HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1997/10/28
"~ "",.r '" IFf)'
e:--'
.,
r'
Tuesday, October 28, 1997
6:00 p.m.
(,
t, ':c ,';' . Council Chambers
.'..; .i:, ,. ': ,r"'i ,~ 11:1-.... , :-... _ ... Public Services Building
;"t, IOIJ6:,tt] wtut a,UVdA .
Re!wlar Meeting of the City of Chula Vista City Co~;IiC -
CALL TO ORDER
L
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Moot _' Padilla _' Rindone _' Salas _' and
Mayor Horton _'
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. MOMENT OF SILENCE
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
October 9, 1997 (Special Joint Meeting/Worksession of the City
Council/Planning Commission) and Octo her 14, 1997 (Regular City
Council Meeting).
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Friends of the Arts board member, Jess Valenzuela, will introduce Dency Souval, Cultural Arts
Commissioner and the McCandliss award.
b. Presentation by Dean Rundle, Refuge Manager of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service on
the proposed South Bay Wildlife Refuge.
c. Port District Update by Commissioner David Malcolm.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 throufih 13)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items IIsted under the Consent Calendar wiI/ be enacted by
the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled
from the Consent Calendar wiI/ be discussed after Board and Commission Recommendations and Action Items.
Items pulled by the public wiI/ be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from the Assistant City Attnrney stating that to the best of her knowledge from
ohservance of actions taken in Closed Session on 10/21/97 in which the Assistant City
Attorney participated, that there were no actions taken which are required under the Brown
Act to be reported. It is reconunended that the letter he received and filed.
6. RESOLUTION 18802 AWARDING A PURCHASE ORDER CONTRACT TO EPIC SOLUTIONS
FOR A DIGIT AL IMAGING BOOKING SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$30,218 - As part of the tiscal year 1996/97 Grant Budget, Council appropriated
grant funds for purchase of a Digital Imaging Booking System for the Police
Department. After studying bidder proposals and based on software
compatibility with local law enforcement agencies in San Diego County. staff
recommends awarding the contract to EPIC Solutions. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution, (Chief of Police and Director of Finance)
Agenda
-2-
October 28, 1997
7 _ RESOLUTION 18803 ACCEPTING $20,000 FROM A CALIFORNIA ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE
CONTROL GRANT AND APPROPRIATING $20,000 TO ACCOUNT
NUMBER 100-1085-5103 - On 6/10/97, Council approved supplemental budget
request #7, accepting the ABC Grant in the amount of $80,000. On 6/17/97,
Council appropriated the funds. The State ABC Grant Coordinator recently
informed the City that an additional $20,000 has heen approved for overtime
expenses. The total ABC Grant will now be for $100,000. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police) 4/5th's vote required,
8. RESOLUTION 18804 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND ACCEYfING $80,000
IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY AND APPROPRIATING $80,000 BASED ON UNANTICIPATED
GRANT REVENUE TO THE ENERGY CONSERVATION FUND TO
DEVELOP A GREENST AR BUILDERS INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND
ADDING A ,60 TEMPORARY EXPERT PROFESSIONAL - In the spring
of 1997, staff applied for a special grant funding from the EP A to develop one
of the key m~sures within the Carhon Dioxide Reduction Plan. The EPA
accepted the joint application and agreed to provide $80.000 to implement the
GreeoStar Builders Incentive Program. The goal of the program is to set a new,
voluntary standard that becomes commonplace for all residential developers to
Use in every master planned community being built in all of San Diego County.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Environmental Resource
Manager and Director of Building and Housing) 4/Sth's vote required.
9. RESOLUTION 18805 APPROVING A PURCHASE ORDER AGREEMENT WITH W,M,P,
SECURITY SERVICE COMPANY TO PROVIDE SECURITY GUARD
PATROL AT CIVIC CENTER/MAIN LIBRARY, SOUTH CHULA VISTA
LIBRARY, AND EASTLAKE LIBRARY FOR THE PERIOD NOVEMBER
1, 1997 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 1998 - The Chula Vista Public Library
has contracted. with private security guard services since 1986 to provide crowd
control as well as a safe, welcoming environment for library users in all its
facilities. The Purchasing Department has issued a formal bid for security guard
services, and W.M.P. Security Service Company has been selected. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Library Director)
IO.A. RESOLUTION 18806 APPROVING FINAL MAPS OF TRACT NUMBER 97-01, UNIT I,
RANCHO DEL REY SPA III PARCEL R-6, ACCEYfING ON BEHALF
OF THE CITY PUBLIC EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP
WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF
IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT - On
2/18/97, Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Tract 97-01, Unit
1, Rancho Del Rey Ill, Parcel R-6. The Final Map, Subdivision Improvement
Agreement, and Supplemental Suhdivision Improvement Agreement are now
before Council for consideration and approval. Staff recommends approval of
the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 18807 APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 97-01, UNIT 1, RANCHO DEL REY III
PARCEL R-6 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT
Agenda
-3-
Octo her 28, 1997
11. RESOLUTION 18795 APPROPRIATING FUNDS, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF "OXFORD STREET
IMPROVEMENTS FROM FOURTH A VENUE TO FIFTH A VENUE IN
THE CITY (STL-229) - This project was originally funded during the fiscal
year 1996/97 Capital Improvement Program budget process. The project was
funded to improve pedestrian access, circulation, and alleviate a local drainage
problem at mid-hlock, It is also part of the overall sidewalk safety program
which provides for the construction of sidewalk facilities in the Montgomery
area. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
4/5th's vote required, Continued from the meeting of 10/21/97,
12. REPORT ANNUAL FISCAL STATUS REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 AND
QUARTERLY FISCAL STATUS REPORT FOR THE FIRST QUARTER
OF FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 - In accordance with Charter Section 504(f), a
report covering the final results of tiscal year 1996/97 and the first quarter of
fiscal year 1997/98 is before Council for consideration. Staff recommends
Council accept the report. (Director of Finance)
13. REPORT EXISTING POOL RENTAL FEES; AGREEMENTS WITH AGENCIES
FOR RENTAL OF POOL(S); COSTS OF POOL OPERATION; AND
RESULTS OF USER SURVEY - On 9/9/97, Council directed staff to return
with a report regarding the schedukd closure of Parkway Pool during the fal1
and winter months. Staff responded with a report to Council on 9/23/97.
Council then directed staff to return with an additional report addressing various
issues related to rental fees at City aquatic facilities, as well as additional
information on the cost and feasihility of keeping Parkway Pool open for the
three months eliminated in the fiscal year 1995/96 budget process. Staff
recommends that Council: (1) Direct staff to pursue discussions with all
appropriate agencies regarding increased rental fees; and (2) Direct staff to
continue with the scheduled closure of Parkway Pool from November 1997
through March 1998, and return to Council during the budget process for fiscal
year 1998/99 with reconunendations and options for closure in fiscal year
1998/99. (Director of Parks, Recreation and Open Space)
ADJOURNMENT TO REGULAR AND/OR JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
* * * END OF CONSENT CALENDltR * * *
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the
Council's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda for public discussion, (State law, however, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Forn." available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak,
please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action,
Agenda
-4-
October 28. 1997
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please jill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting.
14.
PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES - Council previously had
work sessions to discuss and dtwdop City-wide priorities. On 9/11/97. Council
completeu a final review of the priorities and identified seven City-wide
priorities. Council received public comment and input on the proposed top
seven priorities at a publi\: hearing on 10/21/97 which was continued to this
Council meeting. A third public hearing will be held on 1/13/98 at 6:00 p.m.
to allow for further public input and comment with the intent to complete public
testimony and then formally adopt the priorities at the third hearing. Staff
recommends Council accept public testimony on the seven priorities, follow the
staff recommendation for further puhlicizing the priorities and to schedule a
third public hearing tor tinal adoption on 1/13/98 at 6:00 p.m. (Budget
Manager and Public Information Coordinator) Continued from the meeting of
10/21/97.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions, and/or Committees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered indil'fflually by the Council
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. 11/Ose who wish to speak, please
jill out a "Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
15.
ORDINANCE 2714
AMENDING SCHEDULE X OF A REGISTER OF SCHEDULES
MAINT AINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER AS PROVIDED IN SECTION
10.48.020 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - EST ABLlSHED SPEED LIMITS
IN CERTAIN ZONES AND ESTABLISHING A SPEED LlMIT OF 35
MPH ON SOUTH GREENSVIEW DRIVE FROM CLUBHOUSE DRIVE
TO HUNTE PARKWAY, ADDING THIS LOCATION TO SCHEDULE X
(first reading) - Based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code Section
22357 and 22358, and pursuant to authority under the Municipal Code Section
10.48.020, the City Engineer has determined that in the interest of minimizing
traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the promotion of puhlic safety,
there is a need to establish a speed limit on South Greensvit':w Drive between
Cluhhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway. This street has recently been completed
and opened to traffic serving major portions of EastLake Greens. An
Engineering and Traffic Survt':Y, as required hy State law, has heen conducted
and it has been dekrmined that the appropriate speed limit in this are is to be
posted at 35 MPH. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on tirst
re,ading. (Dire'l..~tor of Puhlic Works)
Agenda
-5-
Octo her 28, 1997
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendnr.
Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers.
OTHER BUSINESS
16. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTCS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
17. MAYOR'S REPORTCS)
18. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) ajoint meeting of the City Council and the Sweetwater
Union High School Board on October 30, 1997 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, Administration
Building, and thence to the regular City Council meeting on Novemher 4, 1997 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers.
A special meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will he held immediately following tht:: City Council ffit::eting.
". declare und
~~~y:: t~~ ~~t~Y~C~~,:lk~~ ~~~,:r~r:;et~~\~:nf
. or and that I
thie Agenda/Notice posted
the Public ic on .the Bulletin Board at
Tuesday, October 28, 1997 DATED. i5~i7zBulldlng 6t Cit~ HiIIl on Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. SIGNED ;I~ ..,public Services Building
(immediately following the City Council Mt':eting) -
Citv of Chula Vista Citv Council
CLOSED SESSION AGENDA
Effective April 1, 1994, there have been new amendments to the Brown Act. Unless the City Attorney, the City
Manager or the City Council states otherwise at this time, the Council will discuss and deliberate on the following
items of business which are permitted by law to be the subject of a closed session discussion, and which the
Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the interests of the City. The Council is
required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of final action taken in closed session, and the votes
taken. However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed sessions, the videotaping will be terminated
at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from closed session, reports of final action taken,
and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nel'ertheless, the report of final action taken will be recorded in the
minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
I. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING - Existing litigation pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9
. Jones lntercable v. City of Chula Vista.
. Wolfe v. City of Chula Vista.
. Griffin v. City of Chula Vista.
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8
.
Property:
Approximately 24.95 acres of property located at 1800
Maxwell Road, Chula Vista.
Negotiating parties:
City of Chula Vista (Sid Morris) and SDG&E.
Under negotiations:
Purchase price and tenns.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fight~rs (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
2. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 4b.
Meeting Date: October 28. 1997
SUBMITTED BY:
Presentation by Dean Rundle, Refuge Manager of the
united States Fish and wildlife Service on the
Proposed South Bay wildlife Refuge.
Acting Director of Plan~i~g
City Manager -J~ ~ fJJ!(
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
Staff is preparing a report on this item that will be delivered
separately on Friday, October 24, 1997.
If; - /)
October 23, 1997
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
John Goss, City Manager J(q ~ tx.fu\
Duane E. Bazzel, Acting Assistant Director of Plannin~
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge
On October 2~, 1997, at the next City Council meeting, Mr. Dean Rundle, Refuge Manager with
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), is expected to give a presentation on the
proposed South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge (see attached
exhibit). City staff have been expecting the issuance of the draft environmental assessment and
plan for the South San Diego Bay Refuge for months; however, the draft documents have not been
issued for review and comment as of this date.
In January, City staff presented a draft proposal for the other two elements of the proposed
Refuge, including the Otay-Sweetwater Unit and Vernal Pools Stewardship Project, which are
located within the eastern portion of Chula Vista's General Plan area and linked to the Multiple
Species Conservation Program efforts. Council authorized staff to respond to USFWS with
comments regarding these two elements.
Proposed South San Diego Bav Refuge
The South San Diego Bay Refuge has been previously described by USFWS staff as an "overlay
refuge," which is a designation used when a refuge encompasses state and privately owned lands.
Property does not change ownership and existing uses of the Refuge area retain their primary
mission (i.e. Western Salt and SDG&E). Future development adjoining the Refuge is expected
to not degrade conditions existing at the time the Refuge is established. USFWS would have
administrative authority over the Refuge for the purpose of monitoring and testing; however, no
regulatory power.
The planning area for the Refuge covers the San Diego Bay from Chula Vista to the Coronado
Strand, and extending from 24th Street in National City south to the salt ponds along Imperial
Beach. The San Diego Unified Port District presently has regulatory authority over this area. The
Refuge area will likely be subject to seasonal restriction to deflect disturbance of the migratory
birds using the area during the winter months. During the summer months when avian use is low,
low-impact water contact uses may be permitted and the present 5 m.p.h. speed limit could remain
~b-/
City Council
October 23, 1997
in place. Navigational channels to the Coronado Cays and the Chula Vista Marina may not be
subject to the Refuge overlay.
Initial Concerns
The City has not yet formulated a position on the proposed Refuge and staff is concerned with
potential impacts to development of the Chula Vista Bayfront that could result from the creation
of the Refuge. However, the City would be concerned if any burdens and/or restrictions on
development of adjacent upland areas were to be applied as a result of adopting the Refuge. To
the extent that development of the Bayfront would require permits under federal jurisdiction,
consideration of impacts to the Refuge could be factored into the conditions placed on those
permits. This would potentially result in limitations on the type and extent of development that
would otherwise be acceptable.
These issues have been raised with USFWS staff and their response has been that there may be
additional conditions placed on adjacent upland development projects if the Refuge is adopted;
however, they were not specific as to what additional requirements would be considered. The City
should continue to express concern regarding the impacts that the implementation of the Refuge
would have on adjacent upland development.
Conclusion
City Council should listen, ask questions and express any concerns with the proposal being
presented by Mr. Rundle. However, it would be advisable to not make any commitments at this
point in time, and encourage staff to review and report any concerns with the draft environmental
assessment and plan for the Refuge to Council when these documents are made available.
Attachment
NOT SCANNED
(Ho ISHAREDlPLANNINGlREFUGE. WPD)
2
fj; - c2
FiQ:ure 4
~
\ \
City Boundary Unes_ \ \
, ,
~f
2.
<::.
w
<...:>
o
,,\
I I'
"I
\ I'
"~I
\ I '
"I
I I '
"I
\lj!li
l\i~!
\ \ \
South San
\ \ \
" ,
III
1 \ 1-
Location Mop
~ s<
~
, s<
o 2000 4-000 Feet
I I I
<...:>
c:::
-
()
~
u.s. Naval
RO<Iio Station
@
l.\Qin St
---
Polm Ave Palm Ave
v; v; ,
~ Imperiol Beach ~ I
'" ;:;
,
Coronado Ave I
I LEGEND
, D South San Diego Boy
Planning Area
Figure 4.
Sauth San Diego Bay Planning Area
San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge
Lfb -3
usnIS 0.:- 1_
United States Department of the Interior
FISH A;\,D WILDLIFE SERVICE
San
Diego National wildlife Refuge Complex
2736 Loker Avenue West, suite A
Carlsbad, California 92008
OCT 2 11
Ii\: J,Er'~ " f:J::~::R TO
I
I
OJtob"r
L---
16, ~ 1997----
Mayor Shirley Horton
City of Chula vista
Office of the Mayor
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, California 91910
Dear Mayor Horton:
Thank you for sending me a copy of your September 23 letter too Judy
Johnson regarding the City's position on the proposed South San
Diego Bay Unit, San Diego National Wildlife Refuge. I appreciate
the City's open-mindedness regarding the refuge proposal and also
your need for more and better information as you develop your
position.
Release of the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the South Bay
Refuge Unit has been delayed several times. These delays have been
regrettable, but have allowed the Service to better understand the
range of issues and concerns. I anticipate that the Service will
have a document for public review in December or January.
In the mean time, I would be happy to meet with you and the City
Council to provide information and answer questions you may have
about the refuge proposal. The boundaries of the various
alternatives evaluated in the EA are not going to change prior to
public release. My general perception, after talking to many
people around the South Bay, is that there is substantial
misunderstanding about what a new refuge would mean to neighbors.
There are many questions about how a new National Wildlife Refuge
wOI1Jd operate and impact neighbors that we can answer now.
If you would like to have a presentation or discussion about the
proposed refuge, either personally, or formally 'wi th the City
Council, please give me a call at (760) 930-0168. I look forward
to providing the information you need to develop Chula Vista's
position.
Sincerely,
tl' /1 I
c.c. L.i'!/ L-Uv,nCJ \
GC0(~e K(Crnpi
JJ~ tv'l 0Yl ~0
."], 1_ ,;v, Or"...:>, ~
C7J''-'WCc ~m",_,_:ei
I " /
, ... /
.,
/1 I;: /,,_
,/ /.,r '" \ ~/J, ___ ----
/~. . .."/ ./ '/I~ '... ,~ -
, .
Dean Rundle
Refuge Manager
1//7-1
,
United States Department of the Interior
1'\ REPLY REFER. ,0
FISH AKD \VILDLIFE SERVICE
SA.'> DIEGO NATIONAL \VILDLIFE REFUGE CO'llPLEX
2736 Loker Avenue West, Suite A
Carlsbad, California 92008
(760) 930-0168 Office
(760) 930-0256 Facsimile
June 11, 1997
Lawrence B. Prior
Chief Administrative Officer
County of San Diego
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear Mr. Prior:
The D. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has been working wiLl) local political
jurisdictions. go\'e=ent agencies, landowners, and public interest groups in planning three
new units to me :\ational Wildlife Refuge System in the San Diego region. In April 1997, the
Deputy Region2.1 Director for the Service signed a Finding of:\o Significant Impact/Final
Environmental .-\ssessment and approved the refuge acquisition boundaries for the Otay-
Sweetwater l'nit ad Vernal Pools Stewardship Project of the San Diego National Wildlife
Refuge (enclose;:l:i. The draft envirornnental assessment for the proposed South San Diego Bay
Unit of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge is scheduled for public release in July 1997.
The approval of a R:fuge acquisition boundary does not grant me Service jurisdiction or
control over lanis within this boundary, and this action does not make the lands within the
Refuge acquisition boundary part of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The approved
Refuge acquisition boundary only identifies those lands for which me Service has the authority
to acquire ani/or manage through various agreements with the landowner. Lands do not
become part of me National Wildlife Refuge System until they are purchased or are placed
under an agreement with the landowner that provides for the management as part of the Refuge
system. Thus, no ilew or additional zoning or land-use regulations are created by the Service
within the approved Refuge acquisition boundary for the Otay-Sweetwater Unit, Vernal Pools
Stewardship Project. and proposed South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego National
Wildlife Refuge.
A concern COffilTlOnly expressed by landowners and the business community is that the
identification and approval of a Refuge acquisition boundary will increase the level of scrutiny
that envirOnlTIema] regulatory agencies will apply to lands or projects located within the
approved Refuge acquisition boundary. Because the approved Refuge acquisition boundar)'
only gives the Service authority to acquire lands within that boundary from willing sellers. we
have worked to assure landowners and the business community that establishing an approved
-
,-/}J -3
"
acquisition boundary for a National Wildlife Refuge adds no new or additional regulatory
oversight. While landowners and permit applicants must still comply with the Clean Water
Act, Endangered Species Act, and all other applicable laws and regulations, no new or
additional permits or mitigation requirements would be applied to lands or projects by virtue
of their location within the approved Refuge acquisition boundary for the San Diego National
Wildlife Refuge. UnfortUnately, many landowners and businesses are skeptical of these
assurances. This misconception of new or additional governmental regulation has somewhat
dampened landowner support for the land acquisition program for the Otay-Sweetwater Unit,
Vernal Pools Stewardship Project, and proposed South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego
National Wildlife Refuge. ;
I request your assistance to alleviate the concerns expressed by landowners, the business
community, and local jurisdictions over the perceived impacts of an approved Refuge
acquisition boundary on land use regulations. I request that you advise your staff that the
identification of an approved Refuge acquisition boundary is not a reason to increase the level
of analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act or the California Environmental
Quality Act. to require additional mitigation conditions, or to deny the issuance of a
discretionary permit. Please understand that I fully appreciate the need for land use
regulations to serve and protect the public interest. My goals are to provide you and your
agency with an understanding of the meaning and role of the approved Refuge acquisition
boundary for the Oray-Sweetwater Unit, Vernal Pools Stewardship Project, and proposed
South San Diego B1.Y Unit and to protect the trust resources that both of our agencies strive to
conserve and man1.ge for the public.
I appreciate your 1.5sistance on this matter. Please do not hesitate to can me or Deputy Refuge
Manager ilndrew )'uen at (760) 930-0168 if you have any questions about this issue.
Sincerely,
Iv( k4~c---
W. Dean Rundle
Refuge Manager
Enclosures
,.. ,.
~'--. --
$
~-:',LC--- I\.- I
? c-.cyc-_"
,
J
-'
J/JJ-&
. . Recipienta of letter
Colonel Robert Davis
District Engineer, Los Angeles District
U.S. Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325
Michael Fischer
California Coastal Commission
1330 Broadway, Suite 1100
Oakland, CA 94612
Division Administrator
Federal Highways Administration
California District
980 9th Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814-2724
California Environmental Protection Agenc)'
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 235
Sacramento, CA 95814
Mr. Peter Douglas
Executive Director
California Coastal Commission
45 Fremont Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94105
;j} ~;/
Mr. Lawrence B. Prior
Chief Administrative Officer
County of San Diego
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
Mr. Jack McGrory
City Manager, City of San Diego
202 C. Street
San Diego, CA 92101-3846
Mr. John Goss
City Manager, City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
M. Kenneth Sulzer
Director, San Diego Association of
Governments
401 B. Street, Suite 800
San Diego, CA 92101
C-S-
~&WILDUFE
SEJl.VICE
~
,
, .
.,,~ .."';to/'
~o~.,...~'
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Proposed South San Diego Bay Unit
San Diego National Wildlife Refuge
September 1997
Why does the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service want to establish a refuge in South
San Diego Bay?
In the midst of one of the nation's largest urban areas, South San Diego Bay serves as a vital link
in the Pacific Flyway for many species of migratory birds. South San Diego Bay is an important
v.intering area for waterfowl, such as surf scoter, scaup, brant, and bufflehead, and for
shorebirds, such as northern phalarope and red knot. It is also an important breeding ground for
seabirds, including black skimmer and several species of terns. South Bay provides habitat for
several species protected under the Federal Endangered Species Act, including the California
least tern and western snowy plover.
As San Diego Bay has become more urbanized, the remaining South Bay habiuts have become
increasingly important for \\ildlife. Much of the area's best remaining mudflats, salt marshes,
and eelgrass beds are found in the South Bay. The salt ponds and surrounding shallow waters are
important habitats for seabirds and shorebirds. For example, a 1994 study recorded more than
half a rnillion birds using the salt ponds alone in a single year.
Establishing the South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge would
provide the Fish and Wildlife Service with the opportunity to conserve and manage South Bay's
variety of habitats and wildlife species for the benefit of present and future generations, in
cooperation with the U.S. Navy, State of California, local jurisdictions, and non-governmental
organizations.
What effect does designation of a national wildlife refuge boundary have on the
land within and nearby? .
No new or additional zoning or land-use regulations would be created by the Service within the
approved Refuge acquisition boundary for the proposed South San Diego Bay Unit. Land-use
designations and zoning would remain the responsibility of local jurisdictions. Development of
private land would continue to be subject to the land-use regulations of the local jurisdictions.
The identification of an approved Refuge boundary would not affect the ability of private
landowners and local jurisdictions to implement adopted land-use plans, or to continue existing
projects. The local jurisdictions would be under no requirement to amend their land-use plans to
conform with the approved Refuge boundary.
J/b -?5
The Fish and Wildlife Service works on a willing participant basis. Landowners would be under
no obligation to sell their land, or interests therein, to the Service. The approved Refuge
boundary would give the Service the authority to acquire properties from willing sellers, or to
establish cooperative agreements with other agencies. As lands are acquired by the Service,
Refuge lands would be managed pursuant to the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act. This Act provides the guidelines and directives to administer and manage
national wildlife refuges. This Act does not provide the Service with any authority to regulate
activities beyond the boundary of the Refuge. However, the Service and other Federal agencies
(such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), through a variety of other existing laws and
regulations (such as the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act), may continue to review
and comment on proposed development projects that may impact endangered and threatened
species and wetlands in San Diego Bay.
How would the Service manage lands under the National Wildlife Refuge System?
On national wildlife refuges, management activities generally include monitoring the status and
recovery of endangered, threatened, and candidate species; controlling nonnative species;
restoring and enhancing native habitats; protecting migratory birds and their habitats; and
providing wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities.
Specific activities for \\ildlife management and public use would be carefully designed for the
proposed South San Diego Bay Unit during the comprehensive management planning process.
Biological data, public input, and budget and staffing constraints would be considered in the
development of the comprehensive management plan.
This plan would also address two issues raised in the Refuge proposal: I) public view points, and
2) effects on boaters from protecting migratory waterfowl and seabirds from disturbance in fall
and winter. Management proposals to deal with both issues would be analyzed in the
comprehensive management plan. The Service is introducing both issues for public discussion
now in anticipation of the refuge management planning process.
What boundary alternatives is the Service considering?
The Service is considering four boundary alternatives:
Alternative A. Alternative A would include approximately 4,994 acres of public and private
land within the proposed South San Diego Bay Unit boundary (see Map).
Alternative B. (Preferred Alternative) Alternative B would be very similar to A, but would
exclude three areas on the perimeter of the South Bay: Silver Strand State Beach, Pond 20, and
Area 2. Alternative B would include approximately 4,772 acres of public and private land within
the proposed South San Diego Bay Unit (see Map). Alternative B would cover about 96 percent
of Alternative A.
1~ ~ '7
Alternative C. Alternative C is the preferred alternative from the 1978 environmental
assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. This boundary encompasses the salt ponds,
including Pond 20, Area 2, and part of the MKEO parcel. The only parts of Emory Cove that are
included are those south of Emory Channel. Navy land is not included. Alternative C would
include 2,203 acres of public and private land within the proposed South San Diego Bay Unit
(see Map). The area proposed for protection is approximately 44 percent of Alternative A.
Alternative D. (No Action) Under the no action alternative, the Service would not acquire,
manage or protect any land under the National Wildlife Refuge System in the South San Diego
Bay. Existing levels of protection would be expected to continue under the no action alternative.
What is the status of the proposal, and how does the proposal process work?
The Service is preparing to make a formal refuge proposal to the public in the fall. This will be
done as part of compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A). The Service
expects to release a draft land protection plan (LPP) and environmental assessment (EA) in
October for a 30-day public review. During the review period, the Service will host one or more
open houses to give the public an opportunity to discuss the project with Service representatives
and to submit written co=ents. At the end of the comment period, all co=ents received will
be compiled, read, and considered in the development of the final LPP and EA. On the basis of
the final EA, the Regional Director for Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will decide
whether to the Service should establish the proposed South San Diego Bay Unit, and if so, which
alternative best fulfills the purposes for this Refuge. The public will be advised of our decision.
J-/)) ~ J t:'
Table 1. Acres of habitat within the proposed South San Diego Bay Unit.
'Study' ,XIter;':iiti'JC'cQ ~~fJ;iitiy:~ rAif~Fiiitiv~~ Wte~'ttiv'e~
; Area, . :;::~:;:~t;,~ !~~~:f;,~~ !~~.l~~ f~:'~~~:t~i
Submerged land .. 1,721 1,721 1,721 380 0
Eelgrass 691 691 691 50 0
. ,
Mud flat/intertidal 492 492 492 429 0
Salt.marsh:' ;.. 57 57 57 54 0
C< ,
Salt Ponli' .,e. 1,175 1,175 1,068 1,175 0
",..
Beac~':~1:j1~nes;'." ;<' 696 696 589 89 0
andcreatedhiiId "'".".
, u,,,',...,
Riparian. 8 8 8 , 0
j
Fallow 154 154 146 23 0
Agricultur~I.'land';,',"
. 4,994 4,994 4,772 2,203 0
Total * Does not include acreage along dikes in salt ponds.
Jj~ - I (
BOUNDARY ALTERNATIVES, PROPOSED SOUTH SAN DIEGO BAY UNIT
SAN DIEGO NATIONAL WilDLIFE REFUGE
Alternative A
%
:;:.
Ci
"
\\~
\ \ 0
\\~
I\~ --
II - ~'
\\1
It,
1\ Ii ~
\It.
\11'
\"1
~ \ \ \
~\\ \ ~
\1]
~ H\
\11
- 1\,
11\
- \
\~ \ \
C J
(-
j
o
~
4,994 Acres I
Alternative C
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
"
\\~
\ \ 0
\\~
I\~ -
II --
- \
\~ \ \
\ ~___J
\
_/
~
o
:;:.
Ci
o
~
~
I
2,203 Acres I
Alternative B - Preferred Alternative
- \
~ \ \
\ C J
(-
j
~
o
:;:.
Ci
o
~
~
4,722 Acres I
1 Silver Strand State Beach
j
2 Area Two
3 M KEG / Fenton Parcel
4 Pond 20
o
2
3
I"io... ___
Miles
~!f?
:--.... ~-:
~~
mY OF
CHUlA VISTA
TRANSMITTAL MRMORANDITM
October 23, 1997
SUBJECT
The Honorable Mayor and City Council _C 1.1
John D. Goss, City Manager Jl:{ ~~\
City Council Meeting of October 28, IJ97
TO
FROM
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting of
Tuesday, October 28, 1997. Comments regarding the written communications are as follows:
5a. This is a memo from the Acting City Attorney regarding actions taken in Closed
Session on October 21, 1997. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE
RECEIVED AND FILED.
~~~
~
~~~~
..................~
OlY Of
CHUtA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
DATE:
October 23, 1997
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council ~I
., 0..-
Ann Y. Moore, Asslstant Clty Attorney
TO:
SUBJECT:
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meeting of October 21, 1997
The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss Conference with
Real Property Negotiator, labor negotiations and conference with
legal counsel regarding existing litigation as follows:
. City of Chula vista v. The Fieldstone Company, et al.
. Jones Intercable v. city of Chula vista
. Wolfe v. City of Chula vista
The Assistant City Attorney hereby reports to the best of her
knowledge from observance of actions taken in the Closed Session in
which the Assistant city Attorney participated, that no action was
taken in the Closed Session of October 21, 1997 which is required
under the Brown Act to be reported.
AYM:clb
C:\Council\C!osed
s~-/
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
*f'a;I:-C<:r\SI.f!u~p~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item &
Meeting Date 10-28-97
/ g't"tflc2
RESOLUTION AWARDING A PURCHASE ORDER
CONTRACT TO EPIC SOLUTIONS FOR A DIGITAL
IMAGING BOOKING SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$30,218 ^~V
. ",';'Ie'
Chief of POli~~~
Director of Fina e
REVIEWED BY: City Mana:jjfa.~~ 5ths Vote: Yes_ No~)
As part of the FY 96-97 Grant BUdget,'-~un6fl appropriated grant funds
for purchase of a Digital Imaging Booking System for the Police
Department. After studying bidder proposals and based on software
compatibility with local law enforcement agencies in San Diego County,
staff recommends awarding the contract to EPIC Solutions.
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Solutions
$30,218.
BOARDS AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
the resolution awarding a
for a Digital Imaging
purchase order contract
Booking System in the
to EPIC
amount of
DISCUSSION:
The Police Department currently manually processes bookings. As a
result, "instant" photo line-ups and suspect identification are not
available. Council appropriated funds from the State COPS and Federal
Law Enforcement grants on October 22, 1996, for purpose of acquiring a
Digital Imaging Booking System and related equipment. In response,
staff advertised the Request for Bid on 7-26-97 which opened on
8-21-97.
The proposed imaging system will provide instant suspect photo
line-ups. The system does this on demand by generating 8 1/2" x 11"
photo copy sheets, each containing a mug photo of a suspect with five
randomly (computer) selected mug photos of other physically similar
individuals. The photo-lineups generated by the imaging system are
legall~ acceptable, fair, and impartial visual aids used by pOlice
investlgators to show to eye witnesses to crimes in order to identify
criminal suspects.
The ima~ing system also eliminates the need for hard files, and saves
staff tlme as well as promoting interagency coordination. The photo
image camera will take photographs of suspects, and store the images
in a computer until they are needed. The images can be recalled later
by the Chula Vista Police Department and, as linkage between San Diego
County agencies using the same software is realized, the images and
0-)
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 10-28-97
booking information will be shared amon$ the cooperating agencies.
This sharing of information will result In instant identification of
the suspects and ~hoto line-ups. This technology replaces the 35mm
booking camera equlpment and the need for film and hard files to store
the images of the suspects. Staff time will be saved by reducing the
amount of time required in handling the film, transportation of film
to and from processing vendors, filing film and making prints from
negatives. Approximately $1,440.00 will be saved annually by no
longer using 35mm film and film processing for booking photographs.
Nine potential bidders were contacted; two formal bids were received
from qualified vendors who responded as follows:
VENDOR
BASIC SYSTEM
WITH FINGERPRINT READER
TFP
EPIC Solutions
$22,855.00
$30,218.00
$55,310.00
$30,218.00
Staff recommends the contract for the Photo Digital Booking Imaging
System be awarded to EPIC Solutions based on the following factors:
1) A market search of similar booking systems and the ability to
interface with the San Diego Police Department, El Cajon Police
Department, San Diego Marshal's Office, San Diego Harbor Police,
Coronado Police Department, and Department of Corrections, EI
Cajon. This system will permit sharing of images and databases
among participating agencies. Also, staff will be able to
immediately create the department's initial data base by
transferring information from the City of San Diego's data base.
This will save staff time and make "instant" photo line-ups and
suspect identifications possible.
2) The "Fingerprint Reader" feature of the proposed system allows the
department to scan the right thumbs of suspects and digitize the
fingerprint pattern into the booking photo database. Combined
with the booking photo, this reduces the chance of false booking
information and allows for instant suspect identification.
Moreover, the EPIC product is an "open architecture" design, which
means it is flexible and adaptable to growth as new technology
comes available and does not require specific hardware, databases,
or operating systems. It allows easy expansion capabilities so
additional users, devices and integration to other applications
may be added as needed.
3) EPIC offers the full system requirements, including the "Finger
Print Reader" component as set forth by staff and fits within the
funding limits of the grant. Also, EPIC is a San Diego based
company that recently gained national recognition for producing
" -d.--
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Page 3, Item_
Meeting Date 10-28-97
the Megan's Law CD-Rom technologr which is now available for use
by all law enforcement agencies ln California.
Of the two vendors who submitted formal bids (EPIC Solutions and TFP) ,
EPIC solutions provided the most complete and cost effective system.
