R. 0 APPR. 0 nl 0
ACCOUNT AMOUNT ACCT.
DUE NO.
EST. PLAN I, /17 3!J '00
CHECK FEE 3741
SITE CHECK .........- '00
'" 3741
seWER AI), FEE /-, ~~. ~
seWERCA" .,(..'-... ~
~
TRAF,S.F. '2.1.("" - '"
..
OIF. SEE ATTAC ~
~A-'T. I}.J~ /I.{';,;,,- 'co .'111
z-r -
RESIDENTIAL
CONST. TAX
."
,...
'00
4052
'00
3741
,
100
3331
'00
3333
'00
3332
'00
3332
100
3335
'00
"03
STRONG 6$5~
MOTION INST.
PL. CHK. FEE U 7 7.tJ
SALANCE DUE
~.~O BUILDING 19t-z, K
PERMIT FEE
RECD ELECTRICAL fll1 -
BV PERMIT FEE
9- PLUMBING '1~ -
ERMIT FEE
MECHANICAL ~01;l;>
PERMIT FEE
SEWER
PERMIT FEE
MICRO FILM i 1fI. 0 ~
'"
TOTAL,
~
CITY OF CHOLA VISTA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
BOILDING PERMIT CHECKLIST
C:a>'1sfr!J~+ N~U/ Doc.fOYS' OFFIcC:(T?ep/tu.e Or-Flee 81dJ..)
JOB ADDRESS -Y 74 '1-1' Sfr-a.1- ASSl'SSORS PAR. NO. ~ 7..7 - 010 - () 9
1ST OiKDATE:IO-IS'-91 2ND 0iK:/>::':'-}1 3RDOiK: 4THOiK:
THE ITEMS OIECKED BELOW HAVE NOT ~';,A~;~ifo~-i- APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING
THIS DEPARTMENT SHALL BE WITHHELD PENDING CDtPLIANCE:
PERMIT BY
SEE NOTE .
.[ ] RECORDED SUBDIVISION MAP REQUIRED POR CONDOMINIUMS.....................
.[ ] LEGAL DESCRIPTION OR IDENTIFICATION OF JOB SITE........................
.[ ] GRADING PERMIT IS REQUIRED.............................................
1><1 CONSTROCTION PERMIT IS REQUIRED POR:
!X'] CURB AND GUTTER lX1 ASPHALT fA eell;J: PAVING t><J SID!.WALK RAMP
[X] SID!.WALK 8 ' [ ] SEWER MAIN EXTENSION [ ] SID!.WALK UNDERDAIN
[X] DRIVEWAY APPROACH [ ] STREET LIGHT (s) (X) OTHERI1~d"QI? ~ I
1><1 SUBMISSION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS NEEDED...........,...............
IV! CI C vCS-1
vv DRIVEWAYS AS SHOWN DO NOT CDtPLY WlTll TY STANDARDS...................
~ENCROACHMENT PERMIT REQUIRED........................................... ~4
(X) UNDERGROUNDING OF EXISTING OVERHEAD OTILITIES REQUIRED.................
[X] DEDICATION OF RIGHT-oF-~Y REQUIRED....................................
~ SHOW LOCATION OF EXISTING!PROPOSED SEWER LATERAL.......................
( ] SEWER LATERAL BACK-FLOW PREVENTER REQUIRED.............................
[ ] SHOW EXISTING EASEMENTS OF RECORD......................................
[ ] SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED ELEVATIONS OF LOT AT P.L.'S AND PAD.........
D<J SHOW PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERN..................... ........ ............
[ ] SHOW PROPOSED FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION.................................
DO SHOW STRUCTURES REMOVED OR TO BE REMOVED............................... ~
[ ] WHAT IS TIlE ESTIMATED EARTJM:lRK? IMPORT CO.YDS. EXPORT CO.YDS.
[Xl REVISE ORIGINAL PLANS AND RESUBMIT THROUGH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT
NOTES: . A .:Se. o</'o.fe conS' rvcfioh
l.,oI,t:-c..fe. d a. ofe!e,..,..t<( IS b~m~ p"'~c~.r.5~tJ(.