Furthermore, staff determined that other agencies in the County using
this system were satisfied with the product and service provided by
EPIC Solutions. The purchase price includes licensing, installation,
training, and hardware and software maintenance for one year. Ongoing
hardware maintenance is not recommended. Staff believes we have the
appropriate expertise in-house to support the system hardware. Staff
does recommend purchasing and continuing the EPIC software maintenance
agreement to insure the imaging system remains current with all system
upgrades and to insure proper technical support in case of formidable
service requirements. The annual maintenance fee for the EPIC system
software is $2,240.00. This ongoing fee will be paid by Information
Systems from their Software Maintenance Account #0213. The
Information Systems Manager and Purchasing Agent are in agreement with
staff's recommendation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
An annual software maintenance fee of $2,240.00 (to be drawn from
Information Systems Software Maintenance Account #0213) will remain an
ongoin9 cost during the life of the EPIC Digital Imaging System. This
fee wlll not, however, take effect until twelve months following the
purchase and installation of the system. There is no net impact in
the General Fund. Grant funds have been a~propriated in the FY 96-97
Police budget for purchase of the EPIC Dlgital Imaging System at a
total cost of $30,218.00 including hardware, software, training, and
hardware and software maintenance during the first year.
~~J
RESOLUTION NO. /cr~c?~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AWARDING A PURCHASE ORDER CONTRACT
TO EPIC SOLUTIONS FOR A DIGITAL IMAGING
BOOKING SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,218
WHEREAS, as part of the FY 96-97 Grant Budget, Council
appropriated grant funds for purchase of a Photo Imaging Booking
System for the Police Department; and
WHEREAS, two formal bids were received as follows:
Vendor
Basic Svstem
with Finqerprint Reader
TFP $22,855.00
EPIC Solutions $30,218.00
$55,310.00
$30,218.00
WHEREAS, after studying bidder proposals and based on
software compatibility with local law enforcement agencies in San
Diego county, staff recommends awarding the contract to EPIC
Solutions based on the following factors:
1. A market search of similar booking systems and the
ability to interface with the San Diego Police
Department, EI Cajon Police Department, San Diego
Marshal's Office, San Diego Harbor Police, Coronado
Police Department, and Department of Corrections,
EI cajon. This system will permit sharing of
images and databases among participating agencies.
Also, staff will be able to immediately create the
department's initial data base by transferring
information from the City of San Diego's data base.
This will save staff time and make "instant" photo
line-ups and suspect identifications possible.
2. The "Fingerprint Reader" feature of the proposed
system allows the department to scan the right
thumbs of suspects and digitize the fingerprint
pattern into the booking photo database. Combined
with the booking photo, this reduces the change of
false booking information and allows for instant
suspect identification. Moreover, the EPIC product
is an "open architecture" design, which means it is
flexible and adaptable to growth as new technology
comes available and does not require specific
hardware, databases, or operating systems. It
allows easy expansion capabilities so additional.
users, devices and integration to other
applications may be added as needed.
I
c:,-r
3. EPIC offers the full system requirements, including
the "Finger Print Reader" component as set forth by
staff and fits within the funding limits of the
grant. Also, EPIC is a San Diego based company
that recently gained national recognition for
producing the Megan's Law CD-Rom technology which
is now available for use by all law enforcement
agencies in California.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby award a Purchase Order Contract to
Epic Solutions for a Digital Imaging Booking system in the amount
of $30,218.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
~~~~~
John M. Kaheny, city Attorney
C:\rs\epic
2
~~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 7
Meeting Date 10/28/97
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION / 81rt73 ACCEPTING $20,000 FROM A CALIFORNIA
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL GRANT AND APPROPRIATING $20,000
TO ACCOUNT #100-1085-5103.
Chief of POliC::'-"\'-,'" ~
':J<v~
City Manager j~ ~ ./?
(4/5ths Vote: Yes..x. No_)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
At its meeting of June 10,1997 Council approved supplemental budget request #7, accepting the
ABC Grant in the amount of $80,000. On June 17, 1997 Council appropriated the funds. The
State ABC Grant Coordinator recently informed the City that an additional $20,000 has been
approved for overtime expenses.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council adopt this resolution appropriating the additional $20,000 for
overtime expenses as designated by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The grant provided by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control is in its fourth month. In this
time the Police Department, through a partnership with ABC, has been able to provide training for
139 licensed establishments at their location. This training provided clarification of current ABC
laws. We have also been able to provide two days of specialized training to all licensees by an
ABC training specialist. All this has been to assist alcohol licensed businesses in our city to
succeed, and comply with the laws. In addition, we have been able to direct enforcement towards
those not in compliance with the law.
The initial request for funding was for $100,000. These funds were to pay one full-time salary
and provide $32,000 in overtime. The overtime was to be used in the enforcement of ABC laws
for particular problem establishments. Many of these establishments are generating high calls for
service thus, keeping patrol officers from serving the community in a proactive manner.
ABC took $20,000 from this portion of the grant for use in other communities. They recently
discovered additional funds and have offered to provide the full $100,000 we initially requested.
This $20,000 will be appropriated to its original request of overtime for the grant projects.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this resolution has no fiscal impact on the general fund. The $20,000 will be
appropriated from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund to Account #100-1085-5103.
All overtime costs associated with the operation of the ABC Grant will be fully reimbursed.
(be) C:\wp51\scs\a113s\abcgrant [October 22, 1997 (9:55am)]
7~/
RESOLUTION NO. )'j(g-j/ 3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $20,000 FROM A
CALIFORNIA ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL GRANT
AND APPROPRIATING $20,000 TO ACCOUNT NO. 100-
1085-5103
WHEREAS, at the meeting
approved supplemental budget request
the amount of $80,000; and
of June 10, 1997, Council
#7 accepting the ABC Grant in
WHEREAS, on June 17, 1997, Council appropriated the
funds, however, the State ABC Grant Coordinator recently informed
the City that an additional $20,000 has been added to the grant for
overtime expenses; and
WHEREAS, the total ABC Grant will now be for $100,000 and
it is necessary to appropriate the additional $20,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby accept $20,000 from the Alcoholic
Beverage Control and appropriates the $20,000 from the
unappropriated balance of the General Fund to Account No. 100-1085-
5103.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
(k~~.
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
C: \ rs\ove rtille . ahc
/~2
Item
Date: 10/28/97
~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item Title:
Resolution /~g--".1~prOVing agreement between the United States
Environmental Protection Agency and the City and accepting $80,000 in
grant funds from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and
appropriating $80,000 based on unanticipated grant revenue to the Energy
Conservation Fund to develop a GreenStar Builders Incentive Program
and adding a .60 Temporary Expert Professional.
Submitted by: Environmental Resource Manage~
Director of Building and Ho;r~jJ.,
a.",_", by, Ci~ M_~ ~ LY!;\ (4151b V'I" y,U. N.-!
In the spring of 1997, staff applied for a special grant from the EP A to develop one of the key
measures within the Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan. The EP A accepted the joint application
and agreed to provide $80,000 to implement the GreenStar Builders Incentive Program (hereafter
referred to as "GreenStar"). Staff is recommending approval of the agreement and budget
therefor.
The Goal of the GreenStar Program is to set a new, voluntary standard that becomes
commonplace for all residential developers to use in every master planned community being
built, not only in the City of Chula Vista, but the Southwest region as well.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council approve resolution to approve agreement between the U.S. EPA and the City; accept a
grant of $80,000 from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and appropriate
$80,000 based on unanticipated grant revenue to the Energy Conservation Fund to develop a
GreenStar Builders Incentive Program and adding a .60 Temporary Expert Professional in order
to implement the attached program within a two year time-frame.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: The Carbon Dioxide Reduction Task
Force has supported this measure as one of the top twenty measures for implementation in the
Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan.
1
6-"(
Item
Date: 10/28/97
DISCUSSION:
In the spring of 1997, staff presented the Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan to the Council at a
Council workshop. One of the items that the Council and Task Force particularly liked was the
GreenStar Builders Incentive Program. The City distributed the Plan to many agencies,
including the EP A and they reviewed the Plan and invited the City to apply for a selective grant
to implement one of the key measures within the Plan, the GreenStar Builders Incentive
Program.
GreenStar encourages builders to voluntarily incorporate energy efficient features in their
projects, rewards them with GreenStar recognition, and potentially may link their success with
lower permit fees. The objective is to drastically reduce energy consumption in new buildings
through publicly recognizing exemplary builders, the materials they use and acknowledge energy
efficiency as a marketing tool.
GreenStar will target new development, particularly master plan communities. The program is
anticipated to penetrate 50% of new construction and remodeling projects, once fully
implemented. This results in avoided CO, damage of$780,000 and energy savings of
$2,664,000. CO, reduction impacts are approximately 15,600 tons per year by the year 2010.
Based upon projected growth between now and the year 2010, approximately 18,000 new
residences will be built. Staff anticipates this program will target 50% of all new construction,
including commercial and residential remodels. The 50% market penetration of new residential
construction was based upon energy saving and carbon emission reductions developed within the
Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan. This equates to approximately 9,000 homes and 4.5 million
square feet of commercial space by the year 20 I O. It also results in a CO2 emissions target of
15,600 tons per year and $2,600,000 in energy savings per year. The homeowner will realize a
savings of$350 per year for a typical 1,500 square foot house. This figure reflects a 10% energy
efficiency improvement from previous construction material which would have been used.
Staffs objectives in developing GreenStar is to:
a) Result in consumers requesting GreenStar homes as opposed to those without
GreenStars, when making their purchasing decision.
b) Create a 'stamp of quality' associated with the GreenStar label which dictates a
specific level-of-care associated with the builder, and a level of cost savings for
the buyer.
2
g-';2
Item
-
Date: 10/28/97
c) Develop a user-friendly program easily transferrable to other cities in California
and the United States.
GreenStar will become a template for cities in California and nation-wide to encourage practical
building construction measures and integrates those measures into local land-use design,
construction material choices by private industry, and Building Department decisions. The City
will be required to develop collateral material, brochures and marketing materials for distribution
to homebuilders, commercial real estate developers and homeowners. Staff will develop a
package, which will be presented to Council for approval, that will be designed for city planners
to use and will help both staff and Council identify and reward projects that exceed state energy
requirements and meet various GreenStar milestone levels. At the time the package is presented
to Council, Council will have the option of reviewing whether to tie the GreenStar milestone
levels with lowered permit fees, thus creating an incentive for the developer to use energy
efficient construction techniques. This scoring package is designed to be transferrable to cities
throughout California and the United States.
The City of Austin, Texas, of which this program is modelled, has been operating a GreenStar
Program since the mid 1990s. In 1996, this program saved 5,627 tons of CO, emissions, which
is about four times the savings projected from the City's vanpool program. A recent Performance
Measure Report developed by the City of Austin states that 633 homes annually and a total of
3,800 residences, have participated in the GreenStar program since 1991. The Austin Green
Building Program is a voluntary program which provides a marketing and recognition advantage
for those who participate. Austin is one of the fastest growing cities in the U.S. and they are
experiencing residential new construction permits at unprecedented rates, however because their
program focuses only on providing a marketing edge for the builder, only 10% of the Austin
development community has taken advantage of the program. Chula Vista's program, in
contrast, will not only focus on providing a marketing advantage for the builder, but also
financial and technical advantages as well.
The program will include an analysis to determine the success of the program as well as cost
savings to the consumer and the builder. The analysis will measure the following:
a) Participant Cost Benefit/Cost Ratio:
Savings on energy bills + financial Incentives
Customer's additional cost incurred to participate
The customer, or buyer, must obtain a cost saving from what they would otherwise be spending.
This will be an important indicator of the program's success.
3
Y---3
Item
Date: 10/28/97
b) Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio:
Avoided cost (Fuel + Poweq>lant Costs)
Conservation program admin cost + customer's
additional cost incurred to participate
This measurement will determine the societal benefits of such a program. The benefits are all
cost savings associated with avoiding the need to generate and deliver power to program
participants.
Tasks/Project Plan:
The following is the approved strategy staff will use to develop the program:
1. Working Group: Convene a public/private working group of stakeholders to
review established programs in other jurisdictions. Contact other jurisdiction staff
through meetings held with the City of Austin and the City of Portland to examine
what experiences they have had administering such programs. Identify the pitfalls
of administering complex energy star programs and how to avoid such
administrative problems.
months 1-12
2. Recognition Program: Formulate a recognition program that fits Chula Vista's
criteria, capabilities and geographic circumstances. This includes hiring a
consultant, if necessary. A check list approach will be used as a template to
develop the Green Star program and efficiency criteria for an energy efficient
design "building design and construction check list". The categories will include
(a) design, (b) siting, (c) materials, (d) equipment. A first draft template is
enclosed.
months 1- 5
3. Develop a Plan Review: that scores both qualitative presence of an energy
feature and quantitative characteristics. Once the program has operating
experience the working group will increase the quantitative precision of scoring
efficiency and awarding recognition.
months 4-5
4
g-~f
Item
Date: 10/28/97
4. Create a Process to potentially reduce permitting fees in conjunction with
meeting specified milestones when achieving varied GreenStar levels of
achievement. This will be one option presented to Council to tie the program
together with incentives for participants.
months 5-6
5. Assemble and Develop information and promotional materials for distribution to
citizens and builders. Construct a media and public education campaign to
announce the program and to encourage issues between the buying public and
designers and builders.
months 6-8
6. Develop a Training Program for building department plan review staff to
efficiently provide information about GreenStar to all permittee that have projects
going through plan review.
months 6-12
7. Designate building department plan review staff to review Energy Efficiency
information with permittee. Designate appropriate staff to review plans and
assign a recognition score to projects as appropriate.
months 11-12
8. Provide builders/owners with recognition certification; conduct annual
beautification awards and incorporate success stories into the Business for an
Environmentally Sustainable Tomorrow (BEST) awards program and marketing
effort.
month 12 and beyond
10. Monitor participating building performance to evaluate energy and carbon
dioxide savings.
months 18 - 24
5
o~s
Item
Date: 10/28/97
Staffine
The grant requires an in-kind match, which will be provided through existing staff support.
Staff expenses will total $47,391, of which $5,831 of this total will be reimbursed by the grant
and $41,560 (equal to the EPA required 34% match) will be provided in in-kind stafftime. The
$5,831 will help in cost recovery of existing staff positions. An additional $29,169 from the
grant is proposed to hire a Temporary Expert Professional (TEP). The TEP will be in charge of
managing the project, developing a working task force to oversee development and
implementation, conducting research, working with the various departments, convening staff and
communicating with the federal agencies and private industry organizations effected by the
program. The TEP will also guide the consultant, create the marketing materials, market the
program and implement a training schedule of existing staff to integrate the program into the
permitting process.
In addition to the $80,000 grant amount, the City will be providing an in-kind match through
existing staff support worth $41,560 to help develop the program. It is anticipated this staff time
will not effect the existing work load of the individuals involved in the project. The grant allows
the city to obtain credit for staff time spent on developing the program, time staff would need to
spend on the program to develop it successfully, even ifit was not a required match. This
includes personnel that would need to be involved in the development of the program in order to
successfully implement the program. In-kind staff time includes the Environmental Resource
Manager, Director of Building and Housing, Chief Plans Examiner, and Administrative
Secretary. The existing staff breakdown is found on Attachment B. $5,831 of the grant funds
have been allocated to cover a portion of existing staff costs.
FISCAL IMP ACT:
The City will receive $80,000 in unanticipated grant revenue from the EP A to be placed in the
Energy Conservation Fund. The grant covers 100% of the supplies, consulting services,
marketing brochures and program materials needed to develop and implement the program. The
grant covers a portion of the necessary staff funding, up to $35,000. This project will go beyond
this fiscal year. We plan to appropriate the full grant amount of $80,000; however if we have not
completely expended the grant funds and some promotion will continue into next fiscal year,
staff will include the ongoing appropriation in the FY 98-99 budget.
Total staff expenses are $47,391, with $5,831 reimbursed by the grant and $41,560 in in-kind
staff time designated for the project. This in-kind match of $41 ,560 in staff time will be
provided toward the total cost of the project, for a budget grand total of$121,560. The $41,560
6
y- ~
Item
Date: 10/28/97
amounts to 34% of the total program budget cost as the city's share to meet EP A's 34% matching
requirement. EP A pays 100% of all other costs associated with the program budget.
A Temporary Expert Professional position will be added, which will be paid out ofthe grant.
The in-kind services will come from allocating staff time in the Building and Housing,
Environmental Resource Management, and Administration Departments. Staff time will be used
to develop and implement the GreenStar program. We anticipate being able to provide this staff
time over the next two years without affecting the balance of the work load in each of the
designated departments.
If Council approves the proposed budget, $80,000 will be appropriated from the unappropriated
balance of the General Fund to the Energy Conservation Fund into a new account 280-2813.
These funds will be reimbursed to the City upon successful completion of the tasks listed above.
Attachments:
A: Budget
B: In-Kind Staff Breakdown
C: EPA Contract
7
0-'- /
RESOLUTION NO. / !5i? ?l Y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AND THE CITY AND ACCEPTING $80,000 IN GRANT
FUNDS FROM THE EPA AND APPROPRIATING $80,000
BASED ON UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE TO THE
ENERGY CONSERVATION FUND TO DEVELOP A
GREENSTAR BUILDERS INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND
ADDING A .60 TEMPORARY EXPERT PROFESSIONAL
WHEREAS, in the spring of 1997, staff applied for a
special grant funding from the EPA to develop one of the key
measures within the Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan; and
WHEREAS, the EPA accepted the
agreed to provide $80,000 to implement
Incentive Program ("GreenStar"); and
j oint application and
the GreenStar Builders
WHEREAS, the goal of the GreenStar Program is to set a
new, voluntary standard that becomes commonplace for all
residential developers to use in every master planned community
being built, not only in Chula Vista, but in all of San Diego
County; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending approval of the agreement
and budget therefor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby approve an agreement between the
united States Environmental Protection Agency and the city to
develop a GreenStar Builders Incentive Program, a copy of which is
on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
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
accept $80,000 from the EPA and appropriate it to the Energy
Conservation Fund 280-2813.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a .60 temporary Expert
Professional position is hereby authorized to be added, which will
be paid for out of the grant.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Ov.- ~ ~
Kenneth Larsen, Director of
Building and Housing
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
C:\rs\greenstar
fj----;E(
Item
Date: 10/28/97
ATTACHMENT A
Budget for: 280-2813
Energy Conservation Fund - GreenStar Energy Efficiency Program
TOTAL: $80,000
Account Category Total Amount
5101 Salary & Wages $ 27, 727
Temporary Expert Professional $ 27,727
5145 Benefits (Pars @ 3. 75%) $ 1,040
5143 Medicare (1.45%) $ 402
5221 Travel $ 2,000
5202 Other Specialized Services $ 3,000
(graphic designfor collateral materials, template)
5212 Printing/binding $ 6,000
5218 Postage $ 3,000
5222 Promotional Expenses $ 1,000
5291 In House Staffing Expenses $ 5,831
5298 Contractual $30,000
TOTAL:
$80,000
8
8;7
ATTACHMENT B
List of Personnel - In Kind Staff
Position FTE FTE In-Kind Costs
Hours (with fringe benefits
included)
Environmental Resources Manager .120 250 $ 8,414
Director of Building and Housing .039 81 $ 3,257
Chief Plans Examiner .160 332 $10,857
Plans Examiner .118 246 $ 6,514
Senior Building Inspector .178 370 $ 9,771
Administrative Secretary .069 143 $ 2,747
Total:
$41,560
:?~J{J
EPA OI'FICIAl PILE COpy
~ AmB SIGNATUIU<
.- .'il']- "j- IIAil
.,,, ~~,'" I ,-:." ~
Page 1 01
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 1. ASSISTANCE ID NO. 2. LOG NUMBER
C X 825929-01.0
EPA ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT / AMENDMENT 3. DATE OF AWARD 4. MAILING DATE
PART I . ASSISTANCE NOTIFICATION INFORMATION lJllt:; I ~ ::--;'::;1 ^,I~ ') ') 1007
v
5. AGREEMENT TYPE 6. PAYMENT METHOD
Cooper.tw. Agreement X ~ Adv.nc:e D Reimburoement o ACH#
GrlntAgreement SendP.ymentRequeetto: LAS VEGAS, 17. TYPE OF ACTION
A..illt.lnce Amendment FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CENTER NEW PROJECT
8. RECIPIENT 9. PAYEE
R CITY OF CHULA VISTA DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
E 276 FOURTH AVENUE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
C
I CHULA VISTA, CA91910 276 FOURTH AVENUE
P CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
I
E EIN NO. I CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
N 956000690 50 10. RECIPIENT TYPE
T 11. PROJECT MANAGER AND TELEPHONE NO. (618) 681-5~8b CITY, VILLAGE, TOWN, BOROUGH
0 BAMBERGER, BARBARA 12. ADMINISTERING OFFICE / LAB
R CITY OF CHULA VISTA
G 276 FOURTH AVENUE R09
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
E 13. ISSUING OFFICE (CITY / STATE) 14. EPA PROJECT / STATE OFFICER AND TELEPHONE NO.
P WASHINGTON, DC 20460 MICHAEL STENBURG
A REGION 9, 75 HAWTHORNE ST.
C Grant Specialist for this project: US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
0
N CHERIE BARRY SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-3901
T (202) 564.5312 (415) 744-1182
A 15. EPA CONGRESSIONAL LIAISON &. PHONE 16. STATE APPL ID (CleerlnghouaeJ 17. SCIENCE FIELD \18. PROJECT STEP
C
T BARBARA BROOKS, (202) 260-5660 NIA 99 rNWT ConIltruN}A Gr.ntt; Only)
19. STATUTORY AUTHORITY 20. REGULATORY AUTHORITY 21. STEP 2 + 3 & STEP 3 (WWT Conetnu::tiQl1 Gr.m. Only)
CLEAN AIR ACT: SEC. 103 40 CFR PART 31 &. Treatment Level
b. Project Type "N7A
Co Tre..tment Process
d ~;
22. PROJECT TITLE AND DESCRIPTION CARBON DIOXIDE REDUCTION PLAN: GREEN STAR BUILDERS
INCENTIVE PROGRAM - To promote the use of energy efficient materials and construction
measures by providing recognition to builders who choose to employ such methods.
23. PROJECT LOCATION (Are.. Impacted by Project)
City/Place Courrty Sttlte I congre~~al District
CHULA VISTA SAN DIEGO CA
24. ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (CFDA Program No.... TItle) 66.606: 25. PROJECT PERIOD 26. BUDGET PERIOD
SURVEYS, STUDIES, INVESTIGATIONS, SPECL 08/25/97 - 08/24/99 08/25/97 - 08/24/99
27. COMMUNITY POPULATION 28. TOTAL BUDGET PERIOD COST 29. TOTAL PROJECT PERIOD COST
f'NWT Construction Granta Only) NIA $121,560 $121,560
FUNDS FORMER AWARD THIS ACTION AMENDED TOTAL
30. EPA Amount Thill Action $0 $80,000 $80,000
31. EPA In-Kind Amount 0 0 0
32. Unexpended Prior Vur Balance 0 0 0
33. Other Federal Fund. 0 0 0
34. Recipient Contribution 0 41,560 41,560
35. State Contribution 0 0 0
36. Local Contribution 0 0 0
37. Other Con'ribution 0 0 0
38. Allowable Project Coet $0 $121,560 $121,560
,.. Site Name Document FY Approp. Budget Program )bject Site/Project Cost Obligation ,..
F Control Jrganization Element Class rganizatlon DeobJigation
I Number
S UB0110 9798 B 41U7 HCX 1.83 80,000
C
A
L "
EPA Form 57QO-20A (Rev. 5-82). Replaces previous editiolUl and EPA Form" l;"Tno.. ',r! and D,.nof hich are obllOlete.
g-/7
PART II . APPROVED BUDGET
ASSISTANCE IDENTIFICATION: C X 825929-01-0
Page 2 of 6
TABLE A - OBJECT CLASS CATEGORY TOTAL APPROVED ALLOWABLE
(Non-conatrlJCtion) BUDGET PERIOD COST
1. PERSONNEL $63 929
2. FRINGE BENEFITS 12631
3. TRAVEL 2000
4. EQUIPMENT 0
5. SUPPLIES 9000
6. CONTRACTUAL 30 000
7. CONSTRUCTION 0
8. OTHER 4000
9. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES $121 560
10. INDIRECT COSTS: RATE % BASE 0
11. TOTAL (Shar.: Recipient 34.00 % Federal 66.00 %.) $121,560
12. TOTAL APPROVED ASSISTANCE AMOUNT $80,000
TABLE B - PROGRAM ELEMENT CLASSIFICATION
(N~uction)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. TOTAL (Share: Recipient % Federal %.j
13. TOTAL APPROVED ASSISTANCE AMOUNT
TABLE C - PROGRAM ELEMENT CLASSIFICATION
(Construction)
1. ADMINISTRATION EXPENSE ' '
2. PRELIMINARY EXPENSE
3. LAND STRUCTURES, RIGHT-OF-WAY
4. ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING BASIC FEES
5. OTHER ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING FEES
6. PROJECT INSPECTION FEES
7. LAND DEVELOPMENT
8. RELOCATION EXPENSE
9. RELOCATION PAYMENTS TO INDIVIDUALS AND BUSINESS
10. DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL
11. CONSTRUCTION AND PROJECT IMPROVEMENT
12. EQUIPMENT
13. MISCELLANEOUS
14. TOTAL CUneo1t,.. 13}
15. ESTIMATED INCOME (!hpplico"')
16. NET PROJECT AMOUNT (Une 14 mlnus1S)
17. LESS: INELIGIBLE EXCLUSIONS
18. ADD: CONTINGENCIES
19. TOTAL (Share: Reclplenl % Federal %.)
20. TOTAL APPROVED ASSISTANCE AMOUNT g<j2
I:t'A I orm 5700..20 ~ (Hev $-82)
PART 11I- AWARD CONDITIONS
ASSISTANCE IDENTIFICATION: C X 825929-01-0
Page 3 016
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. In accordance with Section 2(d) of the Prompt Payment Act (P.L. 97-177), Federal
funds may not be used by the recipient for the payment of interest penalties to
contractors when bills are paid late nor may interest penalties be used to satisfy cost
sharing requirements. Obligations to pay such interest penalties will not be obligations
of the United States.
2. In order to comply with the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, the recipient will
complete and return the attached "Payment Information Form ACH Vendor Payment
System," (TFS Form 3881) to the following address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas Financial Management Center
P.O. Box 98515
Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-8515
3. As required by EPA regulations, the recipient agrees to submit a Financial Status
Report (FSR) (Standard Form 269) within 90 days after the end of this budget period
to the following address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas Financial Management Center
P.O. Box 98515
Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-8515
When the recipient submits their final FSR, they will in one of the following ways make
an adjustment for the amount of Federal funds, if any, received in excess of the EPA
share of the reported total budget period costs:
(a) If the recipient is paid through EPA-ACtI, they shall, in accordance
with the enclosed payment guidance dated May 1995, refund excess
assistance funds by either submitting a credit on a current EPA-ACH
Payment Request or by sending a check to the lockbox address: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas Financial Management
Center, P.O. Box 371293M, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15251.
(b) If the recipient is paid by treasury check, they shall, in accordance with
the enclosed payment guidance dated May 1995, refund excess
assistance funds by submitting a check to the lock box address in (a)
above.
If funds are due to the recipient at the time of submission of the final FSR, the recipient
shall follow the procedures as outlined on the enclosed payment guidance to request
the appropriate amount of funds from EPA.
4. EPA participation in the salary rate (excluding overhead) paid to individual consultants
is limited to the maximum daily rate for a Level IV of the Executive Schedule, which is
currently $443.50.
~/3
EPA Form 5700-2OA (Rev. .5-82)
PART 11I- AWARD CONDITIONS
ASSISTANCE IDENTIFICATION: C X 825929-01-0
Page 4 of 6
5. Rights to inventions made under this assistance agreement are subject to the
provisions of Title 37 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 401 (1988).
6. In accordance with EPA' s policy on the utilization of socially and economically
disadvantaged individuals and disadvantaged business enterprises (DBE) in
procurement under assistance programs, the recipient agrees to:
a) Ensure to the fullest extent possible that at least 8% of Federal funds for prime
contracts or subcontracts for supplies, construction, equipment or services are
made available to organizations owned or controlled by socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals.
b) Include in its bid documents a requirement that prime contractors and
subcontractors meet the same 8% requirement as noted in the above
paragraph.
c) Follow the six affirmative steps stated in 40 CFR 30.44(b) or 40 CFR 31.36(e),
as appropriate.
d) Submit a SF-334 "MBE/WBE Utilization Under Federal Grants, Cooperative
Agreements, and other Federal Financial Assistance", to the EPA award
official by October 30 of each year to report on the progress made toward
meeting the fair share objective.
7. Pursuant to EPA Order 1000.25, dated January 24, 1990, the recipient agrees to use
recycled paper for all reports which are prepared as a part of this agreement and
delivered to the Agency. This requirement does not apply to Standard Forms. These
forms are printed on recycled paper as available through the General Services
Administration.
8. If a contract is awarded under this assistance agreement, the recipient agrees and is
required to utilize the following affirmative steps to the maximum extent practicable:
a) Placing Small Businesses in Rural Areas (SBRAs) on solicitation lists;
b) Making sure that SBRAs are solicited whenever they are potential sources;
c) Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into small tasks or
quantities to permit maximum participation by SBRAs;
d) Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirements of work will permit,
which would encourage participation by SBRAs;
e) Using the service of the Small Business Administration and the Minority
Business Development Agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, as
appropriate; and
f) Requiring the contractor to take the affirmative steps in subparagraphs a.
through e. of this part if subcontracts are awarded.
2f~/Lj'
EPA Form 5700-2OA (R...... 5-82)
PART 111- AWARD CONDITIONS
ASSISTANCE IDENTIFICATION: C X 825929-01-0
Page 5 of 6
9. The recipient agrees to ensure that all requisitions for conference, meeting, convention,
or training space funded in whole or in part with Federal funds complies with the Hotel
and Motel Fire Safety Act of 1990.
10. The recipient agrees to submit to the EPA Project Officer within 90 days after the
expiration or termination of the approved project period a final report and at least one
reproducible copy suitable for printing. The final report shall document project activities
over the entire project period and shall describe the recipient's achievements with
respect to stated project purposes and objectives.
11. The recipient agrees that none of the costs for this project shall be considered allowable
unless the attached EPA "Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and other
Responsibility Matters" is signed and returned together with this signed assistance
agreement.
12. The recipient shall submit a detailed work plan within 45 days of receipt of the
cooperative agreement. The work plan shall be based upon the proposal submitted to
EPA and in subsequent correspondence and telephone calls and shall include a
comprehensive statement of the proposed activities, a detailed description of those
aforementioned activities, a timetable of the elements included in the proposal.
13. TheJ~2lP.iE~ntwill submit quarterly reports on the progress of the project (due one month
following the end of the quarter, e.g., Jan 31 for the period of Oct. 1 - Dec 31). The
recipient will send one copy of the quarterly report to the EPA Project Officer and one
copy of each report to Denise Mulholland, USEPA, 401 M Street, SW. (2171),
Washington, D.C. 20460. The report shall include progress made in the previous
quarter and progress made in relation to the approved timetable, problems
encountered, recommendations and/or actions take to overcome those problems,
anticipated activity during the upcoming quarter, any changes in personnel or direction
(which may need prior approval), and summary of costs incurred. The Project Officer
shall provide feedback if needed.
14. The recipient shall consult with the EPA Project Officer on all major phases of the
project. The Project Officer will provide technical assistance to the recipient on the
various project tasks.
15. The recipient shall consult with the EPA Energy Star Homes program to compare
objectives and avoid duplication of effort.
(t//f
EPA Form 5700-2QA (Rev, 5-82)
ASSISTANCE IDENTIFICATION: C X 825929.01-0
Paga 6 of 6
SPECIAL CONDITIONS (oontinuod)
PART IV
NOTE: The Agreement must be completed In duplicate and the Original returned to the Grants Administration Division for Headquarters
awards and to the appropriate Grants Administration OffIce for State and local awards within 3 calendar weeks after receipt or
within any extension of tlma as may be granted by EPA.
Receipt of a written refusal or failure 10 return the properly executed document within the prescribed time, may result In the
withdrawal of the offer by the Agency. Any change to the Agreement by the recipient subsequent to the document being signed
by the EPA Award Official, which the Award Official determines to materially alter the Agreement, shall void the Agreement.
OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE
Tha Un~ad Slates of America, acting by and through tha U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), hereby offers
asslstance/amendmanllothe CITY OF CHULA VISTA for 66.00 %ofallapproved
HECIPI.t:.Nl OAGANIZA liON
costs Incurred up to and not exceeding $ 80,QOO for the suppor1 of approved budget period effort described
ASSISTANCE AMOUNT .
In application (including all application modifications) cited In Item 22 of1hls Agreement
Siqned: 06/30/97
DATE AND TITLE
I Included herein by reference.
ISSUING OFFICE Gr.m. Administration Offioe
ORGANIZATION / ADDRESS
GRANTS ADMINISTRATION DIVISION
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, DC 20460
AWARD APPROVAL OFFICE
ORGANIZATION / ADDRESS
OFC. OF POLICY, PLANNING, & EVL.
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, DC 20460
TES OF AMERICA BY THE U.S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NAME AND TITLE W. SCOTT MCMORAN
CHIEF, GRANTS OPERATIONS BRANCH B 3903F
7
SIGNATURE
This ag ment Is subject to applicable U.S. Environmental Protection Agency statutory provisions and assistance regulallo s.
accepting this award or amendment and any payments made pursuant thereto, (1) the undersigned represents that he Is duly
authorized to act on behalf of the recipient organization, and (2) the recipient agrees (8) that the award Is subject to the
applicable provisions of 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter B and of the provisions of this agreement (Parts I thru IV), and (b) that
acceptance of any payments constitutes an agreement by the payee that the amounts, if any found by EPA to have been
overpaid will be rafundad or credited in full to EPA.
BY AND ON BEHALF OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT ORGANIZATION
TYPED NAME AND TITLE
3/" I.
DATE
EPA Form 5700..2OA (Rev. S-82)
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
/%fftflS'
Resolution approving a purchase order agreement between City of
Chula Vista and W.M.P. Security Service Company to provide security
guard patrol at Civic CenterlMain Library, South Chula Vista Library, and
EastLake Library for the period November 1, 1997 through
October 31, 1998
SUBMITTED BY: Library Directo~ / ~~
REVIEWED BY: CitYManagerJ~ ~~\. (4/5thsVote: Yes_ No X)
Since 1986 the Chula Vista Public Library has annually issued a bid form, and, subsequently, a
purchase order to a private security guard service to provide crowd control as well as a safe,
welcoming environment for library users in all its facilities. For FY97/98 the bid process was
initiated, responses received, and a vendor selected.
MEETING DATE:
ITEM~
October 28. 1997
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the resolution approving a purchase order agreement with W.M.P.
Security Services for security guard patrol at Civic CenterlMain Library, South Chula Vista
Library, and EastLake Library.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
DISCUSSION:
Since 1986 the Chula Vista Public Library has purchased the services of private security guards to
enforce the Library's rules of conduct, provide crowd control, and maintain a safe and welcoming
environment for all library users. In 1993 security guards were added at the EastLake Library,
and in 1995 the South Chula Vista Library also initiated security guard service. The current firm
is Wells Fargo Guard Services whose contract expires November 2, 1997.
1. Background-
The Library strives for a welcoming and safe atmosphere for all users. Adults and children who
use the library have confidence that our staff and security guards will maintain a secure
environment. Our primary concerns are public safety, crowd control (due to heavy secondary
school use in the evenings), collection and building security, and providing an appropriate
atmosphere to use library materials.
9-/
ITEM . PAGE 2
MEETING DATE: 10/28/97
During the 70 hours/week that security guards patrol our three library sites, they are highly visible
representatives of the City. Because of the nature of their jobs, library users will often approach
the security guard for help if they think a child is disruptive, vandalism is taking place, or simply
for directions. Library users generally perceive the security guards to be City employees.
Therefore, it is important we hire well trained guards with good interpersonal skills and
judgement.
Unlike the patrolling of a construction site or a non-public building, the Library's guards deal with
potentially serious situations with very public ramifications. For example, this last week the guard
spotted a postal container outside the Children's Room (Civic CenterIMain Library) which had a
bag with a fuse (there was no bomb). Wasting no time he followed procedures which resulted in
the area being evacuated and the police disposing of the threat. The guard must also deal
tactfully and effectively with the mentally ill. During the past month our guard coaxed a partially
disrobed man trom one of South Chula Vista Library's fountains. We also have regular
"eccentrics" who perceive they "own" benches or certain shelves Qfbooks. The guard ensures
that they do not intimidate or prevent others trom having tree access to all our sources.
It is clear when hiring a security guard firm we take into account the cost of the service, and the
quality with which it is delivered.
II. Selection Process-
In September a request for a bid was issued (Attachment A) by the City's Purchasing Agent for
security guard services to cover all three libraries for the next twelve months. The bid was
advertised in the Chula Vista Star News. Thirteen bidders were contacted, and five bids were
received. One Chula Vista bidder was contacted, but did not respond.
In the bid form it was explained that evaluation of responses would be weighted at 50% cost of
service (hourly rate), and 50% non-economic factors such as references, service to other
governmental agencies, background of firm's employees, management practices, and effectiveness
of employee training.
The five bidders submitting rates were:
Vendor
Pacific CA Private Security
Wells Fargo Guard Services (incumbent)
W.M.P. Security Service Company
Rover's Private Guard Services
Southern California Security Services
Hourly Rate
$ 9.00
9.25
9.90
11.00
11.06
9-;z
ITEM , PAGE 3
MEETING DATE: 10/28/97
Southern California Security Services and Rover's Private Guard Services were eliminated on
price alone. At their bid rate our budget would provide only 75% of the needed security hours.
However the remaining three- Pacific CA, Wells Fargo, and W.M.P.- were evaluated on cost and
non-economic factors by a selection committee comprised of the Branch Library Managers from
Civic Center/Main, South Chula Vista, and EastLake, and Principal Librarian in Library
Administration.
Wells Fargo Guard Services was dropped as they did not submit responses to the requested
information. The Library was especially interested in these responses as Wells Fargo has had
frequent turnover of management personnel during the past two years. This has resulted in the
library assuming supervision and training of the guards, which is normally expected of the security
guard firm, and is clearly required in the specifications (see Attachment A, page 6, #10). Another
ongoing difficulty has been the lack of a trained guard being assigned when the normal guard calls
in ill, resulting in no guard or a un-trained one. The vendor has consistently not returned calls
from the Branch Manager within the two-hour time frame required, sometimes resulting in no
replacement guard when a "no show" occurs. The Library viewed the RFQ process as a means
for Wells Fargo to describe how the current management is addressing its normal business
practices. Wells Fargo did not respond to the request for information in statements 16, 18, and
19 in Attachment A. This lack of response to specific information in the RFQ, and our previous
experiences, justifY removing them from consideration.
The remaining two firms were scored on the responses snbmitted for the following criteria
which was requested in Attachment A, pages 6-7, statements 16, 18, and 19.
* Relevancy of submitted references
* Previous service to other government agencies
* Industry background of managers and guards
* Management and administrative structure and practices
* Training and supervision of employees
As a result, the rankings were:
W.M.P. Security Services
Pacific CA Private Security
306 pts.
275 pts.
1-3
ITEM , PAGE 4
MEETING DATE: 10/28/97
See the following chart
SECURITY GUARD BID RANKING
Total pts. Pacific CA Security W.M.P. Security
possible
Cost $9.00 $9.90
Hourly rate
Total 200 190 110
Ouality of Service
1. Type of references 40 19 40
provided
2. Previous service 40 0 39
to other government
agencies
3. Industry 40 22 39
background of
managers and guards
4. Management and 40 21 39
administrative
structure and
practices
5. Training and 40 23 39
supervision of
employees
TOTAL 400 275 306
There are three reasons the selection committee is recommending W.M.P. Security over Pacific
CA, the low bidder. In making the recommendation, the committee relied on the data submitted
in response to the RFQ. If the bidder responded incompletely or without adequate backup
information, it affected the ranking. In the case of Wells Fargo they chose not to submit any of
the requested information except the cost of service.
9-,/
ITEM ,PAGES
MEETING DATE: 10/28/97
I) Experience in a busy public setting ofa public jurisdiction- W.M.P. has significant
experience working in public environments similar to the library, Pacific CA has none that
they submitted or described. Based on our previous experiences, if the Library set out to
train and manage a firm with no prior experience working for a public jurisdiction in a
high-use public facility, it would cost the Library approximately $134 per week in
additional Branch Manager supervision for the first 6-8 months. This extra time is not
available to mid-management staff already heavily impacted by 3 years of declining staff
and increasing public use oflibrary facilities.
The library has over 100,000 adults and children that come and go through its doors every
month, over 3,000 people every day. The skill in being aware of the activities of
hundreds of people at any given moment is very different ITom monitoring random
individuals in a residential complex. When patrolling a public gathering, the public
demands a large amount of interaction with the guard. Such interaction necessitates that
the guard show diplomacy and common sense when a library user sets off the book theft
detection alarm, a regular customer is caught masturbating in the stacks, an elderly patron
is found clipping coupons from the paper, or an irate parent wants to complain about their
unruly child being asked to leave the library.
Over the past twelve years of administering security guard contracts, the best predictor we
have found of success is previous experience working in a busy public setting, especially
one that is a public jurisdiction. The security management and guards must understand
the very exposed and fragile line a public agency walks. Everyone is welcome to use a
library- a savvy guard needs to know how to placate a patron who complains about a
smelly street person using the library. On the other hand, the guard must determine when
the rights of others are being infringed by a single person such as a boisterous teenager or
an angry vocal adult. There is no room for a guard to make intimidating statements, or to
arbitrarily "kick" someone out ofthe library.
2) Reference cbecks of similar guard duty assignments for public jurisdictions - W.M.P.
was the only firm to submit names of public jurisdictions as references. It is not possible
to compare Pacific CA Security references, as they submitted only ones that involve
private residential facilities, and no high volume public use buildings. All references
checked indicated a high level of satisfaction with W.MP.'s performance in a public
setting working for a public jurisdiction.
San Diego County's Security Coordinator, Michael Luikart, and El Cajon Library Branch
Manager, Karen Dietmeyer, were called. Both were very pleased with W.M.P. 's
performance and responsiveness, and would unhesitatingly hire the firm again. Pat
Kelleher, Senior Buyer with the City of San Diego, states the City has been "extremely
9-5
ITEM , PAGE 6
MEETING DATE: 10/28/97
happy" with the performance ofW.M.P. with whom they have contracted since 1994.
Finally, Dave Rippberger, Director of Purchasing for the San Diego Port District reported
being completely satisfied with the contracts for the airport and the County Administration
Building over the past 3 years.
3) Avoiding possible costs due to mismanaging the public- By selecting a firm that has a
track record of high performance with other public agencies the odds are that we will also
be given that same level of performance. A firm with such experience should ensure that
there is a minimum ofliability exposure from mishandling the public. In the opinion of the
Library, it is good business to take the past experience of the City of San Diego, County
of San Diego, El Cajon Regional Library, and the San Diego Unified Port District and use
it to our advantage.
Cost Evaluation
Our current FY96/97 security contract expires on November 2, and provides 76 hours per week
of security services at $8.77.
If Pacific CA is selected at $9.00/hour they will provide us with 75 hours per week. However,
there will be an additional cost of $ 134/week for 6-8 months as the contractor is methodically
"taught" public library guard skills, and then closely monitored and evaluated by us.
IfW.M.P. is selected at $9.90/hour they will provide us 70 hours per week of guard service.
Branch Managers indicate the 5 hours per week difference can be found by utilizing only one
guard (instead of two) during exceptionally low-use periods. Also, during the upcoming 1997
Furlough, only the Civic Center/Main Library will be open, thus saving approximately 40 hours
that will be used throughout the year. Additionally, the Library expects that it will not be
necessary to provide additional staff time (above and beyond the routine) to monitor an
experienced firm such as WMP.
ANNUAL COST ANALYSIS OF SECURITY GUARD COMPANIES
Company Hourly Hours Annual Staff cost to for Additional TOTAL
Rate per week contract routine staff cost *
cost administration
Pacific CA $9.00 75 $35,100 $4,056 $3,216 $42,372
Security
W.M.P. $9.90 70 $36,036 $4.056 -0- $40,092
Security
· Additional 5 hours/week of staff time for 6 months to "teach" and monitor public library guard
skills (24 weeks x $134)
9~?
ITEM , PAGE 7
MEETING DATE: 10/28/97
III. Recommended Vendor
It is recommended the City accept the proposal of W.M.P. Security Services at the rate of
$9.90/hour. W.M.P. has several features which will strengthen our current service.
1. San Diego based company which has current contracts for several public jurisdictions
including the City of San Diego, County of San Diego (including branch libraries), and
San Diego Unified Port District that require working directly with the public
2. Strong management structure, including Directors of Operations and Training, which
supports field operations including a single manager to be the primary interface and trainer
for the Library
3. Incorporates a concept of "Management Assistance Teams" to provide on-site guard
training, customer quality assurance, and rapid solutions for customer
4. Size of work force, over 200 qualified guards, ensures replacement guards within 45
minutes
FISCAL IMPACT:
The security guard services contract spans two fiscal years. There are sufficient budgeted funds
to cover security services through the current fiscal year. FY97/98 funds are budgeted in
accounts 100-1751-5298,100-1761-5298, and 100-1770-5298.
/! /7/1 ell H 17,() TS.
NOT SCANNED
9-7
RESOLUTION NO.
/ !f~C7S
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A PURCHASE ORDER
AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
W. M. P. SECURITY SERVICE COMPANY TO PROVIDE
SECURITY GUARD PATROL AT CIVIC CENTER/MAIN
LIBRARY, SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY, AND
EASTLAKE LIBRARY FOR THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 1,
1997 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 1998
WHEREAS, in September, a request for a bid was issued by
the City's Purchasing Agent for security guard services to cover
all three libraries for the next twelve months; and
WHEREAS, the following five bids were received:
Vendor
Hourlv Rate
Pacific CA Private Security
Wells Fargo Guard Services (incumbent)
W.M.P. Security Service Company
Rover's Private Guard Services
Southern California Security Services
$ 9.00
9.25
9.90
11. 00
11.06
WHEREAS, Southern California Security Services and
Rover's Private Guard Services were eliminated on price alone; and
WHEREAS, the remaining three were evaluated on cost and
non-economic factors by a selection committee comprised of the
Branch Library Managers from civic center/Main, South Chula vista,
and EastLake, and the Principal Librarian in Library
Administration; and
WHEREAS, W.M.P. Security Services scored 306 points and
Pacific CA Private Security scored 275 points by the selection
committee, based upon the criteria identified in the staff report
dated October 28, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the selection committee recommended accepting
the proposal of W.M.P. Security Services, who has several features
which will strengthen our current services:
1. San Diego based company which has current contracts for
several public jurisdictions including the City of San
Diego, County of San Diego (including branch libraries)
and San Diego Unified Port District that require working
directly with the public.
1
9~6'
2 .
strong management structure,
Operations and Training, which
including a single manager to
and trainer for the Library.
including Director of
supports field operations
be the primary interface
3. Incorporates a concept of "Management Assistance Teams"
to provide on-site guard training, customer quality
assurance, and rapid solutions for customer.
4. Size of workforce, over 200 qualified guards, ensures
replacement guards within 45 minutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve a purchase order agreement
between City of Chula vista and W.M.P. Security Service Company to
provide security guard patrol at civic Center/Main Library, South
Chula vista Library, and EastLake Library for the period
November 1, 1997 through October 31, 1998.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
David Palmer, Library
Director
CL-11~ ~
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
C:\rs\security.lib
2
9-9
,
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 1
OIYQf
CHUIA VISTA
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, THAT SEALED PROPOSALS ON A FORM
OBTAINED FROM THE PURCHASING DMSION, 276 FOURTH AVENUE, CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, WILL BE RECEIVED AT THE PURCHASING OFFICE
UNTIL 3:00 P.M. ON THE J!!!h DAY OF SEPTEMBER. 1997 AT WHICH TIME
THE PROPOSALS WILL BE PUBLICLY OPENED AND READ FOR FURNISHING
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
SECURITY GUARD SERVICES
ALL BIDDERS ARE HEREBY REFERRED TO THE BIDDING INSTRUCTIONS,
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON
FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE PURCHASING DIVISION FOR FULL DETAILS AND
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS AND/OR SERVICES REQUIRED.
THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT ANY OR ALL BIDS OR ANY
PORTION OF ANY BID, OR TO WAIVE ANY IRREGULARITIES OR
INFORMALITIES IN THE BIDS OR IN THE BIDDING.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND COPIES OF BIDDING INSTRUCTIONS,
SPECIFICATIONS, AND REQUIREMENTS, CONTACT THE PURCHASING
DIVISION.
ALL BIDS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN SEALED ENVELOPES PLAINLYMARKRD
WITH THE BID NUMBER AND TIME SET FOR OPENING. BIDS RECEIVED
AFTER THE TIME SET FOR OPENING WILL BE REJECTED.
JOHN P. COGGINS, C.P.M.
PURCHASING AGENT
.
DATED: SEPTEMBER 6, 1997
9 -- /()
- .
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 2
rnvOF
CHUIA VISTA
BID AND OFFER TO CONTRACT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PURCHASING DIVISION
276 FOURTH AVENUE
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
TELEPHONE (619) 691-5141
FAX (619) 691-5174
THE BIDDER, HEREINAFTER SOMETIMES CALLED CONTRACTOR, SUBMITS A BID AND
OFFERS TO ENTER INTO THIS CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, HEREINAFTER
CALLED CITY, THIS ~ DAY OF SEPTEMBER. 1997 AS FOLLOWS:
THIS BID AND OFFER, SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFICATIONS, TERMS AND
CONDITIONS, AND GENERAL PROVISIONS HEREIN, WHEN DULY ACCEPTED BY
THE CITY SHALL CONSTITUTE THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PAYMENTS TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY, AND IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS EXPRESSED IN THE BID FORMS AND
SPECIFICATIONS ATTACHED AND BY THIS REFERENCE INCORPORATED HEREIN,
CONTRACTOR AGREES TO FURNISH SECURITY GUARD SERVICE..'> TO THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA.
9-//
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 3
(]lY OF
CHUlA VISTA
BID FORM
TIlE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY OFFERS, SUBJECT TO ALL SPECIFICATIONS, TERMS AND
CONDITIONS, AND GENERAL PROVISIONS HEREIN, TO FURNISH TIlE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA TIlE FOLLOWING:
HOURLY RATE $
!Hour
Includes all labor, materials, equipment, insurance, supervision training, transportation, uniforms
and applicable sales tax.
Days
Payment Terms:
%
Overtime shall be billed at no more than one and one half (1 YI) times the hourly rate.
Prices shall be firm for the initial one year period.
Public Agency Participation
Other public agencies (e.g. city, county, public corporation, political subdivision, school district, or
water authority) may want to participate in any award as a result of this bid. The City ofChula Vista
shall incur no financial responsibility in connection with any purchase by another public agency.
The public agency shall accept sole responsibility for placing orders and making. payments to the
successful bidder. This option shall not be considered in bid evaluation. Please indicate whether
this will be granted.
Yes
No
Company Name
Address
State _ Zip
City
Telephone
Print Name
Signature
Fax
Title
Date
9---/,2
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 4
01Y OF
CHUIA VISTA
GENERAL INFORMATION
Intent
The City of Chula Vista intends to contract with a private security guard agency for guard services
as may be required at the City's public libraries and other facilities/functions in accordance with bid
specifications.
Period of Coverage
Successful bidder agrees to provide Security Guard Services, as may be required, for a period of one
(1) year beginning November 1, 1997 through October 31, 1998. This agreement may be extended
by mutual consent for five (5) additional, one (1) year periods.
Agreement Prices
Unit prices shall remain firm for the initial one (1) year period of coverage (1l/l/97-1013l/98).
One (1) price increase will be allowed for each option period as the result of:
1) Manufacturer or supplier price increases in the service offered;
2) Governmental or regulatory agency increases to the trade;
3) Regional Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases to the industry.
Any request for a price increase must be substantiated with documentation ITom a manufacturer,
supplier, or governmental agency and must be submitted in writing at least thirty (30) days prior to
the effective date of the increase. Overall increases of greater than 5% ITom prior year prices will
not be allowed.
The City will be the sole judge of acceptable option year price increases.
Alternate Service Providers
The City reserves the right to obtain guard services ITom alternate service providers in the event of
non-performance or when availability is a determining factor. In addition, the City may contract
with alternate service providers for evaluation purposes.
Evaluation
Cost of service will be weighted at 50%; non-economic factors (references, experience in providing
service to other governmental agencies, past performance on City contracts, experience and
background of employees, management practices, and employee training) will be weighted at 50%.
Award
A ward will be made to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as
determined solely by the City.
9---/3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 5
mY OF
CHULA VISTA
SPECIFICATIONS
1. Locations:
A. Provide a security patrol in the Chula Vista Public Library, 365 F Street, Chula Vista, on a
hourly basis for the period November 1,1997 - October 31,1998 for approximately 25 hours
weekly. The days to be patrolled are Monday - Thursday afternoons/evenings, and
Saturday/Sunday afternoons.
B. Provide a security patrol in the Eastlake Library, 1120 Eastlake Parkway, Chula Vista, on an
hourly basis for the period November 1, 1997 - October 31,1998 for approximately 24 hours
weekly. The days to be patrolled are Monday - Thursday afternoons/evenings, and Saturday.
C. Provide a security patrol in the South Chula Vista Library, 389 Orange Avenue, Chula Vista,
on a hourly basis for the period November 1, 1997 - October 31, 1998 for approximately 30
hours weekly. The days to be patrolled are Monday - Friday afternoons/evenings, and
Saturday/Sunday afternoons.
D. The City may request additional guard services at other City locations during the term of this
agreement at the same hourly rate.
2. Total hours listed are estimates only. Contractor agrees to waive any difference, whether more
or less, between hours listed and actual hours of service performed. Payment shall.be made only for
service completed to the satisfaction of the City.
3. The Contractor shall not raise the hourly rate during the initial term or renewal option(s) of this
contract, except as specifically provided herein. No premium will be allowed for lead guards or
supervisors. Supervision costs shall be included in the hourly rate.
4. The Contractor shall respond to off-hour emergencies with a qualified guard on-site within 45
minutes. In the event of an off-hour emergency, the City will pay no more than one and one-half
times (1 \12) the hourly rate, plus one-half ('12) hour travel time each way. A two (2) hour minimum
will be allowed for each off-hour callback.
5. The Contractor shall have all required valid state and City business licenses for contract security
services. Guards assigned to City facilities shall carry current personal guard registration cards
issued by the State of California. Contractor shall comply with all Federal, State, and local
regulations. Guards must know and enforce the "Library Conduct Policy" (see attached).
9r/1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 6
mY OF
CHUlA VISfA
6. All security guards must wear a complete unifonn that is cleaned and pressed. A visible and
easy to read nameplate or name tag shall be affixed to the outer shirt or jacket. The unifonn shall
also have the Contractor's name prominently displayed. Each guard shall be supplied a pager. The
City shall be given a list of pager numbers capable of reaching on-duty guards. Unifonns and pagers
shall be provided at Contractor's sole expense.
7. Guards shall not carry firearms.
8. Before a guard is trained and placed at the library, the library may request an interview with the
prospective guard and reserves the right to accept or reject that prospective guard.
9. If more than one guard is scheduled, each guard shall patrol a separate beat. A continuous
walking beat shall be maintained to include Quiet Areas, the remainder of the library building, and
the library parking lot. Beat schedules and routes shall be subject to Branch Manager's approval.
10. Supervision and training of all security guards shall be the responsibility of the Contractor's post
commander or area manager. This post commander or area manager is to be in contact with the
branch manager at least once a month, and more frequently if detennined necessary by the City.
II. The Contractor shall return calls from the Branch Manager within two (2) hours.
12. The Contractor is to supply an implementation plan to ensure a smooth start of the agreement,
and a plan to avoid any lapses in security coverage for the length of the agreement.
13. Guards who do not report on schedule will not be accommodated. Tardiness and/or absenteeism
will be considered a breach of contract and cause for tennination.
14. The Area Manager shall conduct monthly inspections of each facility and provide oral or written
summaries within one week of the inspection to Branch Managers. More frequent inspections and
reports may be required if deemed necessary by the City.
15. The Contractor is to provide continuity in coverage by maintaining enough site-specific trained
guards to fill-in when absence occurs.
16. At the Contractor's sole expense, all prospective guards must pass a drug test, have no criminal
record, and pass a five (5) year computerized background check. The Contractor shall specify the
computer system used for background checks as an attachment to the bid.
9-/S
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 7
OlYOF
CHUIA VISTA
17. If a security guard must make a court appearance as a result of performing service under the
terms of this agreement, the City will pay only the hourly rate bid for the amount of time spent in
court.
18. The Contractor shall provide a brief history of their security company in the San Diego
County area, local office structure, employee training, and field supervision as an attachment to
the bid. Biographical information, Le. past experience, should be provided on the area manager or
post commander.
19. References shall be provided from other accounts, preferably public agencies, similar in size
to the City of Chula Vista. References shall include company name and address, contact name,
phone number, and dates of provided service.
20. LIABILITY INSURANCE
A. Contractor shall, throughout the duration of this agreement, maintain comprehensive general
liability and property damage insurance, or commercial general liability insurance, covering
all operations of Contractor, its agents and employees, performed in connection with this
agreement including but not limited to premises and automobile.
B. Contractor shall maintain the following minimum limits:
Combined Single Limit Per Occurrence
General Aggregate
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
Insurance companies affording coverage to the Contractor shall be required to add the City
of Chula Vista as an "additional insured" under the insurance policy for all work performed
in accordance with this Agreement. Coverage shall be from a company in good standing and
authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California.
Insurance companies affording coverage shall provide thirty (30) day written notice to the
City of Chula Vista should the policy be canceled before the expiration date of the
agreement. For the purposes of this notice requirement, any material change in the policy
prior to the expiration shall be considered a cancellation.
Contractor shall provide evidence of compliance with the insurance requirements listed
above by providing a certificate of insurance, and policy endorsement which names the City
of Chula Vista as an additional insured.
9"'/?
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 8
OIY OF
CHUIA VISTA
21. Contractor shall show evidence of worker's compensation and employers liability coverage in
accordance with the laws of the State of California. The worker's compensation policy must contain
a waiver of subrogation of rights against the City of Chula Vista.
22. Contractor shall furnish proof of Crime Insurance, including Employee Dishonest/Fidelity
Coverage, to protect the City against loss by theft or mysterious disappearance of property by any
of the Contractor's employees while City property is in the care, custody, or control of the
Contractor. Coverage amounts shall be not less than $25,000 per employee, or $100,000 aggregate.
23. Contractor shall defend, indemnifY, protect, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed
officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims asserted or liability established
for damages or injuries to any person or property, including injury to Contractor's employees, agents
or officers which arise from or are connected with or are caused or claimed to be caused by the acts
or omissions of Contractor, and its agents, officers or employees, in performing the work or services
or supplying the materials or equipment herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending
against same; provided, however, the Contractor's duty to indemnifY and hold harmless shall not
include any claims or liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful misconduct of
the City, its officers, employees, or agents. This shall not prejudice the right of the City to appear
in such suit, participate in the defense, or take such actions as may be necessary to protect the
interests of the City.
24. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR CAUSE. The City may terminate this agreement
and be relieved of any consideration to Contractor should Contractor fail to perform in the manner
herein described. Notice of such termination shall be made in writing at least fifteen (15) days prior
to effective date of termination. In the event of termination for cause, the City shall be relieved of
any obligation or penalty to make payment to Contractor other than for services authorized by and
completed to the satisfaction of the City.
25. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE. The City may terminate this Agreement for any
reason by giving at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Contractor prior to the effective date
termination. In the event of termination for convenience, the full extent of City liability shall be
limited to an equitable adjustment and payment for services authorized by and completed to the
satisfaction of the City. Contractor hereby expressly waives any and all claims for penalties,
damages, or additional compensation.
26. Contact Joann Howard, at (619) 691-5168 for a site inspection of library facilities. Site
inspections are scheduled for September 18th and 19th. Failure to inspect these facilities shall not
relieve the Contractor's responsibility for familiarity with site conditions and locations.
9-/?
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
~I~
:--r-
BID NO. 4-97/98
Page 9
01Y Of
CHUlA VISTA
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
LffiRARY CONDUCT POLICY
1. A quiet atmosphere is desirable in the Library. It is the responsibility of each person in the
Chula Vista Public Library to insure that his or her actions contribute to maintaining quiet.
2. The Library is designed for individual study and reading. Individual study carrels are provided.
3. Tables are arranged to seat a maximum of four people and are not intended for group study.
Conversations must be conducted outside the Library.
4. Food, drinks, and smoking are not permitted in the Library.
5. Adults should accompany young children into the adult areas to insure that quiet is maintained
for adult users.
6. Applicable laws and the Municipal Code will be enforced.
7. Individuals not conforming to these guidelines will be asked to leave the Library.
Approved by the Library Board of Trustees
September 24, 1986
9-/cr
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
/t:J
ITEM TITLE:
A)
Resolution / :!f IS tJ tf:, Approving Final Map of Chula Vista
Tract No. 97-01, Unit 1, Rancho Del Rey SPA III Parcel R-6,
Accepting on Behalf of the City of Chula Vista Public Easements
Granted on Said Map within Said Subdivision, and Approving the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the Completion of
Improvements Required by Said Subdivision and Authorizing the
Mayor to Execute Said Agreement
B) Resolution / 8''i5 tJ ? Approving Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract 97-01, Unit 1,
Rancho Del Rey III Parcel R-6 and Authorizing the Mayor to
Execute Said Agreement
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~ r
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~~J (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..xJ
On February 18, 1997, by Resolution No. 18570, City Council approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 97-01, Unit 1, Rancho Del Rey SPA III Parcel R-6 (see
Attachment 1). The Final Map, Subdivision Improvement Agreement (see Attachment 2), and
Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement (see Attachment 3) are now before Council
for consideration and approval.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolutions approving: (A) the Final Map,
and Subdivision Improvement Agreement, and (B) the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement
Agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None.
DISCUSSION:
The subject subdivision is located north of Telegraph Canyon Road, south of East "J" Street, west
of Buena Vista Way, and east of future Voyager Park. The proposed subdivision is a
condominium project as defined in Section 1350 of the Civil Code of the State of California. The
proposed final map for the subdivision consists of one multi-family lot which will have a total of
63 units (21 tri-plex buildings). The overall project will contain a total of 246 units (82 tri-plex
buildings). A plat of the subdivision is presented in Attachment 1.
/tY~/
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
The final map for said subdivision has been reviewed by the Department of Public Works and
found to be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map. Approval of the map
constitutes acceptance by the City of all sewer, drainage, and access easements within the
subdivision.
It should be noted that all of the streets within the subdivision are private and will be privately
maintained by the project's Homeowners' Association. The proposed street names within the
subdivision are Bolero Drive, Balboa Circle, Valdivia Court, DeLeon Drive, DeSoto Court, North
Cabrillo Drive, and South Cabrillo Drive.
The developer has executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement in order to
satisfy the following conditions of Resolution No. 18570, including unfulfilled conditions of
Resolution No. 16222 approving the Tentative Map for Rancho Del Rey III that are relevant to
Parcel R-6:
1. In satisfaction of Condition No. 20 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer agrees that:
a. The City may withhold building permits for the any unit within the Project if any
one of the following occur:
i. Regional development threshold limits set by the East Chula Vista
Transportation Phasing Plan have been reached.
n. Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities andlor services exceed
the adopted City threshold standards in the then effective Growth
Management Ordinance.
b. The City may withhold building permits for any units within any phase of
development identified in the PFFP, if the required public facilities, as identified
in the PFFP or otherwise conditioned, have not been completed or constructed to
satisfaction of the City. The developer may propose changes in the timing and
sequencing of development and the construction of improvements affected. In such
case, the PFFP may be amended as approved by the City Planning Director and
Public Works Director.
2. In satisfaction of Condition No. 21 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer agrees that prior
to approval of the second final map of the Project, Developer shall either:
a. Enter into an agreement to participate in the financing of improvements to the
Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer; or
)6' "':<.
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
b. Provide a study to the satisfaction of the City Engineer measuring the impact of the
Project's flow on the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer; Developer further agrees
that if, at the discretion of the City Engineer, the Project's flow affects the capacity
of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer, Developer shall enter into an agreement
as set forth in paragraph a., above.
3. In satisfaction of Condition No. 22 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer agrees that, on
the condition that City shall promptly notify the Developer of any claim, action, or
proceeding and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense, the
Developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and
employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers
or employees, to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City, including any
approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to this Project.
4. In satisfaction of Condition No. 23 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer agrees that, on
the condition that City shall promptly notify the Developer of any claim, action, or
proceeding, Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its agents,
officers, and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its
agents, officers, or employees, related to erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage
resulting from the Property. City agrees to reasonably cooperate with Developer in the
defense of any such action, claim, or proceeding.
5. In satisfaction of Condition No. 24 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer agrees to permit
all cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista equal opportunity to
place conduit to and provide cable television service to each lot or unit within the Project.
Developer further agrees to grant, by license or easement, and for the benefit of, and to
be enforceable by, the City of Chula Vista, conditional access to cable television conduit
within the properties situated within the Project only to those cable television companies
franchised by the City of Chula Vista, the condition of such grant being that: (a) such
access is coordinated with Developer's construction schedule so that it does not delay or
impede Developer's construction schedule and does not require the trenches to be reopened
to accommodate the placement of such conduits; and (b) any such cable company is and
remains in compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance with, the terms and
conditions of the franchise and with all other rules, regulations, ordinances, and
procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable television companies as same
may have been, or may from time to time be, issued by the City of Chula Vista.
Developer hereby conveys to the City of Chula Vista the authority to enforce said covenant
by such remedies as the City determines appropriate, including revocation of said grant
upon a determination by the City of Chula Vista that they have violated conditions of the
grant.
/Cl~3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
6. In satisfaction of Condition No. 37 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer agrees to comply
with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code; Developer further agrees
to prepare its Final Map and all plans in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and
City's Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual.
7. In satisfaction of Condition Nos. IX.C, 54, and 58 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer
agrees to comply with all unfulfilled conditions of approval of the Rancho Del Rey SPA
III Master Tentative Map, Chula Vista Tract 90-02, established by Resolution No. 16222
approved by the City Council on June 18, 1991, and to remain in compliance with and
implement the terms, conditions, and provisions of Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plan, General Development Plan, Planned Community District Regulations,
including Section XII.2-C Handicap Parking Requirements and Section VIII.3-G Item Nos.
1, 4, and 6 of the Special Standards for RC Districts, Rancho Del Rey SPA III Water
Conservation Plan, Rancho Del Rey SPA III Air Quality Improvement Plan, Rancho Del
Rey SPA III Residential Design Guidelines, and Rancho Del Rey SPA III Public Facilities
Financing Plan, as amended and as are applicable to the property; Developer further
agrees to provide the City with such security (including recordation of covenants running
with the land) and implementation procedures, as the City may require to assure that after
approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall continue to comply and remain in
compliance with and implement such plans.
8. In satisfaction of Condition No.8 of Resolution No. 16222, Developer agrees to not
protest the inclusion of the property in Open Space District No. 20 (Zone 7) prior to
approval of any final map for the project. Developer agrees to be responsible for any
costs associated with annexing the property into Open Space District No. 20; City shall
not be liable for any such costs.
The property was previously annexed to Zone 7 of OSD 20 along with all of Rancho Del
Rey SPA III. No change or modification is contemplated to the originally approved
methodology contained within the Engineer's Report for Open Space District No. 20
(Zone 7). The developer has deposited sufficient funds for the reapportionment of
assessment spread of OSD 20 Zone 7. The reapportionment will likely yield a reduction
of the annual assessment. This is consistent with Proposition 218 the "Right To Vote on
Taxes Act" and staff believes that we have complied with all the provisions of Proposition
218.
9. In satisfaction of Condition Nos. 51, 52, and 53 of Resolution No. 16222, Developer
agrees to install, test, and operate all fire hydrants required by the Fire Chief prior to
placement of any combustible materials on site of any unit in the project, which such
hydrant maximum pressure will not exceed 150 psi; in conjunction therewith, Developer
shall provide roadway access at such sites for fire apparatus as required by the Fire Chief.
/IJ-tj
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
10. In satisfaction of Condition No. 62 of Resolution No. 16222, Developer agrees to comply
with the Growth Management Ordinance which is in effect at the time building permits are
issued pursuant to each such final map; Developer further agrees that such compliance
includes, but is not limited to the East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan, the Air
Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan for the project then in effect.
11. In satisfaction of Condition No. 64 of Resolution No. 16222, Developer agrees that prior
to approval of each final map for the project, it will not protest the formation of a district
for the maintenance of landscaped medians and parkways along streets within and adjacent
to the subject property.
12. In satisfaction of Condition No. 75 of Resolution No. 16222, Developer agrees to comply
with all relevant Federal, State, and Local regulations, including the Federal Clean Water
Act; Developer further agrees to provide testing and documentation as required by the City
Engineer to evidence such compliance.
The developer has also executed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and has provided bonds
to guarantee construction of the required public improvements and the subdivision monumentation
and benchmarks. The developer has paid all applicable fees.
Please note that the Developer's Disclosure Statement, February 4, 1997 City Council Minutes,
and February 18, 1997 City Council minutes pertaining to approval of the Tentative Subdivision
Map are included as Attachments 4, 5A, and 5B, respectively.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. All staff costs associated with processing of improvement plans and
final map will be reimbursed from developer deposits.
Attachments: NOT <;1(" .
Attachment 1: Chula Vista Tract 97-01, Unit 1, Rancj10 Del Rey 1II Parcel R-6 - Loca!\6rl'~'tr1~/::miiJl;,t'plat
Attachment 2: Subdivision Improvement Agreement J J
Attachment 3: Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
Attachment 4: Developer's Disclosure Statement
Attachment 5A: Minutes of 2/04/97 Regarding Resolution No. 18:2..~~
Attachment 5B: Minutes of 2/18/97 Regarding Resolution No. e~"
KPA/kpa ~O~CSI
h: \home\engineer\agenda\rr- 313. kpa
[FILE NO. 0600-80-RR313]
October 13. 1997 02:01pm)
//J~
RESOLUTION NO.
j8'D~tf
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING FINAL MAPS OF CHULA
VISTA TRACT NO. 97-01, UNIT 1, RANCHO DEL REY
SPA III PARCEL R-6, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA PUBLIC EASEMENTS GRANTED
ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND
APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS
REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista hereby finds that certain map survey
entitled Chula vista Tract 97-01, UNIT 1, RANCHO DEL REY SPA III
PARCEL R-6, and more particularly described as follows:
Being a subdivision of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map
No. 17841, in the City of Chula Vista, county
of San Diego, State of California, filed in
the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County on April 17,1997 as File No. 1997-
178297 of Official Records.