2, I>1J'La.7't! v.se a.YJcll~tUeabl/!v .(/~o.,. .sptHe e>.{ old bv./etnfJ1, Md ~,."ss a"'~
Of. Lot( 9, (,4/S-F. ?)
3. n.. .Slde walk tH, c./~ve r" wi II be 0/1. 'dour" Fro pert:! ...Iter" th~ sfr~e..J V'a.Cel. +'~Y1..
A II ea5o",e...f fe> fh~ c: l'iy "V a Hew sld~';;a Ik I~ f~e pubJ,"c.. R;4> is l/~ecl~oI.
,
L
I. S/r~/'<-rf'V IL-Z. -<7, f51C-C./2.0i4C<4IIJC ''VIO.vu V\e.-...-T <;;..<1 IV
NOTE: IF A CONSTR ION P IT IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT, IT MUST BE
OBTAINED FROM THIS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO CALLING THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT POR A FRAMING
OR ELECTRICAL INSPECTION.
~( )
'< J.'
Plan check by:- /'---' '-1.A IU--.
/.... (SEE OTHER SIDE)
'";:)-S~
ENGINEERING DIVISION FEES
TIlE !OLLOIoiING FEES AS OiECKED BELOW ARE DUE AND PAYABLE PRIOR OR AT TIlE TIME OF
ISSUANCE OF 'l'IIE SUBJECT BUILDING PERMIT: .
A "'e.tV ~el.V~Y' I'>f"'1f be r~"Ivl",~"$8B<4 + -u,(f1}X$"Z.;';
lXl SEWER LATERAL INSTALLA'l'1ON AND/OR TAP INTO SEWER MAIN...............$ l43b-
o l./y .,.~u.".eI.s ,...1.<.,,1,,- m..t +114. I atel'4! Ml4. SO /1'1 s h./lfeJ ,., /92. 7.
(X] ADMINISTRATION FEE !OR SEWER CONNECTION RECXlRDS.....................$ r.-
[>1 SEWER FACILITIES PARTtCIPA~ION FEE ($2,229 PER EDU).................$
7...!>~ Ell U - 1;"3'1 ~~~'(~IT) ~ V2- ~D U
( ) SEWER ASSESSMENT OR REIHBURSEHENT:
7..66'i - ~
( ) ORDINANCE 997 ($16.89 PER FRONTAGE-FOOT).......................$
( ) SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PER CXlUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. ......$
( J MONTGOMERY SEWER SERVlCE CHARGES...............................$
( ) SPRING V1LLEY SANITATION DISTRICT ($138 PER ACRE)..............$
( ) SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO.
.................$
[X') TRAFFIC SIGNAL nt...".....)..........................................$ 2460 - *"
'1-65T(2.\I'S - \C(,lllp>lLIU!D,r ::. 2L(6,~lf'> sl~'\lqt..~ 1806- *-
~ DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE..............................................$ ~.
Pr~pouJ /I."y A...o<.' 3) s-t.~ S.F.
.lIr~d t?1 LDt=- 9,1.+1 S.F E)(''>~ f<-C('.t2. +xzeA;;:' Is~,~ Sf:
~..................................c..................................................
( ) PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ESTIMATE ON FILE
( ) SEWER ESTIMATE ON FILE
I ) NO PUBLIC EASEMENTS ON PROPERTY
REFERENCE DRAWINGS:
UPSTREAM MANHOLE RIM ELEVATION:
Il;lUIVALENT DWELLING UNITS:
FACE OF aJRB TO FRONT PROPERTY LINE:
8'
SIDE (IF CORNER LOT):
Zt:/ (old)
(\ S{.,6 S.F.)