Area: 4.616 Acres
Numbered Lots: 1
No. of Lots: 1
Lettered Lots: 0
is made in the manner and form prescribed by law and conforms to
the surrounding surveys; and that said map and subdivision of land
shown thereon is hereby approved and accepted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, said Council hereby accepts on
behalf of the City of Chula vista easements with the right of
ingress and egress for the construction and maintenance of
drainage, sewer, and access facilities, all as shown on this map
within this sUbdivision, subject to the conditions set forth
thereon.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city Clerk of the city of
Chula vista be and she is hereby authorized and directed to endorse
upon said map the action of said council; that said Council has
approved said subdivision map, and that those certain easements
with the right of ingress and egress for the construction and
maintenance of drainage, sewer, and access facilities, as granted
thereon and shown on said map within said subdivision, are accepted
on behalf of the city of Chula vista as hereinabove stated.
1
jtfJ/1 -/
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Clerk be and she is
hereby directed to transmit said map to the Clerk of the Board of
supervisors of the County of San Diego.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that
Improvement Agreement dated
the completion of improvements in said subdivision, a
is on file in the office of the City Clerk as
, is hereby approved.
that certain Subdivision
for
copy of which
Document No.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Ov-- ~ l~
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
H:\SHARED\ENGINEER\RR-313.FM
2
/&Ar~
Recording Requested by:
CITY CLERK
When Recorded, Mail to:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chu1a vista, Ca. 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance
to a public agency of less than a fee interest
for which no cash consideration has been paid or
received.
Declarant
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 199__, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and SHEA HOMES
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, 10721 Treena Street, Suite 200, San Diego, Ca.
92131, hereinafter called "Subdivider";
H.lTN.!L~~J;;T!!-,-
WHEREAS, Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of
the city of Chula vista for approval and recordation, a final
subdivision map of a proposed subdivision, to be known as CHULA
VISTA TRACT 97-01, RANCHO DEL REY III, PARCEL R-6, UNIT 1, (PARCEL
1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 17841) pursuant to the provisions of the
Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance
with the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula vista Municipal Code
relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision
map; and,
WHEREAS, the Code provides that before said map is finally
approved by the Council of the City of Chula Vista, Subdivider must
have either installed and completed all of the public improvements
and/or land development work required by the Code to be installed
in subdivisions before final maps of subdivisions are approved by
the Council for purpose of recording in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an alternative thereto,
Subdivider shall enter into an agreement with City, secured by an
approved improvement security to insure the performance of said
work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code, agreeing to install and complete, free of liens at
subdivider's own expense, all of the public improvements and/or
land development work required in said subdivision within a
definite period of time prescribed by said Council, and
WHEREAS, Subdivider is willing in consideration of the
approval and recordation of said map by the Council, to enter into
this agreement wherein it is provided that Subdivider will install
-1-
/!J~~3
and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all the public
improvement work required by City in connection with the proposed
subdivision and will deliver to city improvement securities as
approved by the City Attorney, and
WHEREAS, a tentative map of said subdivision has heretofore
been approved, subject to certain requirements and conditions, as
contained in Resolution No. 18570, approved on the 18th day of
February, 1997 ("Tentative Map Resolution"); and
WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for the
construction, installation and completion of said public improve-
ment work have been prepared and submitted to the City Engineer, as
shown on Drawings Nos. 97-475 through 97-482, on file in the office
of the City Engineer, and
WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing said public
improvements according to said plans and specifications has been
submitted and approved by the City in the amount of $358,000.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS
FOLLOWS:
1. Subdivider, for itself and his successors in interest, an
obligation the burden of which encumbers and runs with the land,
agrees to comply with all of the terms, conditions and requirements
of the Tentative Map Resolution; to do and perform or cause to be
done and performed, at its own expense, without cost to City, in a
good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the
satisfaction and approval of the city Engineer, all of the public
improvement and/or land development work required to be done in and
adjoining said subdivision ("Improvement Work"); and will furnish
the necessary materials therefor, all in strict conformity and in
accordance with the plans and specifications, which documents have
heretofore been filed in the Office' of the City Engineer and by
this reference are incorporated herein and made a part hereof.
2. It is expressly understood and agreed that all monuments
have been or will be installed within thirty (30) days after the
completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work, and that
Subdivider has installed or will install temporary street name
signs if permanent street name signs have not been installed.
3. It is expressly understood and agreed that Subdivider will
cause all necessary materials to be furnished and all Improvement
Work required under the provisions of this contract to be done on
or before the second anniversary date of council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
4. It is understood and agreed that Subdivider will perform
said Improvement Work as set forth hereinabove, or that portion of
said Improvement Work serving any buildings or structures ready for
occupancy in said subdivision, prior to the issuance of any
certificate of clearance for utility connections for said buildings
-2-
/tJ/l-/f
or structures in said subdivision, and such certificate shall not
be issued until the city Engineer has certified in writing the
completion of said public improvements or the portion thereof
serving said building or structures approved by the City; provided,
however, that the improvement security shall not be required to
cover the provisions of this paragraph.
5. It is expressly understood and agreed to by Subdivider
that, in the performance of said Improvement Work, Subdivider will
conform to and abide by all of the provisions of the ordinances of
the city of Chula Vista, and the laws of the State of California
applicable to said work.
6. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
ci ty of Chula Vista, simultaneously with the execution of this
agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum
of ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($179,000.00) which security shall guarantee the faithful
performance of this contract by Subdivider and is attached hereto,
marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof.
7. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
City of Chu1a vista simultaneously with the execution of this
agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the city in the sum
of ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($179,000.00) to secure the payment of material and labor in
connection with the installation of said public improvements, which
security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part
hereof and the bond amounts as contained in Exhibit "B", and made
a part hereof.
8. The parties acknowledge and agree that no Sur~ey Monument
Installation Bond is required since monumentation was accomplished
per previous parcel map.
9. It is further agreed that if the Improvement Work is not
completed within the time agreed herein, the sums provided by said
improvement securities may be used by City for the completion of
the Improvement Work within said subdivision in accordance with
such specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option
of the City, as are approved by the City Council at the time of
engaging the work to be performed. Upon certification of
completion by the city Engineer and acceptance of said work by
city, and after certification by the Director of Finance that all
costs hereof are fully paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof
not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or
its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the
improvement security. Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any
difference between the total costs incurred to perform the work,
including design and administration of construction (including a
reasonable allocation of overhead), and any proceeds from the
improvement security.
-3-
...---
/CJ/J~~
10. It is also expressly agreed and understood by the parties
hereto that in no case will the City of Chu1a vista, or any
department, board or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of
the costs and expenses of the work aforesaid, nor shall any
officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be liable for the payment of any
sum or sums for said work or any materials furnished therefor,
except to the limits established by the approved improvement
security in accordance with the requirements of the state
Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula
vista Municipal Code.
11. It is further understood and agreed by Subdivider that
any engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection,
materials furnished and other incidental expenses) incurred by city
in connection with the approval of the Improvement Work plans and
installation of Improvement Work hereinabove provided for, and the
cost of street signs and street trees as required by City and
approved by the City Engineer shall be paid by Subdivider, and that
Subdivider shall deposit, prior to recordation of the Final Map,
with City a sum of money sufficient to cover said cost.
12. It is understood and agreed that until such time as all
Improvement Work is fully completed and accepted by city,
subdivider will be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and
any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer
lines within the proposed subdivision. It is further understood
and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all public improvements
for a period of one year from date of final acceptance and correct
any and all defects or deficiencies arising during said period as
a result of the acts or omission of Subdivider, its agents or
employees in the performance of this agreement, and that upon
acceptance of the work by City, Subdivider shall grant to City, by
appropriate conveyance, the public improvements constructed
pursuant to this agreement; provided, however, that said acceptance
shall not constitute a waiver of di=fects by City a's set forth
hereinabove.
13. It is understood and agreed that City, as indemnitee, or
any officer or employee thereof, shall not be liable for any injury
to person or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions
of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to
this agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the
city, its officers and employees, harmless from any and all claims,
demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because
of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or
employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement; provided,
however, that the approved improvement security shall not be
required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such
indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to
damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of
property from owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as
a result of the construction of said subdivision and the public
improvements as provided herein. It shall also extend to damages
resulting from diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow,
-4-
/~/J-?
modification of the velocity of the water, erosion or siltation, or
the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the
construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of
plans providing for any or all of these conditions shall not
constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility for such
damage or taking, nor shall city, by said approval, be an insurer
or surety for the construction of the subdivision pursuant to said
approved improvement plans. The provisions of this paragraph shall
become effective upon the execution of this agreement and shall
remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the
acceptance by the City of the improvements.
14. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the City or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim,
action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the
city, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning
a sUbdivision, which action is brought within the time period
provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the
State of California.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set
forth.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
fUBDIVIDER:
SHEA HCMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
a California Limited Partnership
By" .To F. Shea Co". Inc.. a Nevada
corporation, eral Partner
Secretary
Mayor of the City of Chula
vista
ATTEST
City Clerk
Approved as to form by
Mark Brock, Vice President
~ yrc. ~,~'7:
C~ orne!~ '7'1/7
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
-5-
/tf);9r?
RESOLUTION NO. / 'fI,!;:J ?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT
97-01, UNIT 1, RANCHO DEL REY III PARCEL R-6
AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the developer, Shea Homes Limited Partnership,
has executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement in
order to satisfy the Conditions 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 37, IX.C, 54,
58 and 64 of Resolution No. 18570, and Conditions 8, 51, 52, 53,
62, 64 and 75 of Resolution No. 16222 approving the Tentative Map
for Rancho Del Rey III that are relevant to Parcel R-6.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the Supplemental
Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Chula vista Tract 97-01, unit
1, Rancho del Rey III Parcel R-6, a copy of which shall be kept on
file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
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.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Cl- ~ 1~
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\R-6ssia.agr
/tJ!J ~/
RECORDING REQUEST BY,
City Clerk
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a
conveyance to a public agency of
less than a fee interest for which
no cash consideration has been paid
or received.
Developer
Above Space for Recorder's Use
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
(Conditions 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 37, IX.C, 54, 58, 64 of
Resolution 18570; 8, 51, 52, 53, 62, 64, 75 of Resolution 16222)
This Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("Agree-
ment") is made this _ day of , 1997, by and between THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California ("City" or "Grantee" for recording
purposes only) and SHEA HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a California
Limited Partnership ("Developer" or "Grantor"), with reference to
the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute a part of this
Agreement:
RECITALS
A. This Agreement concerns and affects certain real property
located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 17841 ("Property"). The Property is
part of a project commonly known as Chula Vista Tract 97-01, Rancho
Del Rey III, Parcel R-6, Unit 1. For purposes of this Agreement
the term "Project" shall mean "Property".
B. Developer is the owner of the Property.
C. Developer has applied for and the City has
Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as Chula
97-01, RANCHO DEL REY III, Parcel R-6, Unit 1
Subdivision Map") for the subdivision of the Property.
approved a
Vista Tract
("Tentative
I
/iJg--2
D. The City has adopted Resolution Nos. 16222 and 18570
("Resolution") pursuant to which it has approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map subject to certain conditions as more particularly
described in the Resolution, copies of which are attached hereto as
Exhibit "A" and "B" and incorporated herein.
E. City is willing, on the premises, security, terms and
conditions herein contained to approve the final map for which
Developer has applied as being in substantial conformance with the
Tentative Subdivision Map described in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants, terms
and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as set forth
below.
I. Agreement Applicable to Subsequent OWners.
1.1 Agreement Binding Upon Successors. This Agreement
shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors,
assigns and interests of the parties as to any or all of the
Property until released by the mutual consent of the parties.
1.2 Agreement Runs with the Land. The burden of the
covenants contained in this Agreement ("Burden") is for the benefit
of the Property and the City, its successors and assigns and any
successor in interest thereto. City is deemed the beneficiary of
such covenants for and in its own right and for the purposes of
protecting the interest of the community and other parties public
or private, in whose favor and for whose benefit of such covenants
running with the land have been provided without regard to whether
City has been, remained or are owners of any particular land or
interest therein. If such covenants are breached, the City shall
have the right to exercise all rights and remedies and to maintain
any actions or suits at law or in equity or other proper proceed-
ings to enforce the curing of such breach to which it or any other
beneficiaries of this agreement and the covenants may be entitled.
a. Developer Release on Guest Builder Assignments.
If Developer assigns any portion of the Project, Developer may have
the right to obtain a release of any of Developer's obligations
under this Agreement, provided Developer obtains the prior written
consent of the City to such release. Such assignment shall,
however, be subject to this Agreement and the Burden of this
Agreement shall remain a covenant running with the land. The City
shall not withhold its consent to any such request for a release so
long as the assignee acknowledges that the Burden of the Agreement
runs with the land, assumes the obligations of the Developer under
this Agreement, and demonstrates, to the reasonable satisfaction of
the City, its ability to perform its obligations under this
Agreement as it relates to the portion of the Project which is
being acquired by the Assignee.
2
jiJ!J-J
b. Partial Release of Developer's Assignees. If
Developer assigns any portion of the Project subject to the Burden
of this Agreement, upon request by the Developer or its assignee,
the City shall release the assignee of the Burden of this Agreement
as to such assigned portion if such portion has complied with the
requirements of this Agreement and such partial release will not,
in the opinion of the City, jeopardize the likelihood that the
remainder of the Burden will not be completed.
2. Condition No. 20 - Building Permits. In satisfaction of
Condition No. 20 of Resolution 18570, the Developer agrees that:
a. The City may withhold occupancy permits for any unit
within the Project if anyone of the following occur:
i. Regional development threshold limits set by the East
Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan have been reached.
~~. Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities
and/or services exceed the adopted City threshold standards in the
then effective Growth Management Ordinance.
b. The City may withhold building permits for any of the
units within any phase of development identified in the PFFP, if
the required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP or as
amended or otherwise conditioned have not been completed or
constructed to satisfaction of the City. The Developer may propose
changes in the timing and sequencing of development and the
construction of improvements affected. In such case, the PFFP may
be amended as approved by the City Planning Director and Public
Works Director.
3. Condition No. 21 Telegraph Canyon Sewer. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 21 of Resolution No. 18570, Developer
agrees that prior to approval of' the second final' map of the
Project, Developer shall either:
a. Enter into an agreement to participate in the financing
of improvements to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer; or
b. Provide a study to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
measuring the impact of the Project's flow on the Telegraph Canyon
Trunk Sewer; Developer further agrees that if in the sole
discretion of the City Engineer, the Project's flow affects the
capacity of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer, Developer shall enter
into an agreement as set forth in 3.a. above.
4. Condition No. 22 Subdivision Map Indemnity. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 22 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees that, on the condition that City shall promptly notify the
Developer of any claim, action or proceeding and on the further
condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense, the
3
/?Jj] ~'i
Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and
its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or
proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees,
to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City,
including approvals by its Planning Commission, City Council, or
any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to
this Project.
5. Condition No. 23 - Erosion and Drainage Indemnity. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 23 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees that, on the condition that City shall promptly notify the
Developer of any claim, action or proceeding, Developer shall
defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its agents,
officers and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City, or its agents, officers or employees, related to
erosion, siltation or increased flow of drainage resulting from the
Property. City agrees to reasonably cooperate with Developer in
the defense of any such action, claim or proceeding.
6. Condition No. 24 Cable Television Easements. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 24 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees to permit all cable television companies franchised by the
City of Chula Vista equal opportunity to place conduit to and
provide cable television service for each lot or unit within the
Project. Developer further agrees to grant, by license or
easement, and for the benefit of, and to be enforceable by, the
City of Chula Vista, conditional access to cable television conduit
within the properties situated within the Project only to those
cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista
the condition of such grant being that (a) such access is coordi-
nated with Developer's construction schedule so that it does not
delay or impede Developer's construction schedule and does not
require the trenches to be reopened to accommodate the placement of
such conduits; and (b) any such cable company is an9 remains in
compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance with, the
terms and conditions of the franchise and with all other rules,
regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the
operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or
may from time to time be, issued by the City of Chula Vista.
Developer hereby conveys to the City of Chula Vista the authority
to enforce said covenant by such remedies as the City determines
appropriate, including revocation of said grant upon a determina-
tion by the City of Chula Vista that they have violated the
conditions of the grant.
7. Condition No. 37 Municipal Code Compliance. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 37 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees to comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code; the Developer further agrees to prepare its Final
Map and all plans in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and
City's Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual.
4
/ (/ f] -;5'.
8. Condition Nos. IX.C, 54 and 58 - Compliance with Map and
Plan Provisions. In satisfaction of Condition Nos. IX.C, 54 and 58
of Resolution 18570, Developer agrees to comply with all
unfulfilled conditions of approval of the Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Master Tentative Map, Chula Vista Tract 90-02, established by
Resolution No. 16222 approved by Council on June 18, 1991, and to
remain in compliance with and implement the terms, conditions, and
provisions of Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan,
General Development Plan, Planned Community District Regulations,
including Section XII. 2 -C Handicap Parking Requirements and Section
VIII.3-G Item Nos. 1, 4 and 6 of the Special Standards for RC
Districts, Rancho Del Rey SPA III Water Conservation Plan, Rancho
Del Rey SPA III Air Quality Improvement Plan, Rancho Del Rey SPA
III Residential Design Guidelines and Rancho Del Rey SPA III Public
Facilities Financing Plan, as amended and as are applicable to the
Property; Developer further agrees to provide the City with such
security (including recordation of covenants running with the land)
and implementation procedures, as the City may require to assure
that after approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall continue
to comply and remain in compliance with and implement such plans.
9. Condition No. 64 Construction Phasing Plan. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 64 of Resolution 18570, Developer
agrees to prepare and submit, subject to the approval of City's
Director of Planning, a construction phasing plan prior to issuance
of the first building permit.
10. Condition No. 8 Open Space. In satisfaction of
Condition No. 8 of Resolution No. 16222, the Developer agrees to
not oppose inclusion of the Property in Open Space District #20
(Zone 7) prior to approval of any final map for the proj ect .
Developer agrees to be responsible for any costs associated with
annexing the Property into Open Space District #20; City shall not
be liable for any such costs.
11. Condition Nos. 51, 52 and 53 Fire Hydrants. In
satisfaction of Condition Nos. 51, 52 and 53 of Resolution 16222,
Developer agrees to install, test and operate all fire hydrants
required by the Fire Chief prior to placement of any combustible
materials on site of any unit in the Project, which such hydrant
maximum pressure will not exceed 150 psi; in conjunction therewith,
developer shall provide roadway access at such sites for fire
apparatus as required by the Fire Chief.
12. Condition No. 62 - Compliance with Growth Management
Ordinance. In satisfaction of Condition No. 62 of Resolution No.
16222, Developer agrees to comply with the Growth Management
Ordinance which is in effect at the time building permits are
issued pursuant to each such final map; Developer further agrees
that such compliance includes but is not limited to the East Chula
Vista Transportation Phasing Plan, the Air Quality Improvement Plan
and Water Conservation Plan for the Project then in effect.
5
)?JjJ--t-
13. Condition No. 64 - No Protest of Maintenance District or
Assessment District. In satisfaction of Condition No. 64 of
Resolution 16222, the Developer agrees that prior to approval of
each final map for the project, it will not protest the formation
of a maintenance district for the maintenance of landscaped medians
and parkways along streets within and adjacent to the Project.
14. Condition No. 75 - Compliance with Applicable Laws. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 75 of Resolution 16222, the Developer
agrees to comply with all relevant Federal, State, and local
regulations, including The Clean Water Act; Developer further
agrees to provide testing and documentation as required by the City
Engineer to evidence such compliance.
15. Unfulfilled Conditions. Developer hereby agrees, unless
otherwise conditioned, that Developer shall comply with all
unfulfilled conditions of approval of the Rancho Del Rey III Master
Tentative Map Tract 90-02 and the Rancho Del Rey III Parcel R-6
Tentative Map, (Tract 97-01), established by Resolution Nos. 16222
and 18570 approved by Council on July 30, 1991 and February 18,
1997, respectively, and shall remain in compliance with and
implement the terms, conditions and provisions of the resolutions.
16. Satisfaction of Conditions. City agrees that the
execution of this Agreement constitutes satisfaction of Developer's
obligation of Conditions 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 37, IX.C, 54, 58 and
64 of Resolution 18570; Conditions 8, 51, 52, 53, 62, 64 and 75 of
Resolution 16222.
17.
prepared
party.
Recording. This Agreement, or an abstract hereof
by either or both parties, may be recorded by either
18.
Miscellaneous.
a. Notices. Unless otherwise provided in this
Agreement or by law, any and all notices required or permitted by
this Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either
party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served,
delivered, and received when personally delivered to the party to
whom it is directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business
days have elapsed following deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or
registered mail, return receipt requested, first-class postage
prepaid, addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. A
party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by
giving written notice of such change to the other party. Facsimile
transmission shall constitute personal delivery.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Director of Public Works
6
/vfl~)
Developer:
Shea Homes Limited Partnership
10721 Treena Street, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92131
A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph
by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the
manner provided in this paragraph. Facsimile transmission shall
constitute personal delivery.
b. Captions. Captions in this Agreement are inserted
for convenience of reference and do not define, describe or limit
the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms.
c. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the
entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter
hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements,
understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect.
This Agreement is not intended to supersede or amend any other
agreement between the parties unless expressly noted.
d. Preparation of Agreement. No inference, assumption
or presumption shall be drawn from the fact that a party or his
attorney prepared and/or drafted this Agreement. It shall be
conclusively presumed that both parties participated equally in the
preparation and/or drafting this Agreement.
e. Recitals; Exhibits. Any recitals set forth above
and exhibits referenced herein are incorporated by reference into
this Agreement.
f. Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences
litigation for the judicial interpretation, reformation, enforce-
ment or rescission hereof, the prevailing party will be entitled to
a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable
attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party"
shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the
relief sought.
7
/r:J/l-r
IN WITNESS
Agreement to be
forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
executed the day and year first hereinabove set
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
~DEVELOPER:
By:
Assistant Secretary
(Title)
:?lr~
Vice President
(Title)
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
H:\Home\Attorney\SSIA\SHEA
Approved as to form:
Attorneys for Developer
8
/CJ!f-i
- -
ATTACHMENT 1
CI/ULA VIST.4
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
BOLERO DRIVE
VALDIVIA COURT
DeLEON DRIVE
DeSOTO COURT
BALBOA CIRCLE
SOUTH CABRILLO DRIVE
NORTH CABRILLO DRIVE
I
I
I
I
I
/
,,"\1~~"
~O.
~~~
<r;,~~
~~~
I
I
J
--
-
---
-
- - - - - - CANYON ROAD
TELEGRAPH
-
[~J ~"~'" · ""~'" ~" ''''". '"'
I'UNHINC - ZNCINZZlt.lNC - SUIU'IYl/'fG
,Q'7' HfJ~1tJ(.JaH8 nur:' - ~AJII DIleO. CA 9Z1R1
(.r.) 6"-4109 - Fa (1'_) 'U-'414
I
1
\
\
\
}--
L
)
I.l..
~~
I
!~.
IC/)
I>
1<
1m
I::>
.-JO)
~/v
- ,
" >,..-- \ ,,"
'- ---
This Page Blank
;--~
"
~
ATTACHMENT 2
Recording Requested by:
CITY CLERK
When Recorded, Mail to:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance
to a public agency of less than a fee interest
for which no cash consideration has been paid or
received.
Declarant
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 199__, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter called "city", and SHEA HOMES
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, 10721 Treena Street, Suite 200, San Diego, Ca.
92131, hereinafter called "Subdivider";
f!lTH1LQ~~THl.
WHEREAS, Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista for approval and recordation, a final
subdivision map of a proposed subdivision, to be known as CHULA
VISTA TRACT 97-01, RANCHO DEL REY III, PARCEL R-6, UNIT 1, (PARCEL
1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 17841) pursuant to the provisions of the
Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance
with the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code
relating to the filing, approval and recordation of supdivision
map; and,
WHEREAS, the Code provides that before said map is finally
approved by the Council of the City of Chula Vista, Subdivider must
have either installed and completed all of the public improvements
and/or land development work required by the Code to be installed
in subdivisions before final maps of subdivisions are approved by
the Council for purpose of recording in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an al ternati ve thereto,
Subdivider shall enter into an agreement with City, secured by an
approved improvement security to insure the performance of said
work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, agreeing to install and complete, free of liens at
Subdivider's own expense, all of the pUblic improvements and/or
land development work required in said subdivision within a
definite period of time prescribed by said Council, and
WHEREAS, Subdivider is willing in consideration of the
approval and recordation of said map by the Council, to enter into
this agreement wherein it is provided that Subdivider will install
-1-
<',I
----'
and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all the public
improvement work required by City in connection with the proposed
subdivision and will deliver to City improvement securities as
approved by the City Attorney, and
WHEREAS, a tentative map of said subdivision has heretofore
been approved, subject to certain requirements and conditions, as
contained in Resolution No. 18570, approved on the 18th day of
February, 1997 ("Tentative Map Resolution"); and
WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for the
construction, installation and completion of said public improve-
ment work have been prepared and submitted to the city Engineer, as
shown on Drawings Nos. 97-475 through 97-482, on file in the office
of the city Engineer, and
WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing said public
improvements according to said plans and specifications has been
submitted and approved by the City in the amount of $358,000.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS
FOLLOWS:
1. Subdivider, for itself and his successors in interest, an
obligation the burden of which encumbers and runs with the land,
agrees to comply with all of the terms, conditions and requirements
of the Tentative Map Resolution; to do and perform or cause to be
done and performed, at its own expense, without cost to City, in a
good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the
satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the public
improvement and/or land development work required to be done in and
adjoining said subdivision ("Improvement Work"); and will furnish
the necessary materials therefor, all in strict conformity and in
accordance with the plans and specifications, which docum~nts have
heretofore been filed in the Office of the City Engineer and by
this reference are incorporated herein and made a part hereof.
2. It is expressly understood and agreed that all monuments
have been or will be installed within thirty (30) days after the
completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work, and that
Subdivider has installed or will install temporary street name
signs if permanent street name signs have not been installed.
3. It is expressly understood and agreed that Subdivider will
cause all necessary materials to be furnished and all Improvement
Work required under the provisions of this contract to be done on
or before the second anniversary date of Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
4. It is understood and agreed that Subdivider will perform
said Improvement Work as set forth hereinabove, or that portion of
said Improvement Work serving any buildings or structures ready for
occupancy in said subdivision, prior to the issuance of any
certificate of clearance for utility connections for said buildings
-2-
f
or structures in said sUbdivision, and such certificate shall not
be issued until the city Engineer has certified in writing the
completion of said public improvements or the portion thereof
serving said building or structures approved by the city; provided,
however, that the improvement security shall not be required to
cover the provisions of this paragraph.
5. It is expressly understood and agreed to by Subdivider
that, in the performance of said Improvement Work, Subdivider will
conform to and abide by all of the provisions of the ordinances of
the City of Chula Vista, and the laws of the state of California
applicable to said work.
6. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
City of Chula Vista, simultaneously with the execution of this
agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum
of ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($179,000.00) which security shall guarantee the faithful
performance of this contract by Subdivider and is attached hereto,
marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof.
7. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
City of chula vista simultaneously with the execution of this
agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the city in the sum
of ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($179,000.00) to secure the payment of material and labor in
connection with the installation of said public improvements, which
security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part
hereof and the bond amounts as contained in Exhibit "B", and made
a part hereof.
8. The parties acknowledge and agree that no Survey Monument
Installation Bond is required since monumentation was accomplished
per previous parcel map.
9. It is further agreed that if the Improvement Work is not
completed within the time agreed herein, the sums provided by said
improvement securities may be used by city for the completion of
the Improvement Work within said subdivision in accordance with
such specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option
of the City, as are approved by the City Council at the time of
engaging the work to be performed. Upon certification of
completion by the City Engineer and acceptance of said work by
City, and after certification by the Director of Finance that all
costs hereof are fully paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof
not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or
its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the
improvement security. Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any
difference between the total costs incurred to perform the work,
including design and administration of construction (including a
reasonable allocation of overhead), and any proceeds from the
improvement security.
-3-
r-
~
10. It is also expressly agreed and understood by the parties
hereto that in no case will the City of Chula Vista, or any
department, board or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of
the costs and expenses of the work aforesaid, nor shall any
officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be liable for the payment of any
sum or sums for said work or any materials furnished therefor,
except to the limits established by the approved improvement
security in accordance with the requirements of the state
Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code.
11. It is further understood and agreed by Subdivider that
any engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection,
materials furnished and other incidental expenses) incurred by city
in connection with the approval of the Improvement Work plans and
installation of Improvement Work hereinabove provided for, and the
cost of street signs and street trees as required by City and
approved by the City Engineer shall be paid by Subdivider, and that
Subdivider shall deposit, prior to recordation of the Final Map,
with city a sum of money sufficient to cover said cost.
12. It is understood and agreed that until such time as all
Improvement Work is fully completed and accepted by City,
Subdivider will be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and
any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer
lines within the proposed subdivision. It is further understood
and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all public improvements
for a period of one year from date of final acceptance and correct
any and all defects or deficiencies arising during said period as
a result of the acts or omission of Subdivider , its agents or
employees in the performance of this agreement, and that upon
acceptance of the work by City, Subdivider shall grant to City, by
appropriate conveyance, the public improvements constructed
pursuant to this agreement; provided, however, that said acceptance
shall not constitute a waiver of defects by City as set forth
hereinabove.
13. It is understood and agreed that City, as indemnitee, or
any officer or employee thereof, shall not be liable for any injury
to person or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions
of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to
this agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the
City, its officers and employees, harmless from any and all claims,
demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because
of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or
employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement; provided,
however, that the approved improvement securi ty shall not be
required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such
indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to
damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of
property from owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as
a result of the construction of said subdivision and the public
improvements as provided herein. It shall also extend to damages
resulting from diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow,
-4-
~
modification of the velocity of the water, erosion or siltation, or
the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the
construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of
plans providing for any or all of these conditions shall not
constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility for such
damage or taking, nor shall City, by said approval, be an insurer
or surety for the construction of the subdivision pursuant to said
approved improvement plans. The provisions of this paragraph shall
become effective upon the execution of this agreement and shall
remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the
acceptance by the city of the improvements.
14. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the city or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim,
action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the
City, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning
a subdivision, which action is brought within the time period
provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the
State of California.
IN WITNESS
agreement to be
forth.
WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
executed the day and year first hereinabove set
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
~BDIVIDER:
/71~~ HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
'>I( a California Limited Partnership
. Fly' ,1 F' Shp" rr> . 1nc . " NPv"(J,,
co~ration, Gen 1 Partner
Mayor of the City of Chula
Vista
City Clerk
ATTEST
R
ant Secretary
Approved as to form by
f~"~u"" ~- &,. A-
ci I ttorney 7~ ~
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
-5-
7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On October 9, 1997, before me, Rhonda M Angel, Notary Public, personally appeared
Mark Brock and Richard Gustafson, personally known to me to be the persons whose names are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their
authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf
of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
@R>:==N:~
SEAL:
I-~--~---;)
- ~ ~ ~.~;~eI ~
t~~~
-------
y
v
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit "A" Improvement Security - Faithful Performance
Form: Bond
Amount: $179,000
Exhibit "B" Improvement Security - Material and Labor:
Form: Bond
Amount: $179,000
Securities approved as to form and amount by
~ 5{Y1cc:;,L '~.:~~
~ Cit~ney
Improvement Completion Date:
Two (2) years from date of
Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement
Agreement.
H:\home\attorney\ssia\bolero.sub
-6-
9
Executed in three counterparLs
B',1 No. 00-184-534
Pl~mium: $895.00
, -
File No.: 12-\'2--3 (5
BON]) FOR FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
- -. ~_. --
- ---- ._-
- -." -- ,_.WHEREAS, the City, Council of the City of ChuIa Vista, County of San Diego, State of
California and Shea Banes Limited Partnership ~_ ._h" h _.. _. _. .
- -. , -
(hereinafter. "Principal ") bave entered.into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and
complete certain designated public improvements, which sai!i agreemerit, dated
19 'J7, and id.."'II!ified as project; TI:act 97-01,' Unit: I' CPa:i:ce1 1 of Parcel Map' .
N::>:17841 ' - , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and,
WHEREAS, said PriDcipal is required under the terms of said agreement to furnish a bond
for ~ perform~n('.e of said agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, we, the Principal and American Home Assurance Company
" ' ';" 0:, v.":::",-_~.;'. , a cOIporation of the State of
New York , (hereinafter "Surety"), are held and firmly bound unto the City
of ChuIa Vista, a municipal cOIporation in the County of San Diego, State' of California
(hereinafter "City"), and to and for the benefit of all P'Cisoris who may suffer daniages by breach
of the coIJditions hereof, in the'penal sum of ere ~-~'y'mre t-tr....,;.,..n an nYlOOdollars,
($ 179,000.00--), lawful money of the United States, for the paymenfofwhich sum well and
truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, sucCeSsois-; exCcutorsandad~i':;f~tors;'joint1y
and severally, firmly by these presents.. '.
. ._~. -. -- -
The condition of this obligation is" sUch that if the above-bound Principal, his or its heirs,
execmors, arlmim"ttators, successors or assigns, shaI1 in all things stand to and abide by, and well
an!! trUly keep and perfonn the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the said Agreement and
any alteration tb:reof made as th...-rein provided, on his' or their part, to be kept and performed at
the time and in the m~nn"I' therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and
~':ng, and shaI1 indemnify and save barmIess City, its officers, agents and employees, as
th..-rein stipulated, then this obligation shaII become nulI and void; otherwise, it shaII be and
remain in full force and effeCt.
As part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified
therefor, there shaI1 be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable
attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation. all to be taxed as costs
and included in any judgment rendered.
The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or
addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the
specifications accompanying the same shaII in anywise affect its obligations on this bond, and it
does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms
of the agreemem or to the work or to the specifications.
;0
-~ '
In addition to the acts bonded for pursuant to the agreement incorporated above, the
following acts and performance~ are additionally subject to the terms of this agreement:
All ~ in ~ , ,. ,-;.. '-'" with Chi1a Vista~. N:s. r:n-rJ5"ID 97-482
~ ; ~..
; ..-
IN WITNESS ~OF. this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and
Surety above named. on July 18 -- . 19E.
- - ~_. - -
..- ...- ----~..; ..
',,:....
.- .
-. .'
-. ~ -
'-
-..--, -
. . ~ . ~ -. .
. ._....J.,
AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY
SHEA HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. ~-
a California Limited Partnership
BY:_.J. F _ Shea Co.. Inc.. a Nevada
corporation. Ge eral Partner
Rv' ckY- ,\ ~ -"<--~_
By:
By:
Principal
Jeri Sumner, Attorney-in-Fact
Surety
(Above-signatories must be notarized)
Approved as to form:
c?~1;:J)1~(!1 1, ~ I-~
CItY. orney
H:\HOMElENGIS=:ER\LA.NDDEV\FORMSIFP _ BOI'<"D.SIA
/1
-,
~
~.
CA-LlFORNIA ALL.PURPose ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of
California
County of
Orange
On
July 18, 1997
0".
before me,
personally appeared
Jeri Sumner
Sheila K. McDon"ld. Not"ry 1'lIhlir
Name and lese otOfticar (..9- -.Jane 00.. NoIary Ptdc:1
NarMfSI 01 Si;NI1SJ
x: personally known to me - OR - = proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument
and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the
same in his/herltheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by
hislherltheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s).
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument._
rf)"':'- " . ~H~I~A"K.' ~C"D~N~(D "It
~ .0> ." COMM. # 1090412 ~
:;;: ~~ NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA 5:
:s: ~;, ORANGE COUNTY 2
il MY COM~~SSIONEXPIRES MARCH 15;2000 It
. . . . . 9 - - . _ _ . . ... :-- yO T"-
WITNESS my h"" ~d _ ~
~jjJ~;j(m 'wid
S9't-lUre of Nowy P\.Oiic:
OPTIONAL
Tr:ougn ;t;e infarmarian tJeJow 15 not required /:)r law, it may pralle valuable to persons reJy;ng on the document and could prevent
.':'audulent removal and rearrachment of tI'Iis form to anol11er dOC'.;ment.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document:
Document Date:
Number of Pages:
Signer(s) Other Tnan Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name:
Signer's Name:
= Individual
= Corporate Officer
Title(s):
= Partner -:: Umited '-- General
~ Attomey-in-Fact
,- Trustee
Guardian or Conservator
, - Other:
_.~.
. (COI'-
Too of :nt,,:l':':C :":ere
= Individual
:: Corporate Officer
Title(s):
:: Partner - ..: Limited ~ General
= Attomey-in-Fact
:: Trustee
CJ Guardian or Conservator
C Other: TOI>ot.............
R!GHT T1-tU~.'f8FRtNT
OF SIGNER
Signer Is Representing:
Signer Is Representing:
/z
~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On July 21, 1997, before me, Monda M Angel, Notary Public, personally appeared
Richard Gustafson and Dale Holbrook, personally known to me to be the persons whose names are
subscribed to the _within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in iheir
authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf
of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.
WI1NESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
~J 'Tn .
SEAL:
it Rhonda M. Angel
- COMII. # 113211P3 II!
U NOTARY PUIII.JC.CAI.JF (i
!II SAN DIEGO.COlJN1Y -
MY COMo\. EXP. APRIL 21. 2001
.2-
1---
I
Executed in three counterparts
Bonr--,. 00-184-534
Premium included in charge for
perf o?n'e"f.:'o?pnd JZ..."R -~ f3
B01'l'D FOR :MATERIAL AND LABOR
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of
California, and Shea Hooes Limited ~
<D=inafter uPrincipal") have entered into an agreement wh=by Principal agrees to install and
complete certain designated public improvements, which said agreement, dated
19 97, and identified as project Tract 97-<J1, Unit 1, (Parcel 1 of Parcel Map'
No. 17841 , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and,
WHEREAS, under th: terms of said agreement, Principal is require<i~ .be!or~. entering .upon
the perform.n~e of the work, to file a good and SlIfficieni paynient bond with the City of ChuIa " .
VISta to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (comm"'Dcing with Section 3082),
Part4;DiViSlOii'3',"of the ciVifCOdeof the State of California. ':c, _, : .
-..~ -- ..-., ---
NOW THEREFORE, said Principal and American Home Assurance Company
, a coIporation of the State of
New York , (hereinafter NSurety"), are held and finn1y bound unto the City
of ChuIa Vista, a municipal coIporation in the County of San Diego, State of California
(1I=inafter uCity"), and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen and other persons
employed in the perform.n~.e of the aforesaid agI"1'f=""'t and referred to in the aforesaid Code of
Civil Procedure in the sum of. ere bTrlrR'l ~i Dim 1h:u!arl an n::Y.lOO---do11ars,
($l/9,cm.OO ), lawful money of the United States, for materials furnished or labor thereon
of any kind, or for amoUnts clue under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work
or labor, that said Surety will pay the same in an amount not exct"e'riing the amount hereinabove
set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount
thereof, costS and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, inl:urred by
City in successfully enforcing such obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the cOUrt, and to be
taxed as costs and to be included in the judgment th=in rendered.
It is h=by expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any
and all persons, companies and cOIporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (co=encing
with Section 3082), Part 4, Division 3, of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them
or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond.
Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null
and void, otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect.
The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or
addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the
specifications accompanying the same shall in anywise affect its obligations on this bond, and it
does h=by waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms
of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications,
/1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and
Surety above named, on Julv 18 , 19 97
-
AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY
SHEA BOMES LIMITED PARTNERSBIP,
a California Limited Partnership
,By: J. F.,'Shea Co~, IDc~i:a Nevada
:::'I;;/~.rtD.r
Principal
By:
b'
- - -
'\ -, "..
,0;: I...J~^'
-
. "
-.i:i::..... _
Jeri Sumner, AttorneY-in-Fact
Surety
-,
. (Above-signatories must be notarized)
Approved as to form:
~1/J"-~tHr a;:0,i)~ /,
C" 'ttorney ~ I./'-' r '()
H:\HOMElENGTI-<=:ERILANDDEV\FORMS\M&L _ BOND.SlA
(~
, 'j
/-
----...,
~
CALIFORNIA ALL.PURPO~c ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Stare of
California
County of
Orange
On July 18. 1997
0...
before me, Sheila K. McDonald. Nnrary P"hlir
J'Qme 11"C17'.. at 0fIIcw 'e.;.. oJanot eo.........,. ~
Jeri Sumner
personally appeared
NametSI c;I Siglensl
x: personally known to me - OR - = proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument
and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the
same in hislherltheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by
hislherltheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
~\. . :c;,,' . ~H'EI~A' K: ~C'D~N'A~D' t
~ (~ CDMM. frl090412 ;;::
o ~~~ roT"Y PUBL1C.C~L1FORNIA 0
:2 ~~) i ;~ANGE COUNTY f'>
~\.MY ~~M:S~IO~ ~:IR:S .M~R~H .15: 2rO~.~
OPTIONAL
it:ouqn ;r.e Informa:on ~lOw /s nor re-qu,rge tJy Jaw:. it may prove valuable to perscns re/ring en the doco..Jment ana ccuk: prevent
.':Guc!t.:ier:r removal anrj rearrac:'ment 01 ttris lorr:r to another dOC!.1ment.
Description of Attached Document
\
Title or Type of Document:
Dccument Date:
Number of Pages:
Signer(s) Other Tnan Namec Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name:
Signer's Name:
Individual
Corporate Officer
TItle(s):
- Partner -....: limited _ General
~ Anomey-in-Facr
Trus:ee
Guarcian or Conservator
Other.
~:i'i!~;iN
I 7cc of """"0 'e<. ,
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
i
I
Individual
Corporate Officer
TItle(s):
~ Par-.ner -...; Limited '-' General
= Attcmey.in-Fact
Trustee
_ GuardiaI1 or Conservator
Other.
rocor~::erw
Signer Is Representing:
I I Signer Is Representing:
II
I!
I I
u
/&
---
Amtrican Home Assurance Com}__oy
-;\'ational Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa.
Principal Bond Office: 70 Pine Street. New York. N.Y 10270
POWER OF A TTOR!\EY
No. 05-B-'4295
Kc\;OW ALL :\IEN BY THESE PRESE:\TS:
That American Home Assurance Comp,my. a Ncw York corporation. and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh.
Po., a Pennsyl\'ania corporation, docs each hereby appoint
-Mike Parizino, James \V. i\loilancn. Robert M. Minot. J:mina Monroe, Lourdes Lanua. Sheila K. i\1cDon:1Jd. ,.!cri Sumner:
of Santa Ana, California-::-
ilS true and bwful Attorncy(s)-in-Fact, with full 'authority 10 execute on its behalf bonds, undertakings. recognizances and other
contracts of indemnity and writings obligatory: in the nature thereof. issued in the course of its business. and to biIld the respective
company thereby.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. American Home Assurance Company and National !..inion Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh. Pa.
havc each executed these presents
(\ this 3rd day of June, 1997
M-t ,,- ~~
Donn Kolbeck. Assistant Vice President
STATE OF NEW YORK }
COUNTY OF NEW YORK}ss.
/".
C
On t.his 3nJ day of Ju...iC, 1997 before me came the above-
named oJIiccr of American Home Assurance Company and National
Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa., to me pc.:rsonally
nO\\l1 to be the individual and officer described herein, and
~cknowlcdgcd that he cxccutCG Lie foregoing inSLi..1II1cnt and affixcd
the seals of said corporations thereto by authority of his office.
CAROL ~..A:;A3
NOiary P:...bj;~. $;a:a 0: New York
No O\R~.5052011
Qualified in.Kings County I qCff-
Commission Expl~81 Nov. 13. _
CERTIFICATE
Excerpts of RcsoJutions adopted by the Boards oi Directors of Amem:an Home Assurance Company ami Nation:..!1 Union Fire Insurance Company
of Pittshurg.h, Pa. on May 1 S, 1976:
"RESOLVED, that the Chairr.;J...'1 of the Board, the PresidenL, or any Vice Pn.:sident be, and hereby is, autllOflzd to <lppoint Attameys-in-Fact to
represent and act for and on behalf of the Company to execute bonds, Wldertakings, recognlz.ances and other contracts 01 indemnity ~md \\Tuings
ohliptory in the naturc thereof. and to attach thereto the corporate seal of the Company, in the transaCLJOn of its surety business:
"RESOLVED, thi:ll the signi:ltillcs and attestations of such oOicers and the seal of the Company may be affixed to any such Power of Attonley or to
,my certdicatc relating thereto by facsimile, :md any such Power or Attorney or certilicate be.:.L.-1ng such facsimile sig....1atures or facsimile seal shaH
he valid and binding upon the Company when so affixed \\ith respect to any bond, undertaking. recognizance or other conlruct of indemnity or
\\Titing obligatory in UlC naturc thereof:
"RESOLVED, that any such Attomey.in-Fact delivering a secretarial certification that the foregoing resolutions still be in c1Tccl may insert in such
..:crt!licallon the date Ulereof, said date to be not !i:lter than the date of delivery thereof"by such Attonley-in-Fact."
L EIlI.aheth ;"'1. Tuck, Secrct<:L"}' of Americ~U1 f!ame Assurance Company and of NatIOnal Gruon Fin: Insurance Company of Pittsburg.h, Pa. do
herehy cer1I!~' that the foregoing excerpts of Resolutions adopted hy the Boards of Dir.:ctors ar th.:se corporations, and the PcJ\\ers of Attonley
lS;.;U':U pursuant thereto, arc true;:md correct, and th<1t both Lhe Resolution!'; and the Powcrs of :\ttomey ar'.:: in full forc.: and drect.
1:--'; \VIT:--';ESS \VHEREOF, I f..::\'e hereunto sel'my hand and allixed the facsimile seal of each corporation
thIS 18th day of
July
.19~
)/'L ./j~
Elizabeth M. Tuck. Secrctary
()~ 166 (... %)
;7
~~
-~~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On July 21, 1997, before me, Monda M Angel, Notary Public, personally appeared
Richard Gustafson and Dale Holbrook, personally known to me to be the persons whose names are
subscribed to the _within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their
authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf
of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
~=An;:N;~
SEAL:
~-----------7)
------------------
@ Rhonda M. Angel
_Ii ~#11_ II!
NlJTARY~('\
SAHDEGO'COIMIY -
"" ~ EXP. APRIL 21. 21101
/f
~
. ~
1~@:~[gDW~!~
i::\ JUl 251997 ~!
I ,'I L'
;..JU
TO BE ATTACHED TO AND FORM A PART OF BOND NO. 00-184-534
PRINCIPAL
Shea Homes Limited Partnership
AMOUNT
$179,000.00
IN FAVOR OF
City of Chula Vista
The above captioned bond, submitted for Tract 97-01, Unit 1 (parcell of Parcel Map
17841) covers construction of public improvements, if any, both prior to and subsequent
to City approval of Shea Homes' subdivision improvement agreement.
THIS RIDER IS EFFECTIVE
July 18, 1997
AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY
I . ~
By: '. . , ~~ ~ h
S;;{-~, torney-~n-~c.t
/1
C~LlFORNIA ALL.PURP,-~E ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of
CaliforrJia
County oi
Oranl1;e
On
July 24, 1997
0...
before me, Patricia H. Brebner. Notary Public
NMIII arc._ 01 oer.c.r (e.;... ..:an. 00.. Notary F'uDC")
personally appeared
Jeri Sumner
NaINt.JoI~.,
x: personally :.mown to me - OR - = proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the.peJSon(s)
whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrUment
and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the
same in hislherltheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by
hislherltheir signature(s) on the instrUment the person(s},
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s} acted.
executed the instrUment..
~--
@ PA,RiC:A H. ,REBNER
-.-, Commission !IF 11.c.6000
- z
~ .,:.. No:C!y Puoli:: - CoUfania i!'
i .' Oronge County f
_ ~- _ _MY_CO_mr::~r~J~IS:~'
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
~~:_~ >/.OM~
$M;natut. of Newy ~JOIC
OPTIONAL
T?':cL'~n zr:e mfcr.:"'.ation ~elOw 1$ .~Ot ,.f!qUlrer: ~y Jaw, it .'iJsy prove valuaCle :c persons reJy;r.g on me aoc-.;ment and could prevent
.'raueu/em removal anC reartac..,menr of ttJis form to anottJer dOC'.Jmsnt.
Description of Attached Document
litle or Type of Document:
Document Da!e:
Number of Pages:
S;~ner{s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name:
Signer's Name:
Individual
Corporate Officer
Title(s):
- Pan:ner - _ Limitea _ General
:!- Attorney-in-Fact
T rusree
Guar:::ian c;r Conservator
Other:
~'!I;"'.
. ,C" ,~-
I ':"CC cf tnt.:rno ~ere
Individual
Corporate Officer
litle(s):
Pan:ner - ~ Limited '-' General
Attomey.in-Fact
Trustee
-, Guardian or Conservator
,- Other:
Too Of ~C:'!er, I
I
i
[
Signer Is Representing:
I
I
I
I
I
I
Signer Is Representing:
20
'-
~
_American Home Assurance Comr~ny
?,ational Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa.
Principal Bond Officc: 70 Pinc Strcct. New York. N Y. 10270
POWER OF A TTOR.\EY
No. 05-8-3.\295
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
That American Home Assurance Company, a Ncw York corporation, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh.
Pa., a Pennsylvania corporation, docs cach hereby appoim
-Mike Parizino, James W. Moilanen, Robert M. Minot, Janina Monroe, Lourdes Landa, Sheila K- McDonald,.Jeri Sumner:
of Santa Ana, California:::-
its true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, with full authority to execute on its behalf bonds, undertakings, recogni_za9ces and othcr
contracts of indemnity and writings obligator)' in the nature thereof, issued in the course of its business, and to bind the respectivc
company thereby.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. American Home Assurance Company and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa.
have each executed these presents
('r.-';;'~
~.....~ ~
~,~
this 3rd day of June, ! 997.
1'-1, 0<- ~L~
Donn Kolbeck, Assistant Vice President
STATE OF NEW YORK }
COUNTY OF NEW YORK}ss,
On this 3rd day of Junt:, 1997 ~forc: me came the abovc-
named officer of AmCriCilll Home Assurance Company and National
Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa.. to m~ personally
knO\\l1 to hi: th~ individual and officer dt:SCribcd hcr~in, and
ackno\....ledged that he executed the foregoing instrument and afiixed
the seals of said corporations thereto by authority of his office.
CARGL ~ASA3
i'~ct3ty P:..bii~. S;.=.:a ot New York
NO.01RASOS2011
Qualified in Kings County f q '1' ~
Commission Explrea Nov. 13, _ r
GrctV ~qc[ll;;
/
CERTIFICATE
!:XCCrpls of Resolutions adopted by the Boards of Directors of Am~rican frame Assurance Company and National Union Fire Insurance Company
of Pittsburgh, Pa, on May 1 R. 1976:
,
"RESOLVED, thal the Chairman of the Board, the Pn:sident. or any Vice Pn:sidenl be, am! hereby is, aulltorized toAappoint Attorneys-in-Filct to
represent and act (or and on behalf of the Company to execute bonds, undertakings, recogni7..aI1CeS and other contracts of indemnity and \\Tltings
obligatory In the nature thereoC and to attach thereto the corporate seal of the Company, in the lran:xlction of its surely business:
"RESOLVED, that the signatures and atteSl4ltions of such officers and the seal of the Company may be atTIxed to any such Power of Attorney or to
any certilic01te relating thereto by facsimile, and any such Power of Attorney or certiticate bearing such facsimile signatures or facsimih: seal shall
be \'aJid and binding upon lhe Company \,,'hen so affixed \..ith respect to any bond, undeIUking, recognizance or other contract of indemnity or
\\Titing obligatory in the nature thereof:
"RESOLVED, that any such Attorney-in-Fact delivering a secretarial certification that the foregoing resolutions still be: in effect may insert in such
certllicalion the date thereof. said date to be not latt..'"T than the date of delivery thereof by such Attorney-in-Fact."
L EIil.ahcth \1. Tuck, Secreta......y of American I-lame Assurance Company and of National Union Fire lnsurance Company of Pittsburgh. ra. do
hereby certilY that the foregoing excerpts of Resolutions adopted by the Boards of Directors of these corporations, and the Powr;rs of Attorney
Issued pursuant tht..'feto, arc true and correct, and that both thc Rc.solutions and thc Po\\'ers of Attorney arc in full force and ctTect.
I~ \\'ITNESS \VHEREOF, I have hereunto sct my hand and aJ1ixed the facsimilc sea! of t.:<.Ich corporation
this 24th day of July
,!9~
fk.0~
Elizabeth M. Tuck, Secretary
65166 (4 96)
Z!
- --.-.
, '
This Page Blank
Z2-
ATTACHMENT 3
RECORDING REQUEST BY, )
)
City Clerk )
)
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO, )
)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
276 Fourth Avenue )
Chula Vista, CA 91910 )
)
No transfer tax is due as this is a )
conveyance to a public agency of )
less than a fee interest for which )
no cash consideration has been paid )
or received. )
)
)
)
Developer )
)
Above Space for Recorder's Use
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
(Conditions 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 37, IX.C, 54, 58, 64 of
Resolution 18570; 8, 51, 52, 53, 62, 64, 75 of Resolution 16222)
This Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("Agree-
ment") is made this _ day of , 1997, by and between THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California ("City" or "Grantee" for recording
purposes only) and SHEA HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a California
Limited Partnership ("Developer" or "Grantor"), with reference to
the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute a part of this
Agreement:
RECITALS
A. This Agreement concerns and affects certain real property
located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly described as
Parcell of Parcel Map No. 17841 ("Property"). The Property is
part of a project commonly known as Chula Vista Tract 97-01, Rancho
Del Rey III, Parcel R-6, Unit 1. For purposes of this Agreement
the term "Project" shall mean "Property".
B. Developer is the owner of the Property.
C. Developer has applied for and the City has
Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as Chula
97-01, RANCHO DEL REY III, Parcel R-6, Unit 1
Subdivision Map") for the subdivision of the Property.
approved a
Vista Tract
( "Tentative
1
/'7,
'--'" ---
D. The City has adopted Resolution Nos. 16222 and 18570
("Resolution") pursuant to which it has approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map subject to certain conditions as more particularly
described in the Resolution, copies of which are attached hereto as
Exhibit "A" and "B" and incorporated herein.
E. City is willing, on the premises, security, terms and
conditions herein contained to approve the final map for which
Developer has applied as being in substantial conformance with the
Tentative Subdivision Map described in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants, terms
and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as set forth
below.
I. Agreement Applicable to Subsequent Owners.
1.1 Agreement Binding Upon Successors. This Agreement
shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors,
assigns and interests of the parties as to any or all of the
Property until released by the mutual consent of the parties.
1.2 Agreement Runs with the Land. The burden of the
covenants contained in this Agreement ("Burden") is for the benefit
of the Property and the City, its successors and assigns and any
successor in interest thereto. City is deemed the beneficiary of
such covenants for and in its own right and for the purposes of
protecting the interest of the community and other parties public
or private, in whose favor and for whose benefit of such covenants
running with the land have been provided without regard to whether
City has been, remained or are owners of any particular land or
interest therein. If such covenants are breached, the City shall
have the right to exercise all rights and remedies and to maintain
any actions or suits at law or in equity or other prope~ proceed-
ings to enforce the curing of such breach to which it or any other
beneficiaries of this agreement and the covenants may be entitled.
a. Developer Release on Guest Builder Assignments.
If Developer assigns any portion of the Project, Developer may have
the right to obtain a release of any of Developer's obligations
under this Agreement, provided Developer obtains the prior written
consent of the City to such release. Such assignment shall,
however, be subject to this Agreement and the Burden of this
Agreement shall remain a covenant running with the land. The City
shall not withhold its consent to any such request for a release so
long as the assignee acknowledges that the Burden of the Agreement
runs with the land, assumes the obligations of the Developer under
this Agreement, and demonstrates, to the reasonable satisfaction of
the City, its ability to perform its obligations under this
Agreement as it relates to the portion of the Project which is
being acquired by the Assignee.
2
21/'
b. Partial Release of Developer's Assignees. If
Developer assigns any portion of the Project subject to the Burden
of this Agreement, upon request by the Developer or its assignee,
the City shall release the assignee of the Burden of this Agreement
as to such assigned portion if such portion has complied with the
requirements of this Agreement and such partial release will not,
in the opinion of the City, jeopardize the likelihood that the
remainder of the Burden will not be completed.
2. Condition No. 20 - Building Permits. In satisfaction of
Condition No. 20 of Resolution 18570, the Developer agrees that:
a. The City may withhold occupancy permits for any unit
within the Project if anyone of the following occur:
i. Regional development threshold limits set by the East
Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan have been reached.
J.J.. Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities
and/or services exceed the adopted City threshold standards in the
then effective Growth Management Ordinance.
b. The City may withhold building permits for any of the
units within any phase of development identified in the PFFP, if
the required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP or as
amended or otherwise conditioned have not been completed or
constructed to satisfaction of the City. The Developer may propose
changes in the timing and sequencing of development and the
construction of improvements affected. In such case, the PFFP may
be amended as approved by the City Planning Director and Public
Works Director.
3. Condition No. 21 Telegraph Canyon Sewer. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 21 of Resolution No. 18570,.Developer
agrees that prior to approval of the second final map of the
Project, Developer shall either:
a. Enter into an agreement to participate in the financing
of improvements to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer; or
b. Provide a study to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
measuring the impact of the Project's flow on the Telegraph Canyon
Trunk Sewer; Developer further agrees that if in the sole
discretion of the City Engineer, the Project's flow affects the
capacity of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer, Developer shall enter
into an agreement as set forth in 3.a. above.
4. Condi tion No. 22 Subdi vision Map Inde:mni ty. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 22 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees that, on the condition that City shall promptly notify the
Developer of any claim, action or proceeding and on the further
condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense, the
3
-
~;:
..-::..' :::;
Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and
its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or
proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees,
to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City,
including approvals by its Planning Commission, City Council, or
any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to
this Project.
5. Condition No. 23 - Erosion and Drainage Indemnity. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 23 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees that, on the condition that City shall promptly notify the
Developer of any claim, action or proceeding, Developer shall
defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its agents,
officers and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City, or its agents, officers or employees, related to
erosion, siltation or increased flow of drainage resulting from the
Property. City agrees to reasonably cooperate with Developer in
the defense of any such action, claim or proceeding.
6. Condition No. 24 Cable Television Easements. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 24 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees to permit all cable television companies franchised by the
City of Chula Vista equal opportunity to place conduit to and
provide cable television service for each lot or unit within the
proj ect . Developer further agrees to grant, by license or
easement, and for the benefit of, and to be enforceable by, the
City of Chula Vista, conditional access to cable television conduit
within the properties situated within the Project only to those
cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista
the condition of such grant being that (a) such access is coordi-
nated with Developer's construction schedule so that it does not
delay or impede Developer's construction schedule and does not
require the trenches to be reopened to accommodate the placement of
such conduits; and (b) any such cable company is and remains in
compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance with, the
terms and conditions of the franchise and with all other rules,
regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the
operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or
may from time to time be, issued by the City of Chula Vista.
Developer hereby conveys to the City of Chula Vista the authority
to enforce said covenant by such remedies as the City determines
appropriate, including revocation of said grant upon a determina-
tion by the City of Chula Vista that they have violated the
conditions of the grant.
7. Condi tion No. 37 Municipal Code Compliance. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 37 of Resolution 18570, the Developer
agrees to comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code; the Developer further agrees to prepare its Final
Map and all plans in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and
City's Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual.
4
~
8. Condition Nos. IX.C, 54 and 58 - Compliance with Map and
Plan Provisions. In satisfaction of Condition Nos. IX.C, 54 and 58
of Resolution 18570, Developer agrees to comply with all
unfulfilled conditions of approval of the Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Master Tentative Map, Chula Vista Tract 90-02, established by
Resolution No. 16222 approved by Council on June 18, 1991, and to
remain in compliance with and implement the terms, conditions, and
provisions of Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan,
General Development Plan, Planned Community District Regulations,
including Section XII. 2 -C Handicap Parking Requirements and Section
VIII.3-G Item Nos. 1, 4 and 6 of the Special Standards for RC
Districts, Rancho Del Rey SPA III Water Conservation Plan, Rancho
Del Rey SPA III Air Quality Improvement Plan, Rancho Del Rey SPA
III Residential Design Guidelines and Rancho Del Rey SPA III Public
Facilities Financing Plan, as amended and as are applicable to the
Property; Developer further agrees to provide the City with such
security (including recordation of covenants running with the land)
and implementation procedures, as the City may require to assure
that after approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall continue
to comply and remain in compliance with and implement such plans.
9. Condition No. 64 Construction Phasing Plan. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 64 of Resolution 18570, Developer
agrees to prepare and submit, subject to the approval of City's
Director of Planning, a construction phasing plan prior to issuance
of the first building permit.
10. Condition No. 8 Open Space. In satisfaction of
Condition No. 8 of Resolution No. 16222, the Developer agrees to
not oppose inclusion of the Property in Open Space District #20
(Zone 7) prior to approval of any final map for the proj ect .
Developer agrees to be responsible for any costs associated with
annexing the Property into Open Space District #20; City shall not
be liable for any such costs. '
11. Condition Nos. 51, 52 and 53 Fire Hydrants. In
satisfaction of Condition Nos. 51, 52 and 53 of Resolution 16222,
Developer agrees to install, test and operate all fire hydrants
required by the Fire Chief prior to placement of any combustible
materials on site of any unit in the Project, which such hydrant
maximum pressure will not exceed 150 psi; in conjunction therewith,
developer shall provide roadway access at such sites for fire
apparatus as required by the Fire Chief.
12. Condition No. 62 - Compliance with Growth Management
Ordinance. In satisfaction of Condition No. 62 of Resolution No.
16222, Developer agrees to, comply with the Growth Management
Ordinance which is in effect at the time building permits are
issued pursuant to each such final map; Developer further agrees
that such compliance includes but is not limited to the East Chula
Vista Transportation Phasing Plan, the Air Quality Improvement Plan
and Water Conservation Plan for the Project then in effect.
5
2-7
13. Condition No. 64 - No Protest of Maintenance District or
Assessment District. In satisfaction of Condition No. 64 of
Resolution 16222, the Developer agrees that prior to approval of
each final map for the project, it will not protest the formation
of a maintenance district for the maintenance of landscaped medians
and parkways along streets within and adjacent to the Project.
14. Condition No. 75 - Compliance with Applicable Laws. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 75 of Resolution 16222, the Developer
agrees to comply with all relevant Federal, State, and local
regulations, including The Clean Water Act; Developer further
agrees to provide testing and documentation as required by the City
Engineer to evidence such compliance.
15. Unfulfilled Condi tions. Developer hereby agrees, unless
otherwise conditioned, that Developer shall comply with all
unfulfilled conditions of approval of the Rancho Del Rey III Master
Tentative Map Tract 90-02 and the Rancho Del Rey III Parcel R-6
Tentative Map, (Tract 97-01), established by Resolution Nos. 16222
and 18570 approved by Council on July 30, 1991 and February 18,
1997, respectively, and shall remain in compliance with and
implement the terms, conditions and provisions of the resolutions.
..
16. Satisfaction of Conditions. City agrees that the
execution of this Agreement constitutes satisfaction of Developer's
obligation of Conditions 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 37, IX.C, 54, 58 and
64 of Resolution 18570; Conditions 8, 51, 52, 53, 62, 64 and 75 of
Resolution 16222.
17.
prepared
party.
Recording. This Agreement, or an abstract hereof
by either or both parties, may be recorded by either
18.
Miscellaneous.
a. Notices. Unless otherwise provided in this
Agreement or by law, any and all notices required or permitted by
this Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either
party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served,
delivered, and received when personally delivered to the party to
whom it is directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business
days have elapsed following deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or
registered mail, return receipt requested, first-class postage
prepaid, addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. A
party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by
giving written notice of such change to the other party. Facsimile
transmission shall constitute personal delivery.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Director of Public Works
6
"- ..-?'
?-'6
Developer:
Shea Homes Limited Partnership
10721 Treena Street, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92131
A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph
by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the
manner provided in this paragraph. Facsimile transmission shall
constitute personal delivery.
b. Captions. Captions in this Agreement are inserted
for convenience of reference and do not define, describe or limit
the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms.
c. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the
entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter
hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements,
understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect.
This Agreement is not intended to supersede or amend any other
agreement between the parties unless expressly noted.
d. Preparation of Agreement. No inference, assumption
or presumption shall be drawn from the fact that a party or his
attorney prepared and/or drafted this Agreement. It shall be
conclusively presumed that both parties participated equally in the
preparation and/or drafting this Agreement.
e. Recitals; Exhibits. Any recitals set forth above
and exhibits referenced herein are incorporated by reference into
this Agreement.
r. Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences
litigation for the judicial interpretation, reformation; enforce-
ment or rescission hereof, the prevailing party will be entitled to
a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable
attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party"
shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the
relief sought.
7
/~
,-' .
~1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set
forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
JDEVELOPER:
By: ~
~-' ~--
fName) Richard Gustafson
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Assistant Secretary
(Title)
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
:?lrt/t/
Approved as to form:
Vice President
(Title)
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
Approved as to form:
Attorneys for Developer
H:\Eome\Attorney\SSIA\SHEA
8
30
~.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On October 9. 1997. before me, Rhonda M Angel. Notary Public, personally appeared
Mark Brock and Richard Gustafson, personally known to me to be the persons whose names are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their
authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf
of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
0R~~ ~'h
SEAL:
~
NOTAIII' PIJIII.IC.CALR) t'
r~^~-~~
-------
-;? ;'
-..../'/
- --..
This Page Blank
7....:;
__'''' .t::-
~.
ATTACHMENT 4
TIlE cm OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
You are required to tile a Satement of Diselosure of ..n:Un ownenhip or financial interests. payments. or campaign contributions.
On all matters whlcb ",'m require discretlorwy action on the pan of the Cil)' Council. Planning Commission, and all other official
bodies. The followln,lnfonnation must be disclosed:
I. List Ibe names of all persons havin& a (mallcia] interest m the property which is the suhject of the application or the Contract.
e.g., owner. applicaDt, ContractOr, subcontractor. material suppJier.
Shea Homes Limited Partnership
2. If any penou" identified pursuant to (I) above Is a corporation or pannenhip, .list the names of >II individuals 0wuinJ: more
than 10" oC the shares in the corporation or owning any pannenb.ip interest in the partnership.
J.F. Shea Co., Inc.
3. If any penou" identilled pursuant to (I) above is Dou-profit organizatiou or a trUst. list the nlmes oC any persou serv1llg as
director of the non-profit orgmizlliou or as trUstee or beneficiary or trUStor of the rrust.
N/A
4. Have yoU bad more than SlSO worth oC business transacted with any member oC the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council withiD the past twelve month? Yes _ No XX If yes, plcase Indicm penon(s):
5. Please identify w:h and eve!)' person, Inc1udlng any agents, employ.... consultants, or Independent Gontnttors who you
have assl&Ded to represent you before Ibe City III this matter.
Russ Haley
Ray Martin-Hunsaker
Marcia Goodman
Dennis Eninger
6. Have you aDdlor your officers or ageuu. in the awegate. contrlbu\ed more than SI,OOO to a Council member In the current
or preceding election period? Yes _ No ..x... If yes, StOte which Council members(s):
Date:
August 25, 1997
" . . (NOTE: Attached additioDa~CSl nec~J1! u. /
j1121d:&~
, Sipwure of Contnctor/Applicant
Dale Holbrook, Assistant Secretary, J.F. Shea Co., In'
Prim or type uame of Conrractor! Applicant
,
" WRIJ. Is deftned lIS: 'Any individual, JlI71I. CO-j)aTrnership, joiN Vtlllllr<, QSSocialion, social club, jrau17llll orgtmivJlion.
corporarlon. uralt. rrwr, rtceiver, JyndicDlt. this DIll! D1IY other CDunJy. ciry Dr COIUl11y, ciry mIlIIidpDliry. disrrier, Dr othu political
subdivision, Dr tvIJ othu group or combillDlion acting as a unit.
-;>~,
.....:::--.5
- _.-
This Page Blank
~J
/
~.
--- !
..
ATTACHMENT SA
PUBLIC HEARING PCM-97-01:
AMENDMENTS TO RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill SECTIONAL PLANMNG AREA (SPA) PLAN AND
ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS TO ALLOW A 58 DWELLING UNIT DENSITY TRANSFER FROM PARCEL
R-7C TO PARCEL R-6 AND CHANGE THE DENSITY RANGE AND PERM1TfED NUMBER OF
DWELLING UNITS OF BOTH PARCELS ACCORDINGLY (02/04/97)
PCS-97-01:
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP KNOWN AS RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill TRACT 97-01 FOR 25.8
ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF EAST "J" STREET BETWEEN PASEO RANCHERO AND
VAQUERO COURT WITHIN THE RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill PLANNED COMMUNITY (02/04/97)
DRC-97-01:
APPEAL OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S DECISION TO DENY THE SITE PLAN AND
ARCHITECTURE OF A 256 DWELLING UNIT CONDOMINRJM COMPLEX AT THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP SITE - Consideration of applications filed by Rancho del Rey Investors, L.P. for 28.8 acres
located on the south side of East "J" Street between Paseo Ranchero and Vaquero Court within the Rancho del Rey
SPA III Planned Community. Au appeal of the Design Review Committee's decision to deny the site plan and
architectural proposal of a 256 unit condominium complex to be located on the Tentative Subdivision Map site has
also been filed. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning) (02/04/97)
RESOLUTION 18570
DENYING AMENDMENTS TO THE RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill SECTIONAL PLANMNG AREA (SPA)
PLAN, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS,
WATER CONSERVATION PLAN AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO ALLOW A 58 UNIT
DENSITY TRANSFER FROM PARCEL R-7C TO PARCEL R-6 (pCM-96-0l); DENYING TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 25.8 ACRES AT RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill, TRACT 97-01 (pCS-97-01); AND
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S DECISION TO DENY THE SITE
PLAN AND ARCHITECTURE FOR A 246-UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON 15.2 ACRES OF THE SUBJECT
SITE (DRC-97-01) (02/04/97)
Councilmember Moot abstained from voting, due to a conflict of interest because his company represetJ,lS the McMillin
Company.