COMHENTS: ~ C~E~ll Gi UEI--l 't-b fL ~x:.\S:t I ~ (,. BU' L.\)pJ G
GeweteAI..- OPt""C Eo USE
****.*********************************..***************
***************** RETURN THIS CHECKLIST WITH NEXT SUBMcrSSION OF PLANS ****************
*******************************************************
(Rev 2/22/91)
I ~ -Sb
l
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
BUILDING PERMIT CHECKLIST
C fZ>'1sfr/lt:..f Ne. tV Doc:. for's' oFFICe (f?t!..plQ.t.f: Or-Flee. SleI,j')
JOB ADDRESS ,]74 '1-/' Sfr~L!.f- \S""SSORS PAR. 110. S7j-OIO- tJ9
1ST OIKDATE:/O-I5"-91 2NDOIK:/~'-,-C'-"l1 3RDOIK: 4THOIK:
THE ITEMS OIECKED BELOW HAVE NOT /~ '~~;~tio~+- APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING
THIS DEPARTHENT SHALL BE WITHHELD PENDING cnu>LIANCE:
PERMIT BY
.[ ) RECORDED SUBDIVISION MAP REQUIRED FOR ~INIUHS.....................
.[ ) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OR IDENTIFI~TION OF JOB SITE........................
.( ) GRADING PERMIT IS REQUIRED.............................................
(Xl CONSTRUCTION PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR:
I>() OJRB AND GUTTER [X) ASPHALT i'I' -"iJ1ai1 PAVING t'><J SIDEWALK RAMP
[>1') SIDEWALK 8' [ ) SEWER MAIN EXTENSION [ ) SIDEWALK UNDERDAIN
[X) DRIV!.WAY APPROACH [ ) STREET LIGHT (S) [)(] OTHERI1r,d;Q f? f/1' I
l><l SUBMISSION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS NEEDED..........~...............
[XJ DRIV!.WAYS AS SHOWN DO NOT cnu>LY WITH CITY STANDARDS.~..H:!...........
~CROACHMENT PERMIT REQUIRED........................................... ~4
bd UNDERGROUNDING OF EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES REQUIRED.................
()Q DEDICATION OF RIGHT-oF-~Y REQUIRED....................................
D<) SHOW L~TION OF EXISTING!PROPOSED SEWER LATERAL.......................
( ] SEWER LATERAL BACK-FLOW PREVENTER REQUIRED.............................
[ ) SHOW EXISTING EASEMENTS OF RECORD......................................
[ ) SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED ELEVATIONS OF LOT AT P.L.'S AND PAD.........
~ SHOW PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERN.........................................
[ ) SHOW PROPOSED FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION.................................
~ SHOW STRUCTURES REMOVED OR TO BE REMOVED............................... ~
[ ) WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED EARTHI<<lRK? IMPORT cu. YDS. EXPORT CU. YDS.
D<3 REVISE ORIGINAL PLANS AND RESUBMIT THROUGH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT
NOTES: . A ,Se. ().r(Lfe cons rvc.tion
I.,PI,G.Q.fe /{ a. oIe/er"..",( 'S be.tnq f''''ocn..r~tI(.
v
2. I""d'c-a.r<€ V$e a. 111::1 Ie.a.s e able. .{/~or .sPQce ~ old bVlfet"~1 a.llot ~rDS's a."'<"a,
O{ l.ot( 9,44/S.F. ?)
SEE NOTE .
3. n,~ s,'de walk 0., C./~ve I'" wi
All e'Hof1~...f f... f~~ cll)' /w a .,~w
1'"" c.rt o.ftey ~ .dr~e.f V'aca. tl~Y/..
s,;;~,.j4!k I~ fl,~ pub/,'C. ~ is l'/~ecl~oI.
.
LI. 5/c,6/-'<-rl"V fL-Z. -'1, /Z.Oi'lC+-IIIJc' 'VIO.vU F~T ~4 /u
NOTE: IF A CXlNSTR ION P IT IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT, IT MUST BE
OBTAINED FROM THIS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO CALLING THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR A FRAMING
OR ELECTRICAL INSPECTION.
~/.)
. <' J..
Plan check by:: L IAA /2.<-..
I C; (SEE OTHER SIDE)
-SS-