Ken Lee, Assistant Planning Director, stated there are some basic differences in the applicant's request and the staff
recommendation. The primary issues relate to the fact the applicant has a site which is authorized for a total of 188
units, and they propose to transfer 58 units into this particular site which results in the site plan having a density of
approximately 16 dwelling units per acre. The adjacent affordable housing site is at a density of just over 13 units
to the acre, and staff concludes a transfer of a lesser number of units could be accommodated to meet staff's concerns.
Staff feels the increase in separation between the buildings is a key design feature. Also, the increase in the front yard
setback to create the needed landscaping relief is a key element, as well as the pedestrian system lacking continuity
and function. The applicant has worked with staff to address many of the issues, but an agreement concerning the
primary issues has not been reached. Staff recommends denial, which is consistent with the decisions of the Design
Review Committee and the Planning Commission.
Luis Hernandez, Associate Planner, stated that staff concludes the proposed project contains a number of design
deficiencies which are directly linked to the increase in density, and a number of the issues can be resolved with minor
amendments in the plan. The three major issues that are unresolved are: (1) the building separation - the project
features a 10 foot wide building separation in approximately 90 percent of the project; a 15 foot separation is more
of a City standard. Staff is not opposed to the 10 foot separation on a limited basis but did not want to see this as a
standard for the project; (2) the building front setbacks - the proposed setbacks produce a limited area for landscape.
I
35
Staff advocates a larger front setback to allow for more landscaping to create a better street scene; and (3) pedestrian
circulation - staff suggests this be simplified in a way that people will walk in a straight pattern. Another option is
to create a better connection from the loop road to the park. Staff indicates a density transfer of 30 units could
potentially reduce most of the issues; however, after discussing the site plan in more detail with the applicant, staff
is convinced more units can be transferred with a successful site design. Based on the unresolved issues, staff has
been unable to make the required findings to recommend approval of the density transfer and recommends denial of
the SPA amendment, tentative subdivision map, and the design review appeal. (02/04/97)
Councilmember Salas commented the Serena development has a 10 foot separation in 15 percent of the project and
the streets are 22 feet wide. This proposed project has a 10 foot separation in 80 percent of the project and the streets
are 24 feet wide. She asked if there was an ability to make the streets narrower in order to resolve one of the
problems.
Mr. Hernandez stated it was the applicant's preference for the streets to be 24 feet. The buildings that are face-to-face
currently are approximately 38 feet. Based on the building design in which the walls are primarily straight up, there
is no relief on the second story, and staff recommends a building to bnilding separation of 42 feet.
Councilmember Padilla wondered what was the real degree of difficulty to achieve some compromise between the
staff and the applicant. He felt that the density transfer was the major issue, but the related issues as a result of the
high density and the landscaping mainly have to do with the separation, setback, and pedestrian circulation.
Mr. Lee explained that the design density for this particular location is 12 dwelling units per acre which in past years
was typically the upper end of density for townhouse development. The applicant proposes 16 dwelling units per acre
and that created in part the issues raised by staff in terms of building separation, building setbacks, and the pedestrian
system. Staff and the applicant looked at solutions, and he felt they were not far apart in terms of meeting the goal
and still allowing a substantial number of units to be transferred into the site. A transfer of up to 30 units into this
site would work well. Staff is willing to work with the applicant for solutions based on that if the applicant is willing
to reduce some of the units. There has been discussion between staff and the applicant regarding the transfer density,
but currently there has been no resolution.
Councilmember Salas felt the Serena development was not an objectionable project. The ratio of 10 foot separation
buildings with the 80 percent in this proposed project versus the 15 percent for Serena, she felt it was a significant
difference. She asked how many units staff felt would need to be taken out in order to make this a good project that
would increase the ratio of those buildings that were more than 10 feet apart. (02/04/97)
Mr. Lee explained from a staff perspective, they did not have a problem in recommending an increase to this area
of 30 units. The applicant is requesting 58, but staff feels comfortable somewhere in the neighborhood of the mid-40s.
This being the place and time as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Craig Fukuyama, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, CA, representing the Rancho del Rey investors, stated one
objective is to bring forward an aesthetic project that meets the objective and many of the subjective design guidelines
imposed by Rancho del Rey and the City of Chula Vista. There is also the objective of bringing to the marketplace
an entry-level for sale product that currently doesn't exist in Rancho del Rey. A market analysis was conducted and
revealed in the very near future there will not be any attached, for-sale products at the entry level in the South County.
The density proposed originally started at 270 units. A project was submitted almost a year ago to staff and through
negotiations and discussions, the number of units were trimmed down to 246. He explained the reason it was
necessary to have the streets 26 feet wide was to meet fire department requirements in order to provide access and
a turning radius for maneuverability for the new fire equipment.
Russ Hailey, 10721 Trina Street, San Diego, CA, project manager for Shea Homes, referred to other successful
projects in San Diego similar to this proposed project. He stated a consultant was hired to assist with some of the
architectural detailing. He stated the unique thing about this project is it is an attached project, and the square footage
ranges from 1,025 square feet to 1,355 square feet.
2
36
Mr. Fukuyama believes the site is ideally suited for the proposed project and is a modest, entry level product. The
reason this item was continued for two weeks was they removed two buildings. or six units, from the project and
asked staff to review that with the intent to try to reach a compromise. Staff felt this was unacceptable so the Rancho
del Rey Investors withdrew the offer and are currently back at the 246 unit offer. They believe removing buildings
will not perceptively improve the project and will result in significantly higher costs to be borne by the remaining
units. With regard to the conditions of approval, Rancho del Rey Investors bope that Council will approve this
project, but some of the conditions presented are unacceptable and designed to a lesser number of units. They
requested if this project is approved with a certain number of units, Council direct staff to work with the applicant
to come back with a set of conditions and resolutions.
Councilmember Rindone stated Council would like to fmd a way to make it work, but the current numbers on the table
appear to create some design problems. Of the three design problems, the only one that is particularly exacerbated
is the pedestrian walkways. There bas been considerable modifications made to Lots 1 and 3 to provide pedestrian
walkways in the three major loops, and he asked what adjustments would need to be made to accomplish the same
thing for Lot 2. (02/04/97)
Mr. Fukuyarna answered to achieve that modification would require pushing the buildings back and reducing the
amount of front yard setbacks, but a certain amount of front yard landscaping would be sacrificed for the sidewalk.
They proposed moving two buildings from the project to improve the circulation and sidewalk system. Staff asked
for a further reduction of two buildings which would achieve a greater separation between the buildings. The
applicant did not compromise, because they felt there was little public benefit achieved by removing the units.
Jim Hardiman, Fire Chief, stated from an operational perspective, a 10 feet separation between buildings allows for
the greater possibility of an extension of fire from one unit to another and increases the difficulty of fire suppression
activities, although he emphasized the proposed project does not violate the Uniform Fire Code.
Ken Baumgardner, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, with McMillin Company, indicated they proposed 270 units
when they initially looked at the transfer of units; staff rejected that proposal. The proposed project was redesigned,
and they returned with 246 units. He believes they can improve the pedestrian access and provide for the circular
pedestrian access within the context of the existing plan. The building separation directly relates to the density issue.
There is little way to make more distance between the buildings on the current site plan, and he offered a two-unit
compromise. He stated they could not guarantee the project will be built if a lesser number of units was approved
for this project.
MOTION (RINDONE/SALAS) TO DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH THE APPUCANT IN IMPROVING
THE PEDESTRIAN W ALKW AYS, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 UNITS, AND TO TAKE OUT THE TWO
BUILDINGS, BASED UPON RETURNING TO COUNCIL WITH APPROVAL FOR THE PEDESTRIAN
WALKWAYS FOR CONSIDERATION ON 2/18/97. (02/04/97)
Councilmember Padilla requested seeing a report regarding the discussions that take place with staff and the applicant.
He reviewed the Planning Commission minutes and noticed it mentioned concern regarding access to the park.
There being no further speakers, the public hearing was declared closed.
Councilmember Rindone stated there was a need to take a look at the limited park access.
VOTE ON MOTION: Approved 4-0-0-1 with Moot abstaining. (02/04/97)
Mayor Horton reopened the hearing and stated this item will be considered at a future date.
3
'--)7
~.
----
- --
This Page Blank
-; (.-9
/. .,
..-/ c/
ATTACHMENT 5B
PUBLIC HEARING PCM-97-01:
AMENDMENTS TO RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN AND
ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS TO ALLOW A 52 DWELLING UNIT DENSITY TRANSFER FROM PARCEL
R-7C TO PARCEL R-6 AND CHANGE THE DENSITY RANGE AND PERMITTED NUMBER OF
DWELLING UNITS OF BOTH PARCELS ACCORDINGLY (02/18/97)
PCS-97-01:
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP KNOWN AS RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill TRACT 97-01 FOR 25.8
ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF EAST "J" STREET BETWEEN PASEO RANCHERO AND
VAQUERO COURT WlTIDN THE RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill PLANNED COMMUNITY (02/18/97)
DRC-97-Ol:
APPEAL OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S DECISION TO DENY THE SITE PLAN AND
ARCmTECTURE OF A 246 DWELLING UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX AT THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP SITE - Consideration of applications fIled by Rancho del Rey Investors, L.P. for 28.8 acres
located on the south side of East 'J' Street between Paseo Ranchero and Vaquero Court within the Rancho del Rey
SPA III Planned Community. An appeal of the Design Review Committee's decision to deny the site plan and
architectural proposal of a 246 unit condominium complex to be located on the Tentative Subdivision Map site has
also been fIled. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution. (Director
of Planning) Continued from the meeting of 2/4/97. (02/18/97)
A. ORDINANCE 2698
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS (first readin~) (02/18/97)
B. RESOLUTION 18570
AMENDING THE RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN GENERAL
DEVEWPMENT PLAN, W ATER CONSERVATION PLAN AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
TO ALLOW A 52 UNIT DENSITY TRANSFER FROM PARCEL R-7C TO PARCEL R-6 (PCS-97-01); AND
APPROVING AND IMPOSING CONDmONS ON TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TRACT !l7-Ol' (pcS-97-
01), APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S DECISION TO DENY THE
SITE PLAN, ARCHITECTURE FOR A 246-UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON 15.2 ACRES OF THE SUBJECT
SITE (DRC-97-01), AND ADOPTING ADDENDUM TO FEIR-89-10 (02/18/97)
CounciIrnember Moot abstained from voting due to a conflict of interest because his company represents the McMillin
Company.
Bob Leiter, Director Planning, stated on 2/4/97 Council endorsed the project proposed by the applicant with the
reduction of six units (two buildings) and addressed some site plan issues: (1) internal pedestrian circulation and (2)
access points to westerly public park. Staff rerurned with revised conditions and plan exhibits which address these
concerns. Staff recommends approval of the revised Ordinance and Resolution.
This being the time and place, the public hearing was declared open. (02/18/97)
Craig Fukuyarna, 2727 Hoover A venue, National City, CA, representing the Rancho del Rey Limited Partnership,
stated over the past two weeks they: (1) prepared a revised plan implementing a more comprehensive pedestrian
system by adding sidewalks and pedestrians walkways, (2) removed and showed the result of removing two buildings
(six units) from the plan, and (3) worked with staff to develop a resolution for approval with the associated conditions
I
....:.-/
of approval. All of the things which were requested of the Rancho del Rey Limited Partners have been accomplished,
and they support staff's recommendation.
There being no further speakers, the public hearing was declared closed.
Councilmember Padilla raised the issue of access from the site to the adjoining park with regard to public safety and
nuisance concerns. He requested more staff comments regarding those issues.
Mr. Leiter replied the Parks and Recreation Director was not present to address those issues, but there was a
memorandum from him in the Council packet which addressed those concerns.
Councilmember Padilla referred to the memorandum and stated there is a need to get a better handle on the nature
of past problems in similarly sitttated areas. He understood limited access gives police officers better options in
apprehending someone, but from a policy point of view it is better to implement design plans in the future for more
access from different development areas to the park areas and better use of ingress and egress for those individuals
who buy into a particular project. He stated if we are experiencing a series of problems in an area, the focus should
be on the problem and directing prevention and enforcement in those areas, because the criminal problem is a separate
issue. He preferred to have as much access to the park as possible for the citizens. (02/18/97)
Councilmember Rindone concurred and stated another significant factor is there are three elevations in this particular
project, and if you buy a residence in the second or third elevation from East "J" Street, you have to go a long way
around to access the park. He asked if there could be some arnenthnent to either the ordinance or resolution that
would allow us flexibility of more than one access possibly in the building permit stage or at the fmal map stage.
Ann Moore, Assistant City Attorney, advised her office could add a provision that prior to the issuance of the first
building permit, the developer shall provide the City with a plan for the City's approval showing additional public
access to the park and for the plan to remm to Council for approval.
Councilmember Padilla stated he could support the arnenthnent to give Council flexibility and to re-examine this issue
at a later date.
ORDINANCE 2698 AND RESOLUTION 18570, AS AMENDED TIIA T PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE
FIRST BUILDING PERMIT THE DEVEWPER SHALL PROVIDE THE CITY WITH A PLAN FOR THE
CITY'S APPROVAL SHOWING ADDmONAL PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE PARK AND FOR THE PLAN
TO RETURN TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL, OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, reading of
the text was waived, titles, read, passed, and approved 3-0-1-1 with Salas absent and Moot a!>staining.
(02/18/97)
2
i.jo
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / J
Meeting Date 10/28/97
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /.?'?95Appropriating funds, accepting bids and awarding
contract for the construction of "Oxford Street Improvements from Fourth
A venue to Fifth Avenue in the City of Chula Vista, CA (STL229)"
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public wor~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage'J~ , ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes l No--J
At 2:00 p.m. on September 17, 1997, in Conference Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the
Director of Public Works received sealed bids for the construction of "Oxford Street Improvements
from Fourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue in the City ofChula Vista, CA (STL229)". The general scope of
the project involves the reconstruction ofthe existing pavement and the installation of curb, gutter and
sidewalk improvements along both sides of Oxford Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue.
The work to be done includes removal and disposal of existing improvements, excavation and grading,
installation of asphalt concrete pavement, crushed aggregate base, cold planing, pedestrian ramps, curb
and gutter, sidewalk, driveways, curb inlet, storm drain pipes, sewer laterals, street lighting, traffic signal
modifications, new mailboxes, adjustment of sewer manholes, pavement striping and signing and other
miscellaneous items of work as shown on the plans.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
I. Approve the resolution appropriating $22,278 from the unappropriated balance of Transportation
Partnership Fund (TPF) No. 253 and authorizing a $44,000 loan from the Trunk Sewer Capital
Reserve Fund No. 222..
2. Approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding contract for the construction of Oxford
Street Improvements from Fourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue in the City of Chula Vista, CA
(STL229) to MJC Construction in the amount of $328,708.00
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
This project was originally funded during the FY 96-97 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget
process. The project was funded to improve pedestrian access, circulation, and alleviate a local drainage
problem at mid-block. It is also part of the overall sidewalk safety program which provides for the
construction of sidewalk facilities in the Montgomery area. As originally budgeted, in the FY 96-97
Capital Improvement Program (CIP STL229), the City proposed to build sidewalks on the north side
of Oxford Street only to provide a safe walkway for the children in the area. Funds for this project were
obtained from the Transportation Development Act (TDA) through the San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG). However, since the TDA funds will only pay for the sidewalk and not related
items such as curb and gutter, additional City Gas Tax funding was included. Staff met with the
property owners in the area and briefed them on the status of the funding for the project, and a majority
///j
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
of those present indicated an interest In making up the difference necessary to construct full
improvements on that street.
On April 22, 1997 by Resolution 18645 (Exhibit A), Council approved a petition for the formation of
the assessment district (Assessment District 97-01), 1911 Block Act for the construction of the street
improvements. Subsequently, on May 13, 1997, Council adopted Resolution No. 18663 (Exhibit B),
approving the boundary map for AD97-01. At the same meeting, Council also approved Resolution of
Intention No. 18664 (Exhibit B) ordering the installation of the street improvements on Oxford Street
from Fourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (also known as the 1911
Block Act) and setting the public hearings for July 15 and 22, 1997. On July II, 1997, Council adopted
Resolution 18740 (Exhibit C) making findings of public hearing pursuant to Chapter 27 of the
"Improvement Act of1911." The adoption of that resolution also authorized staff to proceed with the
construction schedule since none of the property owners have commenced the construction of their
portion ofthe improvements after the expiration of the 60 days from the date of notification allowed
under the Act, for property owners within a district to do so.
The project was advertised for bids on August 23, 1997 for a period of four weeks and plans were
purchased by 14 contractors. Bids were received from four contractors as follows:
Contractor Base Bid Amount
1. MJC Construction - Chula Vista, CA $328,708.00
2. Frank & Son Paving - Chula Vista, CA 360,081.83
3. Single Eagle, Inc.- Poway, CA 436,293.00
4. Scheidel Contracting & Engineering - La Mesa, CA 479,858.00
The low bid (base bid) by MJC Construction is below the Engineer's estimate of $369,940.00 by
$41,232.00 or I 1.2%. Staff received excellent bids for the proposed work. The Engineer's estimate was
based on bids received for similar projects in the last several bids. The difference between the base bid
and the total bid represents the cost of constructing the retaining walls, requested by some property
owners. They have elected to pay for the walls in addition to their original assessment.
Staff has reviewed the low bidder's qualifications and references and found them satisfactory. We,
therefore, recommend that the contract be awarded to MJC Construction.
Disclosure Statement
Attached is a copy of the Contractor's Disclosure Statement (Exhibit D).
Environmental Status
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project and has
determined that this project is categorically exempt under Class I, Section 1530 I (c) of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
/ )-- :<
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
Prevailin~ Wage Statement
The primary source of funding for this project is Gas Tax funds, with additional funding from
Transportation Development Act Funds (TDA), Transportation Partnership Funds (TPF), and Trunk
Sewer Capital Reserve Funds. Contractors bidding this project were not required to pay prevailing
wages to persons employed by them for the work under this contract. No special minority or women
business owned requirements were necessary as part of the bid documents. Disadvantaged businesses
were encouraged to bid through the sending of the Notice of Contractors to various minority trade
publications.
Assessment District
This project is partially funded through Assessment District 97-01 approved by Council on April 22,
1997, by Resolution 18645 (Exhibit A). The property owners within this district were informed of the
engineer's estimate and their individual costs are known to them. Although the contractor's bid is below
the engineer's estimate, the contractor's bid for the particular items of work being paid for by the
property owners is about the same as the engineer's estimate. The property owners' cost will be
approximately that amount in their ballot or lower. It is estimated that the total reimbursement to the
City from the assessment district will be about $44,000 ($33,000 in concrete improvements and $11,000
in sewer improvements). The contract bid document had an item for some retaining walls, which could
be installed if requested by affected property owners. The amount of $27,000 will not be used, since
the property owners no longer desire the walls. The contract specifications for this project was drafted
in a manner that allows the City to delete that item of work ifthe property owners decide not to proceed
with the construction of the walls.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds Required for Coustruction
A. Contract Amount (Grand Total Bid Amount) $328,708.00
B. Contingencies (approx 10%) 32,870.00
C. Water Facilities Relocations (payment to Sweetwater Authority) 60,000.00
D. Materials and Lab Testing 2,000.00
E. Staff Costs (Construction Inspection, Traffic Inspection, Assessment 30,000.00
District Formation, Construction Surveying and Design)
Total Funds Required for Construction $453,578.00
Fuuds Available for Construction
A. Oxford Street Improvement (STL229) $387,300.00
B. Additional Appropriation from Transportation Partnership Funds (TPF) 22,278.00
C. Appropriation of Loan from Unappropriated Balance of Trunk Sewer 44,000.00
Capital Reserve Fund
Total Funds Available for Construction $453,578.00
//-3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
Funding for this project was budgeted in the FY 96-97 CIP budget process as identified above. The
project as budgeted will utilize Gas Tax funds and Transportation Development Act (TDA) Funds with
an additional appropriation from the unappropriated balance of Transportation Partnership (TPF) Funds
and a loan from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund. Prior to advertising this project for bids,
engineering design staff determined that additional funds in the amount of $ I 40,000 would be required
to complete the project. The additional funding was required because the City's share of the cost of
water facilities relocation, which is split equally with Sweetwater Authority was much more than
originally anticipated and budgeted. Another factor that increased the cost was the cost of the additional
work requested by some of the property owners (i.e., sewer lateral installation) which were not part of
the original scope of work, but is now being financed through the Assessment District. However, the
City needs to front these costs to be paid back over time. The estimated costs for these items is $1 1,000
out of the $44,000 to be reimbursed by the property owners. The loan from the Trunk Sewer Capital
Reserves for the full amount of the costs estimated to be repaid by the property owners. Staff identified
the source for additional funding for the project, but since we hoped to get bids better than the engineer's
estimate, decided to proceed with advertising the project, getting an exact bid from a contractor and
determining the amount to be appropriated after receipt of bids. Based on the bids received, the amount
to be appropriated was reduced to $66,278. The City will be reimbursed for about $44,000 over a period
of 10 years at 7.00% interest, through the administration of Assessment District 97-01. The award of
this contract will authorize the expenditure offunds from the STL229 Project Account. Upon completion
of the project, all funds not utilized will be reimbursed either to the Transportation Partnership Fund
if it is not an item to be reimbursed by the property owner or to the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund
if the savings is from reimbursable work not done such as deletion of some of the retaining walls.. The
project will require only routine City maintenance, mainly sweeping, upon completion.
Exhibit: A - Resolution No. 18645 ~S)
B - Resolution Nos. 18663 and 18664
C - Resolution No. 18740 ~
D - Contractor's Disclosure Stateme~~
File #0735-IO-STL229 & 0725-IO-AD97-0 I
H.\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\STL229.AC
//~(
I
I' .
, /
RESOLUTION NO. 18795
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING FUNDS, ACCEPTING
BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF "OXFORD STREET IMPROVEMENTS
FROM FOURTH AVENUE TO FIFTH AVENUE IN THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA, CA. (STL229)"
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on September 17, 1997, in
Conference Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the Director of
Public Works received the following four bids for the construction
of "Oxford Street Improvements from Fourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue
in the City of Chula Vista, CA (STL229)":
Contractor Base Bid
Amount
1. MJC Construction - Chula Vista, CA $328,708.00
2. Frank & Son Paving - Chula Vista, CA 360,081.83
3. Single Eagle, Inc.- Poway, CA 436,293.00
4. Scheidel Contracting & Engineering - La 479,858.00
Mesa, CA
WHEREAS, the low bid (base bid) by MJC Construction is
below the Engineer's estimate of $369,940.00 by $41,232.00 or
11.2%; and
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the
qualifications and references and found them
therefore recommends that the contract be
Construction; and
lowest bidder's
satisfactory and
awarded to MJC
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
reviewed the work involved in this project and has determined that
this project is categorically exempt under Class 1, section
15301(c) of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the primary source of funding for this project
is Gas Tax funds, with additional funding from Transportation
Development Act Funds (TDA) and Transportation Partnership Funds
(TPF) .
//-5"
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula Vista does hereby accept the four bids and award the
contract for the construction of "Oxford Street Improvements from
Fourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue in the City of Chula vista" to the
lowest bidder, MJC Construction, in the amount of $328,708.00.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
appropriate $22,278 from the unappropriated balance of
Transportation Partnership Fund (TPF) No. 253 and authorize a
$44,000 loan from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund No. 222 to
be reimbursed to the City over a period of ten years at 7%
interest, through the administration of Assessment District 97-01.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
C'L I"\/G~~~ G 00---
John M. Kaheny
City Attorney
C:\rs\oxford.bid
)/~~
Ex: t-t I eXT A
4; ) ~f:If~
COUNCIL AGEJ'iDA STATEMENT
Item! 0
Meeting Date 4/22/97
ITEM TITLE: Resolution (q G ~ s: Accepting petltJQn for formation of a special
assessment district on the 400 block of Oxford Street for the construction of
street improvements between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue (CIP # STL-
229).
SVBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
The City Engineer has received sufficient ballots in favor of commencing a construction project for
the missing street improvements on Oxford Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue. The
ballots were signed by a majority of the property owners along the frontage of the 400 block of
Oxford Street These property owners are requesting that a special assessment district for the
construction of improvements to Oxford Street be commenced. Upon acceptance by the Council,
the ballots will be filed in the City Clerk's office. Approval of this resolution will permit staff to
begin the assessment district proceedings related to the street improvements.
RECOMME..1I.:1>ATION: That Council approve the resolution accepting the results of the ballots
for formation of a special assessment district for the construction of street improvements on Oxford
Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
This project (STL229 - Oxford Sidewalk Safety) is part of the overall sidewalk safety program,
which provides for the construction of sidewalk facilities in the Montgomery area. As originally
budgeted in the FY96/97 Capital Improvement Program (CIP # 0735-10-STL-229), the City
proposed to build asphalt concrete sidewalks on the north side of Oxford Street to provide a safe
wall:way to the children in the area. Funds for this project were obtained from the Transportation
Development Act (TDA) through San Diego Association of Governments (SA1\'DAG). However,
since TDA funds will pay only for the sidewalk and not related items such as curb and gutter,
additional City gc.s tax funding was included.
As the design of the project progressed, it became apparent that to accommodate the sidewalk,
grading of the south side of the street would also be necessary. To this effect, staffheld a meeting
v,cith the area property owners on January 30, 1997. At this meeting, staff presented the idea of
expanding the project to include the installation of concrete sidewalks on both sides of the street
instead of sidewalk improvements on the north side only. This possibility could be accomplished
/
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 4/22/97
provided the property owners would participate in the formation of a special assessment district,
whereby the difference in cost would be paid by all area property owners on both sides of the street.
During the January 30, 1997, meeting with the property owners, staff also discussed the assessment
district procedures, the scope of the project, financing alternatives and answered questions that they
had. Staff then prepared ballots and on February 24, 1997 mailed them out to the property owners.
On March 25, 1997 the City Engineer received sufficient ballots in favor of forming a special
assessment district (1911 Block Act) for the construction of improvements to Oxford Street between
Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue. Sections 2804 (a)(3) and 5871 (a) of the Street and Highways
Code require that such petitions be signed by owners of more than 60% of the area, unless otherwise
approved, and be signed by owners of more than 60% of the front footage. The recently passed
Proposition 218, the "Right To Vote On Taxes Act", requires a ballot to be approved by the majority
of the property owners by financial obligation.
The results of the ballots received showed that as of April 4, 1997, twenty-seven of the thirty-four
affected property owners had returned the ballots with 25 property owners in support of the project.
The property owners in favor represented $22,103 (69.38%) out of the $31,858 pre1iminary
estimated share of the project cost the property owners would contribute. Four of these thirty-four
property owners already have the street improvements in front of their property and they all voted
in favor of forming the asses=ent district Since their assessment is $0, their vote carries no weight.
These properties may not be included within the final district boundaries if no additional work is
required adjacent to their properties. Of those ballots "in which the property owners did not vote in
favor of the project, they either were opposed spending money on the street improvements or felt
that it was totally the City's responsibility to improve the street
There are four dwellings on three separate parcels which at this time have septic systems and no
sewer lateral. Therefore, staffhas included an optional cost item related to sewer lateral work which
will be made available to these property owners. This work consists of connecting to the existing
sewer main (which parallels the Oxford Street centerline) by constructing the missing sewer lateral
from the centerline of the street to the property line. Staff has estimated the sewer lateral
construction and connection costs at $5,800 for each property. These additional costs will be
included as part of their assessment amount.
The property ov.'Ilers signing the petition agreed to the following terms:
A. That the cost of the improvements will be charged to the land outlined on Exhibit A
which benefits from the project, including their land;
r-
Page 3, Item_
Meeting Date 4/22/97
B. That the cost of engineering, legal and other incidental expenses which will be
paid for by the City, 'will be included in the project cost;
C. That once the construction is completed and accepted by the City, each property
owner may pay his assessment either in cash without interest or in installments with
interest over a period of 10 years;
D. That the estimated cost of the improvements is $365,000. The property owner's
contribution to the construction of the project is estimated to be up to $35,000;
E. That property with an assessed lien is subject to foreclosure in cases of delinquency
and non-payment;
F. That they consented to the formation of the Assessment District in accordance
with Section 2804 of the Streets and Highway Code of the State of California and the
requirements of Proposition 218 and waived any rights to protest against the
formation of said assessment district;
G. That they agreed to dedicate all required rights-of-way or easements necessary
for the works of improvement, all dedications to be accomplished before the ordering
of improvements.
ImDrovements and Costs
The improvements on Oxford Street exiend rrom F ourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue including the work
v,-ithin those two intersections. The work would consist of grading, excavation, asphalt paving,
pedestrian ramps, sidewalks, driveways together with appurtenances and appurtenant work to serve
and to benefit properties located within the boundaries of the proposed assessment district.
It is estimated that the following costs will be incurred for the improvement of Oxford Street:
Costs
Recommended
Obli~ation of City
Construction ($94.00/LF)
DesignlInspection
..<\ssessment District Formation
Contingencies
Total
$361,858.00
$100,000.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 15.000.00
$496,858.00
$330,000.00
$100,000.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 15.000.00
$465,000.00
Property
Owner's Cost
$ 31,858.00
$ 0.00
$ 0.00
$ 0.00
$ 31,858.00
Staff recommends that the City pay all costs of design and inspection as well as the assessment
district formation, estimated at $100,000 (direct costs), which is consistent with past practices and
Council Policy 505-01 (attached). Staff recommends that construction costs of $31,858 be the
......
-~
Page 4, ltem_
Meeting Date 4/22/97
responsibility of the property owners, based upon this policy. This Assessment District (# 97-01)
will be formed by the 1911 Block Act to obtain reimbursement for the improvement and other
miscellaneous costs in accordance with Council policy. The 1911 Act is a financing mechanism
which authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefiting properties to fund the
construction of public improvements. To construct the project through assessment district financing,
the ClP budget detail shows $141,500 from IDA funds and $358,500 from Gas Tax funds.
Alternatively, the City could sell bonds in the amount of the construction costs. However, for a
project of this size, it is not economically feasible to do so, consequently, the City typically advances
funds for cost effectiveness. .
Based on the staff reco=endation, the assessments for each parcel would range from a low of
$470.00 to a high of $2,793.00, with the assessments averaging $1,100.
The properties have not previously been considered for inclusion in the Block Act for the following
reasons:
1. This area was part of the January 1, 1986 Montgomery Annexation from the County
of San Diego and the City Council had committed that no assessment district would be
formed for a period of ten years from the annexation date, unless there was a petition by 3/4
of the benefitting properties requesting the District;
2. Previously, there has been no requests for the street improvements to be completed by an
assessment district.
Staff reco=ends that this street improvement project be approved for staff to complete the
assessment district proceedings this year and that the City participate in the financing by funding the
design, inspection and project administration costs. Alternatively, the City could deny participation
in the funding, and the property owners could pick up the non-construction costs of $1 00,000. A
new petition and ballot would need to be executed by the property owners to proceed with this
option. If the property owners were required to fund the non-construction costs, the assessments
would increase ranging from $1,945 at the low end to $11,560 at the high end. The property owners
will be allowed to finance the improvements over a ten year period with the interest charges included
on their property tax bills. Based on the revised cost estimates, staff does not believe that a majority
of the property owners would support formation of the district 'Nith this latter option.
Future Actions
1. Staff -will return to Council with the Resolution of Intention declaring the City's intent
to from a district.
2. Although there is no statutory requirement to do so, staff will meet with all property
owners again to discuss the project status, improvements and its fmancing.
)/
.r;""
Page 5, Item_
Meeting Date 4/22/97
Therefore, tonight's action by the City Council is not binding on the property owners in the event
the bids come in higher than the estimated $365,000. After the bids are opened, the project comes
back to the Council for award, the actions will include notice to the property owners of a public
hearing with an opportunity to review their proposed charges. At that time, the property owners
could request the Council to eliminate the district because of the higher than anticipated costs. After
construction is complete, and the final costs are known, there will be another public hearing to
review, levy or protest the actual assessments.
All property owners within this proposed assessment district of 34 parcels have been sent a copy of
tonight's City Council agenda statement and attachments.
FISCAL IMP ACT: This project was originally approved in the FY96/97 budget as CIP project
STL229 - Oxford Sidewalk Safety. The financing for this project (project total of$500,000) is being
funded through IDA funds ($141,500) and Gas Tax funds ($358,500). Approval of the resolution
authorizes staff to co=ence assessment district proceedings which will allow for the property
owners within this district to participate in contributing a portion of the construction costs,
preliminarily estimated at $31,858. The estimated property owner's share will be reimbursed with
7% interest over a period of 1 0 years.
Attachments:
A - Proposed Assessment District Boundaries with Ballot Summary
B - Payment Schedules
C - Ballot Summary ",.jth Street Address and Assessor's Parcel Number
D - CIP Program Detail
E - Policy #505-01
File No.: 0725.10-AD97-01
April 16. 1997 (2:00pm)
H:\HOMEIENGINEER\A.GENDA \AD9i10XF.FXR
i:-><rl/B/T A
!
I
l..,
~
.
c
>-~
~O
:21
Sl'-
1--<
U)~ Uz
-~
I- a:::~
o 1---
--'~U1~
~UO~
m~ ""
::c ~ I-- ~
I-~Z6
3:00~~
U)~wz;Q
W~>U3g;
0::: 0 ~ t:=.c
<( r:......... a:::: >- ~
o ~'c..!'2;
sZ ~8 ~
~:;;I--g ~
O~U:; 0
w r:z2 <:: ~ ~
U)r:z2 G
o ~t:..
CL~ ~~
~ r:z2 0') 8
CLr:z2~
-<
~.l7J:J.ro
~w.""'-
<:~
/
/
I
I
1
I
I
i
I
i
i\. \.r~'j
>-t-M : :\.:"i', 'j >- t-M
of",,""'I'-"'" 'CI
t-, -',/" '"
. \" ','
...... '.J,<,.j >-t.:=)\
... "r~ ,: \C)
:,". )''''_ 0,
I' " ... "
>-@ ::~1:>:.1 >-@
... .~ ", '.
'. \./' '
I?fnO:T7IIfO.iXO .~~::t~J >-@
j "'~"&::
i>-tN\ '\. "", ,J >-@
: \:::::J '. ,l\..'"
I \.i,\.1
: '(,'iC'-<7>
". t "",.: @
>-1-\ ,"":f\' @
'd '..'" "ZOO
.~~~ ~
>-@ ~~I~ >-tr::\
....~f"" \. . 1;:;.1
e .~~' ,
>- . ."
<7> !,'C/),,'..j >-@
"",f'. ,,:
8,+=41,,,.
>- 00 1,,0::;1, \. I >-W>\
:. '::+,:>'j 1;:;.1
:~j'."
!'6,!"" : >-to=>\
'<::t" ~
>-r.::::\ f'\.. -'-.; '. "~
o ~,''-i:<\.J >-tN\
r','~\.': 1;:;.1
:'\."" I, " 1-\
\,. 'r' ,>- 8
>-G ?f0:.
v ". "';-~>-@
" '..1 ...,
i"V,,'"
6.,\.1- ',I
>-..n /' '.. '1', ':
.'->> ",1 >-@
.. 'J" '.:
,,'.. j'. '\.
>-Q !<'::j'~<1:
v ",~.. ,.
e ., '- 'I, '- i C'-tCO\
C'"-o.I""") L,'"l'<'': 'd
., 'J'.I
....',j,..'\1
. '... 1 "
'-, "1.'. '.,,: >-@
8. ,." -
C"- C'-..l " '{ '. "
.....'.,j,\...,! c:::
\. '.,J', ',I >-tG\ ?!5
',,}.. ,. 'd :::E
,"" '1,', '. =>
'- 'v'", :z:
z8 t<:{0i C'-@ !z:
i~,:i - ~
i'-. !.~ ~.)
LU .z:
__ i .. ~ t;jo ~
3fJNJA Y ]lIJU----....L----- ~ <: 0- z =>
! w II 1111 11
I c..:>
i ! ::J8o-zC'-.
i !
i i
~
r-
~
~
JJJfl3);rHJCiflOJ
;;
~
~
"
v
S
c
"
-
-
"'
-
"
"-
<;:
"'
~
c
1:
:>
c
u
E-c
~
~
0:;
E-c
UJ
>-@
b
.....
o
~~
~O\
~ -en
.....0[;:;1
E-<Zo..<
enE-<~
98~
o~~
RE-<U
~~en
OOE-<
v" z:
O~:;
0[;:;1-,,<
S~~
0[;:;1
oen
""en
-<
:::<
"
& .. -
;; E
;-
x ~ ~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
" ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ "" ~ "" N N
~ ~ '" N '" ~ ~ 0; ~ .." ~ ~ -
~ ~ - ~ '" =: N 9 ~ ~ - ~ 9 9 ~ ~ g, ~
~ '" N. 0 ~. x ~. - ~. ~.
" .- N ~. ,
.:: .:; ;: ~ - - - ~ ;;; - - - ;;;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
..
c
- -
~ ." -
:;:: u , c
~ =
'0' ;; >>
u -< t:.
:::: VJ
~ ~ >. 9 4 4 4 4 4 9 4 4 4 . 9 9 9 4 9
-
c ,;; -< ;: .., .., '" '" .., .., .., .., .., .., .. .., .., .., .., ..,
~
~ c
'0' i
u
::::
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ x x '" ~ .". ~ 0 0 N ~ 0
.... - ,..: N N N - ,..: M .; 0 .." ~ ..;
.Jj .. '" ~ .". ~ , .". .". '" => . .; 0 .... '"
u ;; >. x. 9 '" ""- =< '" ~ '" .... "l 9 '" ~ "" '"
~ ] . - - - ,.; - ,.; '" ;;; ;;;
~ ;- .. ... ... ~ ... ... ~ ~ .. ... .. .. ... ... ...
~ ." c
:;:: u
~ ..!.
'0' >.
u ~ ==
:::: VJ <
~ ] ~ ~ ~ x N => ~ ~ - 0
=> 9 "" '" "" 9 '" '" x ~ 9 9 ~ '" ~ '"
- >. '" ~ ,..: - N ..; ,..: - 0 .; ~ .."
C ;; -< . M ~ M N ~ ~ '" M .... N N ~
VJ .. ... .. ... ... .. ... ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ...
."
.~ -;;;
.. ~ ,.,
u t:.
::::
0 ~ => 0 0 0 => 0 0
=> '" ~ => "" ~ x x 0 0 => ~
- ~ " '" - ..; x ~ '" ,..: N x '" ~ '"
~ >. x 9 ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 9 ..; ~ ~
u "l ~. "l x '" '" ..." ~ N. M - ~ ~,
~ N N .
::. - x - x - '" ;;;
... .. .. .. ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... ... ... ...
c
~
~ ." C
< ~ ,
'0' <; >>
u c
:::: VJ < ::..
'" '"
, . '" ~ r- '" N 00 00 ..,. '" 0 C> 00
.~ ..,. 9 C> - "" 9 .; '" ,..: - 9 4 ": 00 ~ '"
<; >> 0; ,,; ,..: ... ..,. .; M ,.; - .; r- ,,;
== r- r- r- ..,. - '" - '" ..,. '" ..,. r-
..:; VJ < .., .., ... .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., ..,
~
c
~ U -
.~ c .
.. .
u
:::: -
" ~ r-
. '" ..,. M
~ -:;; - 4 00 '" 9 00 '" M r- 9 4 r-- '" .... r--
~ . , '" '" N 0 '" "', 00 00 N '" '"
~ c ~ - '" - '" N' '" - 00 '" 00 '" '"
" u .., .., .., .. .., .., .., .., .., .., ... .., ... .., "" ..,
~
~
-<
- N N N
" " .B ~ c . U . ~
" >> -g .s N g " -g :;;
" g .:! u ." .g '" -"
'"' "t: ~ t ~ 'N .~ " c ~ .g !!
" a . :; " 0- C '0 0 :;; " a
:;: :3 :;: :> 0 u ~ ::2
z: 0 '" N > '" '" :r: ::::
-
~ "" - N ~ ..,. '" '" r- oo '" C> - N .... ..,. '" '"
~ - - - - - - -
-<
:g
K
:.:.:.J
R - /
.~ ~
<.> ~
~ =>
.~ "-
~
.t?! '0
;;
^ >< ..
-
'" '" '0
" '- '0
1:: " ~
" ." :;
"- '"
" " g
5- .~ .~
" ji
3 .~ g
0
>-. :?
ii- ~
" -
0- 0<
'" ;::-
g ~
~ g,
<:!
~ ~
" 3
" ,:
." ." -
~ eo.
'" '"
'" u
~ '"
"
.2 "
"
u "
>-.
5 -ri 1::
:; " ~
" 5"
u g. ~
~ c.
,g ~
D :; ~
u
~ ;; '"
" '" >
" .D ,g
~
~ ,g 2
"
.E .~ ~
~ ';::
" U
0< 'v;
'" " "
'" '" ."
-5 ~ ~
0 ~
'- u ~
" " f::
.S " "
:; b
.E ." ~
.S "
~ c.
"
.5 5-
u '-
-:S u "
." U;
~ " "
<.': .D "
""
0 "
0 .;; ~ ^
00 ~ OJ ~
'." "
'" ~ >..".=
'" - ~
'- '" :; "
" .~ c.
- ~ "
~ 5-
0 (;
u .~ ." "
."
" " 3
OJ OJ .D
2:-
f:: 0<
~
" ::: -'" ;0-
" 1 (; g
." 0<
"
] " ~
.~ '"
~ "
"
g U; .E ."
" ~
u ~
~ ] " OJ
" 0< u;
0 "
I:) i:::: >-.
'" ~
*
* *
* . .
;-/
::::)
~
.D
><
~
.....
o
~~
[:;1"'-
r::J IJ)
~O[:;1
E-<Z...<
IJ)....=-
. Q
:3 U c_,
.....--
o~==
r=..E-<U
>d:Q IJ)
OQE-<
:'::E-<~
uZ""
o~""
...<2:>-
~IJ)<:
IJ)~
0[:;1
01J)
""'IJ)
<:
~<<-
- :; --"
,...
~
y
,~
li
~
~
'<
-:-_!: << -
~
~~~
."
y "
"" E
.~ c:; ~
::::VJ<:.c
=~~
-fj-~
_ClJ<:'
."
~
~
"t ~ :..~
::::f-o
...
"
:E
"
~
!;
:;::
__--cc -; _
-~
=.1:) ..rt:.
_r-_
."
~ I c:
'> >.
=:~<~
";...!.~
=c=>.
:: U = III;
_cn<::..
."
~
~
'> =: >.
~ c; "_"
::::;...
-
~
,:
"
11
:;::
E=
=~....
=~:E
."
:::...!. g
";: ;;...
=:~<::
"
~..l >.
-~<::
-
c; ~
~ u u
~ .
"::: c: ..
~
::::E:_
z
;;;
~
..
~
~
-<
~
~ '" ~ c
C => .,
u:.:
"
-
E
"
Z;
~~
~
-<
~
'"
~
~
~.
-
..,
9
...
=>
~
~
"l
-
..,
<>>
<"j
-
M
..,
=>
~
...
~
"i
-
..,
...
'-'>
...;
'-'>
...
...
'"
00
...
!!
"
::<
,...
-
~
~
N
~
'"
N
..,
9
...
=>
'"
ci
~
~
NO
..,
-
~
N
~
..,
=>
'"
-.i
~
",-
..,
-
N
,...:
'"
-
...
.
.
.
'-'>
'"
"l
-
...
"
N
g
'c:.
~
'"
00
-
~.
N
50
~
..;
....
9
..,
=>
'"
.;
~
...
~-
..,
'-'>
,...
,...:
'"
...
=>
~
,,;
...
'"
..;
....
M
00
00
'"
...
.
.
.
~
'"
...
N
...
N
g
's
~
'"
-
~
~
,,;
~
'":
..,
9
...
=>
~
0;
=>
"l
..,
00
'"
-
~
...
=>
'"
~
~
"'0
-
..,
N
N
...;
'-'>
...
00
00
00
...
~
E
o
~
<;
::;
'"
N
~
...
N
-
"l
-
..,
,
'"
...
=>
~
...:
=>
"1.
..,
N
'"
~
N
...
=>
~
-.i
'"
q
..,
...
,...
-.i
.,.,
..,
'"
'-'>
,...
...
o
=
y
::;
~
-
N
~
-
.;
D
'"
..,
9
...
=>
=>
0;
~
'"
..,
.,.,
~
M
M
...
=>
'"
~
"1.
....
.,.,
'"
'"
'-'>
...
'"
...
'"
...
"
=
;:
o
Q
N
N
~
N
~
D
'"
....
9
...
=>
~
.;
~
"1.
..,
M
.,.,
00
N
...
'"
~
ci
~
....
N
'"
00
.,.,
..,
.,.,
-
~
...
"
"E
=
"
~
N
'"
"l
~
N
'"
..,
9
..,
'"
'"
'"
'"
,...
...
.,.,
..,.
~
-
...
'"
N
'"
'"
'"
...
'"
"':
M
~
...
.
.
.
'"
,...
..,.
...
N
5
z
...
N
p --,
...
~
-.i
~
N
..,
9
...
=>
..,.
ci
'"
~
...
N
'"
00
M
...
o
N
..;
00
"l
..,
'-'>
-
'"
,...
...
N
-
-
o
-
...
..
>
en
.,.,
N
o
~
.;
N
'"
..,
9
...
=>
'"
...:
=>
"':
..,
00
'"
00
N
...
o
00
.;
...
..,
...
~
00
.,.,
...
00
N
00
...
-g
~
'-'>
N
~
~.
N
~
'"
-
....
9
...
o
~
0;
~o
-
....
~
N
'"
N
...
=>
~
.;
00
-
o
;;;
"'"
"'"
'"
.,.,
""
.,.,
~
00
""
~
~
1
i5
'"
,...
N
'"
~
N
~
"'.
..,
9
...
o
~
..;
"':
...
00
N
vi
~
...
o
'"
.;
~
~o
...
'"
~
-
,...
...
00
o
00
-
""
..!!
;;;
-<
00
N
N
'"
-
-
~.
..,
9
...
o
=>
0;
...
""0
..,
.,.,
...
o
M
...
o
'"
.;
~
No
...
~
~
-
'-'>
...
o
,...
00
...
"
-C
"
::
"
~
'"
N
-
~
~
~
O.
N
....
9
...
o
'"
.;
'"
"':
;;;
'-'>
'"
~
M
...
o
'"
M
o
"l
-
..,
00
-
.,.,
,...
...
'"
.,.,
~
-
...
N
~
.~
"
::<
o
M
~
=>
ci
~
~
N
....
9
..,
=>
..,.
ci
~
..,.
N
....
r-
'"
-
~.
...
o
N
...:
~
o
N
..,
'-'>
'"
M
o
""
'"
~
"'"0
-
""
.s
~
~
=
u
-
~
'"
'"
..;
-
~
N
..,
9
..,
=>
o
,,;
00
=>
N
..,
.,.,
'"
N
..,.
...
=>
=>
...:
~
"':
..,
.,.,
M
,...:
00
...
,...
N
No
-
..,
...
'"
..!!
2
N
~
'"
'"
.;
-
~
N
..,
9
""
=>
'"
...:
00
o
N
..,
.9
U
5-0
.,
E'i>
~o.
-~ "
o
o <>
"'g u ~
a: Co) >
-;-;~
3~
.!:! ,.-
~.2
~ 0
" ::>
~ t:
.5 g
'-< <>
" .,
::
.2 S
_c; "
.~
.~ c 0-
-5~~
~ .,
<2""'
g ";;
00 ,...
1.f"I- -g
:::: ..
~~
~~
""
,J ~
" "
~.g
~ :;
] .~
00
'"
N
..,.
...
=>
..,.
.;
~
"':
..,
N
..,.
,...:
00
...
00
N
No
-
.~
tii
~
M
'""
~
,~
t::
~
5"
.~
U
~
.~
,~
'"
"
....
o
."
"
..:!
.S
'"
~
.5
>
"
~
~
ii
"
;;
g
.~
ji
g
i5
~
-
-
0;;
oS
'"
"3.
a.
"
g
~
"
"
."
~
~
.,
~
.~
~
"
~
"
~
.5
...
g:
<:!
..,.
,:
"
e:.
2
."
"
U
S
o
<>
.?;>
~
"
a.
"
~
a.
~
~
2
gf
'~
';;;
"
."
~
~
~
:;
0;
b
~
~
5"
~
"
::>
0-
.,
~
-~
.. ~
~'€
" .,
o a.
., "
::: E-
o
-Co;;
"
""'2
.~
]:
"
-'"
~
~g
"
~
"
]
~
"
o
."
~
,.-
B
~
'"
~
-
- ~
" "
::: u ~
.,
~
"
u:>
~~
.
. .
. . .
~
-
~
.0
-;:
~
.....
o
~~
r.;:;10\
[;:;J orfJ
:i:Or.;:;1
E-<Z...<
rfJE-<::J
E;j~~
o~=
~E-<U
~~rfJ
OQE-<
::'::E-<~
UZ...
Or.;:;1",:;
...<:E:><
~rfJ<:
rfJ~
0;;:;)
OrfJ
~rfJ
<:
~ . -
~ ~
.
v. ~
~ - ~
~ ": ~ '"
~ . - - ~ ".
'"
. '. Q E ::: -
> ~ ~ ~ ;::;
.
c
- -
~ ." "
:;;: ~ ,
~ =
.;;: >.
~ ~ ~
c: In <
~ ..
~ 9 9 9
c ~ -< t.
... ... ...
." -
~ -
.~
> .= ....
~ '" ~
c: ....
'" '"
'" '" '"
.... - v ,,; 0;
~ ~ .. >. N '" ~
;; M ":. '"
-E :s t. ~ <i
... ... ... ...
c
c
-
~ ." "
< ;: .l.
-;: ~ ....
~ '"
- In < ::..
-
~ N '" ~
~ , '" '" ..,.
>. M vi .,:
:s " -< t. - M -
'" ... ... ...
."
~
~ ~
.;: ....
~ '" ::
c: ...
'" '" '"
~ '" '" ~
- ~ '" ~ ~
.. N ~
~ ;; >. N ""'. N
-E t. '" 00
'" ... ... ...
~ ."
< ;: , ~
.;;: ....
~ ~ ::
c: In <
c '"
.J. 00 '" 00
~ ..,. - N
~ >. -6 - -
< '" N .... ..,.
In ::.. ... ... ...
- ~
:; ~
~ u u
~ .
.;;: '" .
~
c: ~ -
-
0; ~ 00
E ~ :2 '"
~ 00 '"
~ ~ . N ~ 00
.... -
~ '" M M - ~
~ u ','
~ - ... ... ... ...
~
<
c ~
" '" .
'5 ;!.
;-. c -;; '"
c u :5 '" .
2; :E ;-. ,.: .
.
- ~ c -
..,. u ~
~ ~ ~ -.; ~
~ M ~
< '" '"
u =-
-
U .:i
~ ;:c
.~ '"
.~ ~
5'
'" >< >
"
'" U -0
.:< '-< "
0 .
g -::J '"
3" " "
" ~
~ ~ .~
-;; ~
.3 2
]: 0 !
"
;,;- ""
c:;
g '" ;::-
~ ~
~
'" "'"
u .3
D ,:
." -::J g
~
'" "
" U
<E S
.~ 0
u
U ~
5 .,,; g
0 "
" 0'
u g. E..-
o
li 0
0 0 ~
u
" iJ "
;,; " ""
-" .E
" ~
0 c .3
"
] .~ :!:"
0
" u 'C
" '.0
" .5 "
'" ."
-5 ~ '"
0 0
~
'-< u ~
D "
:< D
.~ 0 ~
E ." 0
.~ "
c "-
0
.~ c ~
" '-<
" 0:; 0
-::J v;
0 " "
'" -" "
<:r
0 "
0 .- 0 '"
'" " " '"
<r) -::J "
>. ".;:::
"" " 0
'-< '" 0 "
0 " "-
v; 05 ~ 0
D 0 ~
" .~ ."
." " C
" -" .3
~ "
v; ;: .~ ~
" 8 -'" a-
" .g c; g
." "
] :; -;; '"
,~ 0 "
" D
g v; ] ~
0
u 0
'" 0; " B
" "
0 " " '"
0 ~ u:> >,
'"
.
. .
. . .
R_~
,
,
BALLOT
SUMMARY
EXHIBIT "c"
I ASSESSORS
ASSESSMENT BALLOT STREET PARCEL
NUMBER * ADDRESS NUMBER
CD NO 496 OXFORD STRITT I 618-27D-25
CV UNKNOWN 488 OXFORD STREET 618-27D-49
Q) UNKNOWN 478 OXFORD STREET 618-270-22
G) YES 472 OXFORD STRITT 618-270-21
@ YES 47D OXFORD STREET 618-270-44
@ I reS I 466 OXFORD STREET I 618-270-53
Q) reS 462 OXFORD STREET I 618-270-19
@ reS 446 OXFORD STREET 618-270-18
@ YES 442 OXFORD STREET 619-270-17
@ YES 438 OXFORD STRITT 618-27D-16
@ YES 430 OXFORD STREET 618-270-45
@ YES 1198 OXFORD COURT 618-380-Dl
(j) YES 1197 OXFORD COURT I 618-380-D9
@ YES 1196 FOURTH AVENUE I 618-270-41
@ UNKNOWN 497-495 OXFORD STREET 618-3D1-02
@ YES 485 OXFORD STREET 618-301-20
@ YES 481 OXFORD STRITT I 618-3D1-19
@ I UNKNOWN 475 OXFORD STRITT 618-3Dl-04
@ YES 467-71 OXFORD STREET I 618-3Dl-05
@ YES 465 OXFOP.D STRITT I 618-301-06
@ I YES 459 OXFORD STREET I 618-301-07
@ YES 461 OXFORD STRITT 618-301-08
@ YES 453-453A OXFORD STRITT 618-301-09
@ I YES I 447-449 OXFORD STREET 618-350-13
@ I YES I 445 OXFORD STREET I 618-350-01
@ YES I 441 OXFORD STRITT 618-350-02
@ reS 437 OXFORD STREET 618-350-03
@ NO 433 OXFORD STREET I 618-350-04
@ UNKNOWN 429 OXFORD STRITT I 618-350-05
@ YES 423 OXFORD STREET I 618-350-06
@ I YES 419 OXFORD STREET I 618- 350-07
@ I reS 415 OXFORD STREET I 618-350-08
@ I YeS I 409 OXFORD STREET I 618- 350-09
@ I YES 1208 FOURTH AVENUE I 618-350-10
* ~ OF 4/~/97 c-.
.-.- COI.IPUITR AlE: C:\R13\CD~\SUPPOR1\S1l229\15S1l1DST.D\I'C
e'J<t-4IB/I D
II , I I i I I I i I I , /1
I i , I I
I I I I I
aUGEN I I ANNE I i DR.
, I
r----. ;J!t
-' i ' , I
i----+- I I Nil
---- I /J;
........'I--J I I ciO / 0-
. ............1 I ~~ --
..............' '1 . ~-T-
'r:::",. ~-
............ )Q l-n ~-
-............: -.J
........r-2 ~-
. lIlUIl . 1Il 11I1l1II1I[ 1I1l1ll1l1l1Il1 [11/ 11/ . . JIll ~~1Ji -
. ........
r-
. OXFORD STREET f---
. r-j II . - I ), /
L-
n ~
- I
-'--
I I -
1
...... / -
'.LJ
'-i
'TJ I -
H k '7j
J ~ f"r4'
~~ 0
c
'<< ~
~ \ 0 r-3
~~ ...... "';-<
~/ '"'"'
- >-
en j ~I :-1 -<
tTJ
/ z
r r1SF1T ~ I ST I c
tTJ
PROJECT LOCATION: 11111/11[[[[11
PROJECT TITLE
DRAP::I BY: A. STEVEN.S.
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS - OXFORD
STREET, BETWEEN FIFTH AND
DAT~: 01/26/95 FOURTH AVENUES /
-~._. --
0 0
N ... ...
'1
0
0
N
>-
D 0
... ...
~
'1
0
0
0
N
>-
U.
0 0
... ...
0
'1
~
~ ~
~
~
>-
" u.
~
:;,~
- - "
coW::: 0 0
~- ~ ... ...
~C ~
~...~ "I
..~-
o r: ..
;:r: ..
'" ..
EO ~
:0 >-
...J " .. u.
~ .. 0. rx:
w w
..1 (!)
W " 00: 0 0 0 D 0 0 0
C c "z
w"'oo: '" '"
::;: =ffi:E ..
"I
c( 0:;:... ...
c(,e:: "''''0 ..
..
1-(.') ..1C:w ~
rJ) 0 00:00:'" >-
-Q.O
:> c:: t:wa: "-
::i~ ~c.a..
:JI- "'... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
:I:Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zz 0 D '" '" 0 "'. '" 0
UW Qw 0" ",. ",. <D. 0" :;;: ",. 0"
u.::;: ...J~r:::c::: .. '" 0 N 0 '" 0
O~ v '" - '" '"
ct-I::::cr '" '"
>- 0 1-E:l::Jw
00.0>-
I-C:: "'0"
-11. C:c:
u::;: Q.-
Q.-
...J 00:'"
c( ill!
I- 0 0 0 0 0 "';:.:0 0
c: 0 0 0 0 ":.8 0
... 0 o. '" '" "'.
c( 0..1 0" '" co '" :::::;.g
() woo: - '" 0 N v
..,... V ......!.D ..
00 ::".'~.
c:... II
::.. .:::::"~:;:;.
'" '"
-' -'
;:: ;::
0 0
>- >-
CJ
z
a
z
00:
::- z
~ u:
1;
E'
>,=
_ 0 r:
.!!:;: '" .Q
~ c E
'" "E
x<- c c -;;
-w ~ ,g "E to
~c: ~ E
too: ;;; w
~ .Q "0 a
:;<z u; 0 "0 00: c:
..",,,, W ;; " " n; "
~-::...J ... ~ '" I ];; 0; 0
, ~ Q. 00: "0
..1o~ c . c '"
...- :;: '" " 1; '"
"'0- ;::: if. ~ c a CJ (!)
-' z
.. z '" C3 ><
. " w
0..:;: z '"
Zw ... ...
Q...1:;: '" '" '" '"
_!::o 0 ;:: z c '"
o...a 0 ~ - - :> u: ... CJ
x
co ~
~E
:2~
~e(
o -
,,1::
0"
"" 0
"LL
. 2""0'
'- "
~ '"
0..:::
"'"'
~u:
-"
~ '"
o "
- ~
~a;
:E..c
>-
o '"
a.f
..c U5 .
" C9
:C"E<t:
~oc
-xZ
EOe(
~s::UJ
0>0>-
E"'C..c
"-,,,<D
>.. -; C)
_,,0>
~o"-
",- '"
(I)~3
~u""':l
'" "'''
~2:;;
"0 "'- "
ti3Q1~
"'..::: E
..c::f-t
- -
- . '"
om-o
~~~
~~.s
.- "
uE5
mo.,
.0' l?~
- r: ~
"'-0"'-
'~::E .e
..::: "'-
:15~~
~...
-':~ro
~~.3
!-' ~ ~
-0 0
" ..
"'e;;
(1)=
~ ~
,,-
" "
ro.5!!..
" I:
'" "'-
";:: U)
U;::c
~I-
~~
'" '"
> ~
0'"
_-0
",--
E '"
._ 0>
_.f:
~ .3
[T
-0 '"
" -
"'0;
ce
:5(1)
.!!! "E
- 0
rex
:go
'" 0>
-"
[02
'"
-g:f
'" '"
~~"'"
....'" "
~:E..Q
",,,,.0
t1)o-c
~ 2"E
"'''-
'" '" '"
e E E
:g ~~
",,,,.0
_;:2
"","'-
"'- '"
.ere OJ
c..'O ~
.!:!! Q) ra
..:::"-
':-u'~~
,,- "
o-"e
=.c:::ctI
.. 0
.2~2
-"''''
='S.>
'" " '"
:::::1'......=
,;;,
"
't5
"
2
"0
~
:5
.!!!
'n;
>
'"
0>
r:
't5
r:
'"
"'-
'"
0>
-
....
0>
>-
LL
~
.E
-0
'"
:;
-0
'"
U
'"
.!!!
r:
.Q
"
2
;;;
r:
o
()
I
ex':"fiBi! 0
ro
.J;
co
~
~
.
.
~
~
~
~
"-
;;
"
~
-
w
i
!
'-
u
.~
.
!
;;
.
-
'"
J--.
~
eXHIBIT
-
c
COUNC1L POLICY
CITY OF CHULA. VISTA
SUBJECT: PA.1i.TICIPATION BY TI-iE: CIIT O~ CHUL..
VJSTA IN 1911 BLOCK ACT PROGP..^NI
PROCEEDINGS
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
ADOPTED BY: Reso]ution No. 11373
505-01 08-30-83 1 OF 6
I DATED: 08-30-83
BACKGROUND
,
There are properTies within the Ciry limits that do not have full street improvemems. In the past, Council has
directed the owners of critical unimproved parcels to install Lt,eir missing public improvements. The 1911
BJock Act Proceedings were utilized in most instances. A5 a11 encouragemem for property owner participation,
the Ciry has contributed' funds for the compJetion of certain items of work (i.e., grading, pavement
instalJation, etc.). Also, the Ciry consistently has contributed engineering inspection and administrative
services at no charge to the property owner(s). However, there is no Council adopted policy regarding Ciry
participation in 1911 Block Act improvement construction proceedings.
Tnis policy is designed to encourage the insta11ation of missing improvemenrs along developed residential lors.
It specifically sets Ciry participation goals for the improvemem of corner, non-corner, and double fromage
residential Jots. The policy reaffirms Ciry Council intent to require the installation of public improvements
adjacent to undeveloped property (residential, commercial, a."d industrial) through the formation of 1911 Act
}.ssessme.!1t Districts or through the subdivision and building permit approval procedures.
"
Tnis policy shaJJ only apply to areas incorporated on or before this policy's effective date.
PURPOSE
To establish a policy for participation by the Ciry in the construction of publjc improvements via the 1911
BJock Act Proceedings (Chap!er 27, Street and Highways Code of the State of California).
POUCY
Tne Ciry Cou.'1cil eSiabEshes the foJJowing poJjcy for Ciry participation m 1911 BJock Act Program
proceedings:
1. Gene;c] Participation
a. The Ciry, at no cost to the property o"mer(s) shaJJ provide all engineering, inspection and
administrative services necessary to install missing improvements via the 1911 Block Act Program
proceedings.
b. Jt shall be Lt,e City's responsibiliry to reJocate a11 existing public irnprovemems found to be in
cor"lict with the proposed street improvemem constrUerion. Such improvemenrs shaJJ include, but
not be 1i.1nited !o: street lights, traffic signal standards, drainage structures, fire hydrants, etc.
c. S-,gi1,eering staff shall meet individually with each property ovmer prior to the program's public
hea.-ing to hand deJiver initial correspondence and to explain the plans, proceedings and this policy.
Fir.al engineering plans and project specifications shalJ reflect as dose as praericable, the property
o".7ler(s) concerns provided they tefleer standard engL-,eering practice.
e: - !
---;,
/ ..
r'
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: PAH.TICI?L.TION BY TrE CiTY OF CHULI\
VJSTA 11'1 1911 BLOCK .<'CT PRGRfJv1
PROCFT)INGS
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No. 11373
505-01 08-30-83 2 OF 6
I DATED: 08-30-83
d. Prior to the end of each fiscal year, the City Engineer shall sub:nit ro rhe City Counei! for approval
under this program, a recommended lisr of projecrs for scheduling in rhe ensuing fiscal year.
Funding for L'1e program shall be derermined annually and shown in rhe Capital Improvement
Program.
e. City parriciparion in this program shaIl be limired !O developed parcels that cannot be split into lots
or building sires.
2. Develooed Residential Lots
a. Non-Corner Lots
It shaIl be the City's responsibility ro overlay or reconstruct L'1e roadway travel way adjacent to
non-corner 10:5 when the rravelway is already improved and needs an overlay or reconstruction to
accommodate drainage Of rraffic safety requirements.
Tne City's responsibility described above is shown on Figure 1 (arrached).
b. Corner Lars
For the purposes of this policy, the corner Jar from lot line shaIl be defined to be the shorter of the
two adjacent street ]ot lines. In this case of a non-rectangular comer Jot, the from Jar line shaIl be
the average widili of the lor. (See Figure 2).
It shall be the City's responsibility roo
(1) Instal! curb, guner, sidewalk and pavement (if non-exisrent) adjacent ro J/2 the corner lot's side
street fron~z.ge.
(2) Overlay or reconsrrucr the side and frOntage street's travelway when needed ro accommodare
drainage or traffic safety requirements.
(3) In the event that there are improvements already existing along the corner lor's side propeny
frontage already exisring, L;,ese improvements shall be credired ro rhe City if rhey need nor be
removed to accommodate t.~e improvements to be installed.
Tne City's responsibility described above is depicred on Figure 3 (arrached).
3. Dual Fronta5!e Lacs
It shall be the City's responsibility roo
E-z..
/
,"':
~
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA. VlST A
SUBJECT: PARTICIPATION BY TE;:: CITY Or C:-JU!..A
VJSTA IN ]911 BLOCK .~CT PROGR";!v1
PRor""DINGS
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No. 11373
505-01 08-30-83 3 OF 6
I DATED: 08-30-83
a. lr:staIl curb, gurrer, sidewalk, and pavement (if non.existent) adjacent to the entire Jot's rear SITeet
frontage.
b. OverJay or reconsU1.Jcr the lot's rear street ITavelway when needed to accommodate drainage or
w2.ffic safety ptLrposes.
For purposes of this policy, dual fronrage lots shall be a lor having fronrage on two para]Je]
approximately parallel sITeers, one of which is an "aJ]ey".
or
I
i
,
4. Developed Industria1/CommerciaI Lots
The Ciry contribution towards the consU1.Jction of improvements adjacent to developed
industrial/commercial lots sha]] be Jjmited to:
a. The overlay or recoTIsU1.lcrion of existing roadway tT2velway areas when found to be required for
drainage or traffic safery purposes.
5. Undeveloped Residentia1. Industria] and Commercial Lots
This policy shall reaffirm the Ciry Council's intent to require the installarion of missing improvements
adjacent to undeveloped lors [both comer and non-comer with and without double streer frontages)
through:
2. } 911 Ac! Assessment District procedures.
b. subdivision requirements, and
c. buDding permit approval requirements.
There sha]] be no Ciry contriburion towards the consU1.Jcrion of improvements adjacent ro undeveloped
reside:1tiaI, industrial and commercial lots. In rhe event that an owner petitions the Ciry for inclusion of
his(ner undeveloped parcel in a 1911 Block Act Program, alJ expenses shal1 be borne by said owner.
6. ADDlirabilirv
This policy shalJ be applicable to areas within the Chula Vista Ciry limits on or before irs effecrive dare.
E-3
='.
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA. V1STA
SUBJECT: PARTICIPATION BY Tn=: C[TY 0;: CHUL^>
VISTA IN 1911 BLOCK ACT PROGi\AM
PRorFFDlNGS
ADOPTED BY: Reso]ution No. 11373
~
"0
>- '"
!-
-
-'
-
:::>
-
""
z
z:
""
2!
l-
e;:;
::;:
w::;:
><
. D:::::
"""
:-"0
::;:'"
-:-..
1-1-
UO
<-'
"''''
uw
Oz
-''''
:::>0
U
- ,
-z
0'>0
-z
",'
,,~!
"'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r---
I ..: '" J
I :: ~ L_l
I ~ ':)
L-_~__..J
1
I
I
I
I
I
"I
I
I
I
/'/
II
II
II '...
/I '"
~
II ~
I' V)
II ~
1/ :?~, ~
" ~ ~
p/ ~
"
I'
II
II
II
"'-J Y"'>Q< ><
I <<
'-J ><>A,
i'X :<:
i~&
'"T -
"
II
II
iN
II ~~
II ~::>
~~
II
II
~
'='!\.1
\J",
....
~t
~~
f
I
I
E-'-I
POLICY
NUMBER
505-01
EFFECTfYE
DATE
08-30-83
DATED: 08-30-83
I
I
>-,
~
-
-
-
..:>
-
~
:;
'"
~
:f;i
I
.,
J
>-,
~
..
.,
"'-
o
..
:-..
>-,
~
-
-
-
..:>
-
~
2,1
~
~
>-,
~
-
u
,
~
u .
p~
~ ~
~ E
:: .,
o >
u '"
, "'-
.,
.. 0>
r:
..-
o~
~
>-,-
.. "
- .,
.,
>....
o 0
,
g
OJ
0> ....
'"
....
r:
o
..
....
-
.,
-
OJ
..
-
...
.,
~
o
-
-
-
-
'"
....
~
r:
-
o
~
."
OJ
...
-
::>
'"
OJ
I..
.><
I..
~
....
o
~
E
OJ .
....~
-....
r:
~~
.:::'"
~>
00
'I..
- 0.
-E
"'-
,.,
V)~ c::: WI..,n-
a..c::ozt-<:C)w
-
~
r:
OJ
I..
o
....
.,
u
o
~
I..
OJ
~
~
::>
0>
....
o
0.
.><
-
'"
x
OJ
."
-
'"
."
r:
'"
I..
OJ
~
....
::>
0>
-
-
E
o
..
....
~~
r: r:
fI~
.,~
>-
'" "
c..,
-
.::0
..
::>
u
-
N
PAGE
4 OF 6
0>
r:
'"
~
E
COIJNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHUlA V1STA
SUBJECf: PP-'nJCIPATION 3Y TriE CITY OF CHULl;
VJSTA IN ] 9] J 3LOCK ACT PROGRA!>1
PROCEEDINGS
I ADOPTED BY: ResoJution No. 11373
POLICY
NUMBER
505-01
EFFECTIVE
DATE
08-30-83
PAGE
50F6
DATED: 08-30-83
() 9
11 rill
~IN 21- I Ii
O.J
ct I II
IL. I 'I
1/ , ,)
() , "
I i I
I
>-
I-
-'
o
""
2:
ir
""
Ei z
o
1->--
2:01-
W.....J<:
:;c 2:
w:.::_
>L;,JZ
02:'"
.c:::::::::::w
"-0.....
'::;;;:UW
o
+-<1.:.J
U-'2:
<::::>-
"'-'
~z
u<::>-
01-0
-'U-,
Ow
'" I-
-'2:
-2:0
0'10::::::
-2:...
~
--'
-------
-------
E-s-'
cj
\
()
..1.
....,
'"
'"
~
o
..
..
'"
J::
~
...J ...J
CJ :;;
......
...J
rJ
......
-::>
'" .
::: '"
_...J
....J::
OJ 0
-::>..
....
'"
-0
::t
OJ-'
0>
'" OJ
~:S
o
......
"'0
/1
r
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA. VISTA
SUBJECT: pA.!rnO?ATION BY 1:"':":: CIIT OF CHULA.
VJSTA IN 1911 BLOCK ACT PROGRA'v1
PROCF"T)INGS
ADOPTED BY: Reso]ution No. 11373
~
OJ f?
'"
0 ~
>- '" ~
t- '"
<
-' OJ ~
"" ~ ~
'" ~ ~
~ '" Q:"
-::> ~ ~
V> OJ
w :: ~
-.... t\> K
....c
t- OJo ~ I /I \.,.
::: -::>'- g 1-..
w .... \jJ
::;: ~ :2\"
w -0 ~
> '"
g OJ~ ~ ; II 'Ill..
:>> ;.;:
::-.~ '" OJ ">
::;:< ~ -
-- =~ II ~
'" 0 !IJ
t-D '-.....
u::::::: :..:... 0
<~
"" t-
UO
0-'
-'
""'"
w
-z
--
"'0 ~------,
-u I I
I J...
~~ ,t\>lJ.J 'S
J ~tI) I
"::>.- J "::. '"
0,> , f.. () ~_..J ()
, :?::t I
J'" I
,111 I
L__...J
-,oJ
.J.c:7.::1'~ .J./VOi!!'~
--
I
=.L
T ~ ~ I
f2 !~ ~
~ (f.i::;rr: 7 ~ m ~ ../D7 -.J.fYOC'.:>'
r~~ ~l~ ~ "'3-+
~::> .l.??C'.l.S ?$&7.1.rrc;C'.:>' .
>::iJ
~~
".~
I(j~
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
6 OF 6
505-01
08-30-83
DATED: 08-30-83
.,
..,
.. .... >,
....-::>
0 ~ .... 0 I ....
c_ ..... 80J
CJ 0
1> <: E OJ "....
0 >, 1> '"
~ u.... OJ-::> 1> ~
>, .... u OJ >- U
.... U ....... .. '" ~ u u
0 .. "'- .... ..-
'- 0 ~ ~ u .....
....~ -e- o 0.....
-" ~ u '-.... ..
c....- '" ., .... '-
~ 0 c..... 'u "'........
0 u OJ..... ~ '- c
C- I E '" .. 0 S'..,
~ OJ OJ '- -:::. u <:
'- >~ '- OJ ., OJ
OJ '" OJ OJ": '- > 0>
'" '- :::..., -'-=~ .. '"
>, 0 ........'" ~ a.:::
O>CJ 0 0
.... C'I_Wf c;
>,c :>> 0>",
u "'.- '" >-.:::1-
-.... -0> t'Oo_""O
'- ~-= -" OJ -....
OJ_ '" '- 0 '- ~ OJ
> >( '- ;::1-"= Q)...- -'
0 OJ-::> U ..- > >( '"
0 OJ":>
.
-
'"
I ..... ,
'- '-
OJ C)
.... ~.... t ....
'" 0
c..: C) ....- 0 OJ
.- .... u '" c ....
.>< '" ..... OJ OJ OJ U '"
'- ~.... E-::> '- .....
'" ~ ~....~
OJ U "'-
"'-- >-.c:::: -= > "'..0 U
>.,c::.:
C) '" .. '- ...
CJ "'.>< ",-", 0
>, -::> 0 "'.>< 0
.... ::: -::> u~ - u -::> u....
.......... ... 0 C)_
"'- 0--::> "C ., ., .. 0
0_-::>
........ '- :0 C) - u - '-:0 C)
..0 '- '" '-.... '-
C) 0 00_ '"
C)_ ~~o .... "'-~ 0 0_
'" .... ~.... 0
c .... a- C) '" a-
0 - OJ'" ., C) .,,, ., ... C)
Q. ~ Co ... ......: 0 Co '-
~ 0 ..- ....- ....-
C) '- - ....>< -~ u - '-.><
" .... "'-... '" ~-
'" - - "'-...
0> 0 "" 0
... rt1 VI t: -' ~ ~ -e 0> c.... '" ~
'" - 6- t: ~ C ~ E c ....
~ - -.;.t. I'CI '- = '" 0_ '" .>< ...... c
'i ........ Q) ~ 1- -' 0 IV .......-..::: '- ....... 0 .,
0 VI U = 1'0 VI e ~ ...t- ... ~ E
L. '= c._ VI Q) '- "'-'- ~ .,
>, .1'0....., X E > -- - >( E >
.... 1- C. '" E Q) Q) 0 ....... '" E C) C) 0
'- Q) - 0 I ~ L ., C-- 0 , .... ..
C) ~O\X1...t:__Q.. .... ...... U '- C- :::.
:::. ~6~"'gJ..~ ...,.... C>_ .... 0 E
0 0 vi C C) C '--
.. 0'1_ C-' Q) 0>_ ., ., .... .,
II:! 0 C..... - 0'1 ><-..= ='-.= 0>
.::J" = Sl-= t: .., '" c:J._ -' C
1- ~"'- I: 0_ ..0 I ., E 0._
:J;g_~~_~ .. --"" ., ., ~
0 E.;: > C_ ~
U__-=___I U C_ '" 1'0___
"-- '" E "'-- .. E
. .
'" M - '" M
VI t- c::: L.I.J I.I.J t- I V"It-C::WL.l.JI-
~C:::OZ:I-C:::t..:'W V)-C1.i.J
E-fc:,
/r
/
-~Xtl18l(
8
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEJ\fENT
Item cr
Meeting Date 5/13/97
ITEM TITLE: - a). Resolution ,g 6 b 3 Approving the boundary map showing the
proposed boundaries for Assessment District 97~Ql of properties to be
assessed for street improvements on the 400 block of Oxfqrd Street,
- .. - ..
b). Resolution I?? b b L{ Ordering installation of improve~ents on
Oxford Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue, ordering the
Superintendent of Streets to give notice and to order the construction and
setting public hearings on Resolution of Intention to form Assessment
District 97-01 pursuant to the Block Act of 1911.
SUBMlIIED BY: Director 'Of Public Works~.r(
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
As a prelimin"ry step in the assessment district proceedings it is necessary to request that the
Council pass resolutions approving the proposed map boundary, ordering the installation of the
improvements and setting public hearings on the resolution of intention to form the assessment
.~ district.
RECOM:MEl\'DATION: It is reco=ended that the Council:
1). Approve a resolution approving the boundary map for Assessment District 97-01 for
construction of missing street improvements on the 400 block of Oxford Street under
the 1911 Block Act procedure.
2). Approve a resolution ordering installation of certain public improvements at the location
shown on the boundary map, instructing the Superintendent of Streets to give notice and
to order the construction of said improvements, and setting public :hearings for July 15
and July 22, 1997 at 6:00 F:.M. on the resolution of intention to form Assessment
District 97-01.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMEl\'DATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Backcround: On April 22, 1997 by Resolution # 18645, Council accepted a petition for the
formation of an assessment district (1911 Block Act) for the construction of street
improvements, such as =b, gutter, sidewalk and pavement on Oxford Street between Fourth
Avenue arid Fifth Avenue. Staff has estimated the total project costs at $496,858 with the
construction costs at $361,858. Approximately $31,858 of the estimated $361,858 cost of
/ I
"' -,I
Paue 2 - Item . -
"', -
Meeting Date 5/13/97
construction is to be reimbursed from the property owners upon successful formation of the
assessment district. The construction of the missing street improvements is included in the
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Fiscal Year 1997/1998. ,\
Subsequent to this action, staff is in the process of finishing the construction. plans,
specwcations and costs estimates for the project and has met with the owners of the properties
proposed for inclusion in the assessment district. Those property owners who were unable to
meet with staff were notified by mail.
'-
The City Environmental Review Coordinator studied the potential environmental impacts
associated with the implementation of the project and has determined this project is
categorically exempt from the requirement of an Environmental Impact Report.
Costs: City participation in the construction costs has been determined pursuant to Council
Policy 505-01. The fmancing totals of $500,000 are made up of $141,500 Transportation
Development Act (IDA) and $358,500 from Gas Tax funds. Design, inspection and district
formation costs estimated at $120,000 will be contributed by the City.
The improvements on Oxford Street extend from Fourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue including
some work within those two intersections. The work would consist of grading, excavation,
asphalt paving, pedestrian ramps, sidewalks, driveways together with appurtenances and
appurtenant work to serve and to benefit properties located within the boundaries of the
proposed assessment district.
,
!
It is estimated that the following costs will be incurred for the improvement of Oxford Street:
Recommended Property
Costs Obli~ation of City Owner's Cost
Construction
Design/lnspection
Assessment District Formation
Contingencies
Total
$361,858.00
$IQO,OOO.OO
$ 20,000.00
$ 15.000.00
$496,858.00
$330,000.00
$100,000.00
$ 20,000_00
$ 15.000_00
$465,000.00
$ 31,858.00
$ 0.00
$ 0.00
$ 0.00
$ 31,858.00
Staff reco=ends that the City pay all costs of design and inspection as well as the assessment
district formation, estimated at $120,000 (direct costs), which is consistent with past practices
and Council Policy 505-01. The construction cost share of $31,858 will be the responsibility
of the property owners, based upon this policy and represents the difference in cost between
installing asphalt sidewalk and permanent Portland Cement Concrete sidewalk. The cost of the
asphalt sidewalk is being paid by the IDA funds on a grant from SANDAG. This Assessment
District (# 97-01) will be formed by the 1911 Block Act to obtain reimbursement for the
improvement and other miscellaneous costs in accordance with Council policy. The 1911 Act
'" , ("
.-- ,/
Page 3, Item_
Meeting Date 5/13/97
is a fmancing mechanism which authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefiting
properties to fund the construction of public improvements. To construct the project through
assessment district fmancing, the CIP budget detail shows $141,50q from IDA funds and
$358,500 from Gas Tax funds. Alternatively, the City could sell bonds in the ajIlount of the
construction costs. However, for a project of this size, it is not economically feasible"to do so,
consequently, the City typically advances funds for cost effectiveness. '
Based on the staff reco=endation, the assessments for each parcel would range from a low
of $372.00 to a high of $2,793.00, with 18 of the 30 assessments at less than $1,000.00.
Action: The proposed assessment district will be formed pursuant to the Improvement Act of
1911 of the California Streets and Highways Code. The Code requires that the Council
approve the district boundary map prior to adoption of a resolution ordering installation of the
improvements. The resolution ordering the improvements, the cornerstone of Chapter 27 of
the 1911 Act process, describes the details of the Assessment District including: 1) description
of the work to be done; 2) description of the properties proposed for inclusion in the
assessment district; and 3) time and date for public hearings on the proposed improvements and
the 1911 Act procedure. The Resolutions before Council, if adopted, will approve the
assessment district boundary and order installation of the improvements and schedule the
required public hearings.
Public HearinQ:s: The public hearings are proposed for July 15 and July 22, 1997, and will be
noticed pursuant to the Brown Act. After the second public hearing, Council may adopt a
resolution to proceed with the 1911 Block Act. A schedule for this project is attached for
Council information. The property owners will have the opportunity to address Council during
the public hearings in July.
Future Actions:
1. Although there is no statutory requirement to do so, staff will meet with all property
owners again to discuss the woject status, improvements and its fmancing.
2. Two Public Hearings, as required by law, will be held, on July 15th and 22nd, 1997.
Therefore, tonight's action by the City Council is not binding on the property owners in the
event the bids come in higher than the estimated $496,858. After the bids are opened, the
project comes back to the Council for award, the actions will include notice to the property
owners of a public hearing with an opportunity to review their proposed charges. At that time,
the property owners could request the Council to eliminate the district because of the higher
than anticipated costs. After construction is complete, and the fmal costs are known, there will
be another public hearing to review, levy or protest the actual assessments.
Page 4, Item_
Meeting Date 5/13/97
Deferral of Assessments: The City Council may at their discretion determine by Resolution,
to allow property owners to defer payment of their assessments per section 10700 of the Streets
aDd Highwavs Code. A subsequent section in the Code allows CQuncil to determine the
criteria that property owners must meet to qualify for deferral, and Council may also determine
the procedures to ensure that the criteria are satisfied. Lastly, Section 10706 states. that the.
,
amount of any deferred assessments, including interest, shall be due and payable whenever the
parcel of property upon which the assessment was levied is transferred, or at other times as
determined by the legislative body.
On May 25, 1995, Council approved Resolution # 17980, for the Elm Alley Assessment
District. This resolution established criteria for deferrals and the delegation authority to defer.
The following alternative payment option (Alternative #2) was adopted by Council:
Semi-annual payments (interest only) and payment of the principal at the end of a 10-
year term or at the time the property is transferred, whichever occurs first. At the end
of the 10 years Council may grant, on a case-by-case basis, a time extension to fulfill
the payment obligations.
Another payment option available (Alternative #3) involves deferring all payments for 10 years,!
or at the time the property is transferred. At the end of the 10 years or when the property is
transferred, one payment, which includes principal and accumulated interest is due. At the end
of the 10 years Council may grant, on a case-by-case basis,' a time extension to fulfill the
payment obligations.
Both of these alternatives, Alternatives #2 & 3, will require a resolution by Council at the time
of the Public Hearings, scheduled for July 15 and 22, 1997. Staff will incorporate similar
guidelines used for the previous assessment district which required that interested property
owners qualify under the HOD Low Moderate Income standards as contained in the City's
Master Fee Schedule or 'have a demonstrated fmancial hardship approvea by Council. For
example, qualifying fmancial hardsh,ip can include, being a retired senior citizen living on a
fixed income, retired, and unable to pay the assessment for other legitimate reasons.
Qualifying property owners that elect alternatives #2 or 3, must enter into a deferral agreement
with the City and their request for deferral must be approved by Council Resolution. The
HOD Low Moderate Income Standards allow for a maximum family gross income for
eligibility of $15,350 for one person in the household and incremental increases at
approximately $2,000 intervals for each additional member in the family for up to 8 members
($28,950). An additional $1,000 annual income is allowed per each additional person in the
household in excess of eight (see Attachment E).
All property owners within this proposed assessment district of 30 parcels have been sent a
copy of tonight's City Council agenda statement and attachments. Staff has also noticed the
four Oxford Street property owners who will not be included within the district. These four
""--). ~ ,
->0'-
Page 5, Item_
Meeting Date 5/13/97
properties have an assessment amount equal to $0.00, since there will not be any additional
work required in front of their property which already has the ultimate street improvements in
place. , "
FISCAL IMPACT: This project was originally approved in the FY96/97 budge~ as Cn>
project STL229 - Oxford Sidewalk Safety. The fmancing for this project (project total of
$500,000) is being funded through Transportation Development Act (IDA) funds ($141,500)
and Gas Tax funds ($358,500).
Assessment district proceedings will allow for the property owners within this district to
participate in contributing $31,858 towards the costs of the construction, preliminarily
estimated at $361,858. The estimated property owner's share will be reimbursed with 7%
interest over a period of 10 years.
Attachments: A - Resolution # 18645
B - Cn> Program Detail
C - Boundary Map
n D - Schedule of Proceedings
E - HUD Low Moderate Income Standards
..
FILE: 0725-1D-AD97-(11
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA 1AD97lMAl'.FAR
May 02, 1997; 1l:03am
rl,
. ,-
_. --'
UHIBIT A-
RESOLUTION NO. 1f!{,.'IS--
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING PETITION FOR FORMATION
OF A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ON THE 400
BLOCK OF OXFORD STREET FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN FOURTH AVEN\JE AND
FIFTH AVENUE (CIP il0735-l0-STL229) ",
. ,
.,'
WHEREAS, the city Engineer has received a petition from
property owners in the 400 block of Oxford Street between Fourth
and Fifth Avenue requesting that special assessment proceedings be
commenced in accordance with the Improvement Act of 1911 for the
construction of missing street improvements such as curb, gutter
and sidewalks; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of
Proposition 218, the "Right To Vote On Taxes Act", a ballot has
been mailed to the affected property owners and more than 60% of
the property owners are in favor. of the district; and
WHEREAS, upon acceptance by the Council, the petition
will be filed in the city Clerk's office; and
WHEREAS, approval of this resolution will permit staff to
begin assessment district formation proceedings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby accept the petition for formation
of a special Assessment District for the construction of street
improvements on the 400 block of Oxford Street between Fourth
Avenue and Fifth P.venue and direct staff to proceed with the
assessment proceedings as required by the Improvement Act of 1911
and Proposition 218. .
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
~111191Q-0L~.
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
c: \rs\adoxford
N ~ v.
'1
~
'"
'"
N
>-
u..
0 0
.... ....
~
'1
'"
'"
'"
N
>-
11.
'" 0
.... ....
'"
'1
'"
~ '"
'"
~
>-
~ 11.
~
0,..
--.,
o:,ajj "> 0 0
"'- '" .... ..
- ..0 '"
"''''.. "I
"'~-
0" '"
:0:" '"
'"
., ~
EO
..J :;; >-
11.
;;:;: :s&
..o..w
I- ~ "
W :> <0:
CI C ..2: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w"'<o: .. ....
:E '"
=m:: '"
<( ":E... .:.
<( c: "'..." '"
'"
l- e.? ...Jl%:w ~
'" 0 <0:<0:-' >-
-0..0
-c: t:wa:: 11.
>c.. ~CD..
:)'"
=>1- "'... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
:I:Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OW Zz 0 0 '" '" 0 "'. '" 0
Qw 6 0> ",. cO 6 ",- 6
u..:E ...J~a::o::: ;; '" 0 N 0 ;;: '" 0
D~ ... '" - '" '"
<0:-1%:<0: .. ..
>- 0 1-t!::Jw
O~O>-
!::: c: "'0:>
0 c.. 0:1%:
~ 0..-
o..t::
..J <0:
<(
I- 0 0 0 0 0 ::::::0 0 0
E: ... 0 0 0 0 /:8 0 0
0 0 "'. '" "'. ;; ....~.
<( "...J o. 0; '" cO .::,.-0 ;;:
() w<o: - '" 0 N ,";:'.0
-, ... ... "."';1tJ ;;; "'e
00 ':::'~
a:...
0.. '"':-.':"'.-"
'" '"
--' --'
" "
0 0
... ...
(!)
~
"
z
'"
::- z
~ u..
0
'"
,.."
_ 0 "
.!!:E C> .Q
'" " E
'" "E
xCi. " " u;
-w '" .g "E
"'I%: ~ E '"
~<o: " " w
~ 0 " "
~z .. 13 <0:
'" 0 I%:
"''''<0: w E " ;: "ii :>
N."...J <0: ~
r:'.D.. ... ~ "' :;; 0
<0: "
...Jor: " ~ " " '"
...- :E ., '" ., 0 .,
" 1= D:. 0 " (!) (!)
"'Oz --' z
'"
0: =- W U X
o .o:E ... z ;::
z~::'i '" . <: <: '"
E:t:O 0 ~ ?: z 0 <:
"..." " ~ - = > u: ... "
-'"
Cii:
~ ~
~~
:::<
0-=
,,-::
o=>
=0
"u..
2."
-"
:g ..
o _
02
JJiI:
~ "
.2"
"'~
" "
.".::>
>-
o '"
o.~
~Wc)
~"<{
~oo
-xz
EO<
~,....C/)
OJc>.
2~..c
"-"co
>.. ro en
_0'"
~o~
..- "
C/)!!13
=::oJ
.. " c:
~e:;
" ::l. Q)
in tLI-;:
"E E
-=' Q)
- -
- 0"
o:g"D
-:;::....111
..<.::>
"-,..
IJ)....,B
:::~.c:
o c: 0
mo:;::;
oE.~
~~o..
!!1:E 2
-= e>.
i;""1;;~~
::;-0
"'I-
-0>-
t~ ~
~13u
o.!:!<
.,,0
c: '"
mo;
"'-
~ ~
0-
" 0
rc.~
o
c: ~
me>.
-= VI
V;:c
~I-
0> 0
e>.~
..
'" ~
> '"
10."
e>.o-
E '"
_ C)
c:
~~
C"
1:> 0>
c: ~
me;
~~
:EW
m."
= (:)
mx
~O
'" C)
"[.Q
m
-g~
m m
>.$:..::.2
- "'''
"." 0
(i;"U;:o
(I)'O-b
~~E
VoI=_
'" '" m
~ E c:
:g ~~
m",.::>
.....$:::
" '" "-
"'- '"
"e- m 0)
0..'0 ~
..!=2 Q) ro
-=c:~
1-0'"
"'0;
i::::: ()
0-..2
~cttl
.~g2
-.. m
:;:;"'5 ";;
'" " "
=>~-
-, "0 ro
"
'.
0,
.EO
."
c:
a
-
o
g
:0
~
m
>
m
C)
'c:
'"
~
a;
e>.
'"
'"
;::
'"
>-
u..
~
.!2
."
'"
=>
."
~
"
'"
.!!!
c:
,2
<3
;:
..
"
()
I
m
,~
~
.;.;
"
.!!!
ii:i
;;
o
,
".
~
"
-
~
}
~
~
~
~
"
~
.
,
;;
.
---~
?"
r',/
:0
~
$.
o
w
(/)
o
D-
O
0:::
D-
.......
o
I
l'-
~
(/)
W
0:::
<(
o
z:
:::J
o
CO
E-4
Z
~
==
u:2
u:2
~
u:2
u:2
<
r--
u
-
e:::
r--
U')
-
o
-
r--
u
<(
~
~
0')
~
!
!
!
!
____..J
lflNJAT HJliflOd
~./7J:,,,,
~o.y'"I7r:J.
~~
::J
z
~
-
0
I:=..
-
.....:I
<::
u
I:=..
0
1:::1 E--4
Eo- P:::I
~ P:::I
"" e::;
0 E--4
c;> rt.2
~
-
Q ~
Z e::;
<::
"" 0
I:=.. ~
0
>-< 0
Eo-
Z ~
:::>
0 U
u 0
~ ~
"" ~
-
>-
::5 0
0
:::> "'<::i'4
::::
u
I:=..
0
>-<
Eo-
-
U
JliflOJ al:JOJX()
~.'::~
I
I
I
I
1
!
i
EXHIBIT
c
00'>
, '"
r--'"
0'>-'
C)'V>
<:
o .
_ 0
,=
U") .
"'0
r-- .
03;
@I
@H\
@!
@D
@D
@D
@)D
@)D
@I
@B @I
\.
''---
@)~
@~
I
@~
@I
@~
@~
'''''
12':
15
I~
~
>i'i=
c..z
=>
-0
I::::
I:
",,0";
8'tj ~
~::ar:;: ~
z"--
_o='
.wu.
S;;:: u:..
= 0
-:I~ 3
u '"
E2 _
I~@
''z 2S
t:>L..J~
>-" B5 VJ
<(.1')1..-'
o~o
1"- ~
",00
s: V"J (..)
-9>'=1
o~~
~ -
~"- .....
i::o 0
60
'"'....,
~~
c~
~~
~e
c'"
z~
1'5~
u~
u
~~ v;
-~d
0"" ~
~~~
~~~
>-~5
'" S :E
""'zo
5e::z
=e-
<a~ ~
g~~
f.5~f5
"- '< ::E
~ti;CS
o
u
~
""0
is_
85'1
u
2?'~
i=i=
zz
1'5=>
<..>8
"'
~
E-4
U
~
~~
E-4W
u:2~
S~
o
e:::
c...
::E
J
I
I
-~------
/
,
J, ....,.,. '''J
I /..'.].....".
@,.,... .
.... /- ,."J.. \. .
-.""'" '~'..."
- f','J'<':
"','J", "J
... ,to, ''','
I~i<"'l"<
. 0:,',j<',j
~ -. " " '.'
','. ",'
"" "\.J',",~
'.::...1-, '..J
-', ~:~.t..:~~:':
. '. 'l', 1
0.: "-'..I',"',
..;@ ,'"f'"
z: " I,"':
'. ',' . 1
'\."C'>:
c: ". '~',.',
..;@ '--"'i\\
z '-""",1"'"
,8..,h.. '....
@j,~I',>~
:~:....,
,.~<.
6!V)i""j
........".f-...'....:
I"S.'>'
0,.........,.,1
Q,.""'":l"'"
cq,."J
..~r':""
""-e-,,.. j,.".' ~ '0. .J)
.-~'" ~..__.....
t:::'\ ['",'''-.i''.''''.,
v,......-,{,...,.j
",\>~<'"
I 'r' '.
c: ~::'l<:>
-<;1;;;\ ."~'L"..."i ~
;:z v ".. '~,"',,': 't::V
... ,), '.
:......'".'..1,..........:
!,',j<,.I
6i';'.l'."-,j
c",,,"',r'<"...:
" '.JO..'"
~ Q ~,".J">1'
~ '\J ", '.)., '..
:', 'i:',J
~Q""'i'"
~ Ok".J,'.,l
:<'.f':--:
... " }, '.
~ 0) ::::-]:..,:
.:....(.'-J
.....1.. "
~ ~"",,1">4
t;81'.~l'>i@ ;
; i~,'r<j ;
'", -', ',,"'1
i
3flN3AV HT1U --+------
I
i
i
I
j
,
,~
.0
u
:::?
'"
G
W
i~
z
g~
_0
<.z
'"
-
'"
2S
--
Q: ~25~
~Vi~~
~25~~
iE.....~'"
0<:,,-
~-c:::5
~~~4.
'" 00
~<9::.oC
ton 1:;::' t.:J
.. tl')or
Q <:z
ge~l~ 1
ci <: <:
u C;; C;;
","'" >-
L....d3 C ~ :> s:
~~~ I :5 ;5 :5
;;2 V'> ;;2
5 u.. 2: f u :> U
goL....!::: "- ~ "-
oi= 0;:= 0 0
LI..Iz......Jz ?:: W i=
V)~~o w "- w
a:8=>0 0
o o~ "" i= ""
g:<u~ "" '"
- - ...., w ....,
<>~ ~..:- ~ D
u '=I'
z uo
~ :5 ~,ds , c ;:= c
w "- w
v=>~-=o 0
'-':--:Z:: ""
~u..C:Oc":)z '"
oo~o ....,
~
;;c$:85 u"':
=
=u~:::ec5 c~
5i:j-.:"~3t3 u
....,u "" b'
- => ;:=
;=r;;;2B6
_-3::Q:: "-
SO . 0
-I-S<~ W
-:Z:ZI--C':I U
~WC:Z:::<- G:",
;:::~ e < ~ \:;0
tj~~~ I '=:'?<
;:=0
>- "':5 ;:!;
E3~o2 I
E5~ ~ t:> I 0
::::1...L.::51-1...L. ::I
_0""'<0 G:
,..-,
Exhibit D
April 28, 1997
File: 0725-10-AD97-01
0735-10-STL-229
STREET IMPROVEMENTS OXFORD STREET
FROM FOURTH A VENUE TO 1<11< Hi AVENUE
SCHEDULE
,
\'
ACTION
DATE
.
L
Pre1imin;rry property owner & City staff meeting
1b1ffi97
2.
Completed PetitionIBallot due to City Engineer
F3IUl fJ7
3.
City Council Meeting 6:00 P.M.
Adopt Resolution A=pting Petition to Install
Street Improvements on Oxford Street between
Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue
T4!12S7
4. City Council Meeting 6:00 P.M. T5!J3S7
a). Adopt Proposed District Map Boundaries
b). Adopt Resolution Ordering Installation
of Improvements (Begin 60 days)
c). Set Public Hearing on Resolution of Intention
d). CEQA
e). Post & Send Public Hearing Notice; Publish Twice In Newspaper
5.
6.
7.
File Proposed Boundary Map
a). City Clerk
b). County Recorder
c). Mail Notice per GC 54954.6,
publish notice (5194)
FS/1697
Plans and specifications signed
115/1997
City Staff Meeting with Property Owners
InMay*
8.
Notice of Improvement Ends (5132) (End 60 days)
Sat7112/97
9. City Council Meeting 6:00 P.M. & 4:00 P.M. TII15/97 & TI122/97
a). Public Hearings on Improvements and Proceedings
b). Adopt Resolution of Intention and Making Findings at
Public Hearing pursuant to Chapter 27
c). Obtain Letters of Permission
10. ** Advertise for Construction Bids
S;JJ!YfJl
r ) _,H
, ,
~,
OXFORD STREET SCHEDULE -2- A.D.# 97-01
ACTION DATE
11. ** Receive Bids WB/lJ97
12.** City Council Meeting 6:00 P.M. T9f1J)f:J7
a). Adopt Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding <;:ontract
13.** Execution of Contract ',', F9!2fJf.J7 '.
14. ** Preconstruction Meeting - (Date To Be Announced) 9ro97
15. ** Begin Construction (110 working days) MlO/06/97
16. ** End of Construction TIm9:!
17. ** Project Closeout and Final Accounting M3Q358
18. ** City Council Meeting 6:00 P.M. T4Il~
a). Adopt Resolution Accepting Contract Work
19.** City Council Meeting 6:00 P.M. 15/~
a). Accept filing of Engineer's Report
b). Set Public Hearing on Engineer's Report
20.** Notice of Public Hearing to Property Owners 'IJ:M~
21. ** City Council Meeting 6:00 P.M. T7/l~
a). Public Hearing on Engineer's Report
b). Adopt Resolution ConfIrming Engineer's Report
c). Adopt Resolution for Notice of Lien
22.** File Assessment Diagram .' Wl/15/J3
a). City Clerk
b). County Recorder
23.** Notice of Assessment & Begin 30 day pre-payment period WlI15':J3
24.** End 30 day Pre-payment period F&l14t98
25.** Due Date of First Billing (On Property Tax Bill) Thl2/1O/98
* Meeting Date will be scheduled and property owners notified.
** Dates shown are tentative, and only listed to show Assessment District procedures.
{M,\BDMElENGINEER\LANDDEV\AD971SWLFXR)
:? ~/
t....---.--'i7IDI/ c:::;
APPEl'-.'DIX B
.'
,
HUD LOW MODERATE rnCOME STANDliliDS
No. in Household . Maximum Annual Family Inrome (Gross
for Eligibility
1 $15,350 ,
2 17,550
3 19,750
I 4 21,950
I 5 23,700
6 25,450
7 27,200
I 8 28,950
"
'.
Plus $1,000 annual income allowed for each additional person in the household in
excess of eight.
..
wPC:F:\BOME\GER./JJ)y\185.!i2
~. -
~\\f~
~
"""=---:.....- -
- - -
cm OF
(HUlA VISTA
DEPARTIIoENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
'.
.
Our records indicated you may have an interest in the attached item
that will appear before the City Council as an agenda item on
MAY /3
/": 00
at \,2- p.m.
, 1997
The Council meeting begins
.
The City Council meets in the Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue
in the Public Services Building which is located a the northwest
corner of Fourth Avenue and "F" Street.
If you have any questions about the attached item, please contact:
FTZ-AIJ/L. RJV6P-A- CIViL- f31JG-INE=EI'2.. A-T (61'1) 69/-:'-;;:-6G
COMPLIANCE WITH THE A11ERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
.
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans wi th
Disabilities Act (J<.Dl!.), requests individuals who require special
accommodations to access, attend and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodation at least
forty-eig1Jt hours in advance for meetings and five days for
scheduled services and activities. For specific information,
please contact the Engineering Division at (619) 691-5021 or
Telecommw"ications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) at (619) 585-5647.
276 FOURTH AV~NI1;::/r.1-411! lJ \l1~T^ r- ^ t ICr"IOldllo "'......~... ""..~..., '"''"'.. ~__.
./
..
~)(rtfbl T C
RESOLUTION NO. / 'iJ7L-jO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA MAKING FINDINGS AT PUBLIC HEARING
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 27 OF THE "IMPROVEMENT ACT
OF 1911" TO FORM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 97-01, ON
OXFORD STREET BETWEEN FOURTH AVENUE AND FIFTH
AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution of
Intention No. 18664 ordering the installation of street
improvements on Oxford Street from Fourth Avenue to Fifth Avenue
pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911; and
WHEREAS, all owners of property within the proposed
assessment district were mailed notice of the public hearings and
the estimated assessment to their property; and -
WHEREAS, the Resolution of Intention was published twice
in the Star News on Saturday, June 28, 1997 and Saturday, July 12,
1997 with the first publication being at least ten days prior to
the public hearing date; and
WHEREAS, each property owner wi thin the proposed district
was notified on May 13, 1997 to construct the improvements abutting
their property within sixty (60) days after notice is given.
I
,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Findinqs:
follows:
The City Council does hereby find as
A. The city Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, has instituted proceedings
pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 27 of
the "Improvement Act of 1911 being Division 7
of the 'Streets and Highway Code of the State
of California for the construction of certain
authorized improvements in a special
assessment district known and designated as
Assessment District No. 97-01 (AD No. 97-01).
B. Notice has been given in the manner and form
as required by law and specifically Article
II, Part 3, of Division 7 of the Streets and
Highway Code, and a Certificate of Compliance
is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
C.
A public hearing has been held and
testimony and evidence heard relating to
work of improvement as proposed for
Assessment District, and the legislative
is desirous at-this time to proceed.
all
the
the
body
1
, ,
~
/
section 2.
Section 3.
Section 4.
Section 5.
Section 6.
Presented by
That all protests of every nature are hereby
overruled and denied.
The Superintendent of Streets is hereby directed to
proceed and cause the construction of the works and
improvements in said Assessment District if said
construction is not commenced wi thin sixty (60)
days after notice is given to the property owner
(by 7/12/97) to cause the work to be done.
The works of the improvement shall be done and
carried through and financed pursuant to the
provisions of Chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act of
1911" and for all particulars as to these
proceedings, reference is made to the Resolution
ordering the installation of the public
improvements and instructing the Superintendent of
Streets to give notice.
The works of improvement and project shall be
financed pursuant to the provisions of said Chapter
27, and the city shall collect each assessment
remaining unpaid following the expiration of a 30
day cash collection period. Said balance shall be
payable over a period of 10 years at an interest
rate of 7% per annum. The city shall collect the
unpaid balance of any assessment on the district
properties semi-annually in conjunction with the
collection of city taxes, excepting those
properties for which. a payment deferral has been
approved. The collection of assessments on these
properties shall be in accordance with the payment
schedule stipulated in their deferral agreement.
The city has complied with the requirement of
Proposition 218, the "Right To Vote On Taxes Act",
by mailing out ballots to all property owners
subject to an increase in their property taxes and
has counted the ballots returned and found that
based on financial obligation, that 88.52% of the
property owner's share, voted in favor of forming
the assessment district.
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c: \ rs\ad9701 . fin
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
2
j l
, /t/-/
,',
COu1\CIL AGE:\DA STATDIE:\T
Item / if'
Meeting Date 7/22/97
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing on the Resolution of Intention to form Assessment District
97-01, on Oxford Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue, pursuant
to the Improvement Act of 1911 ,
Resolution ) '577 0 Making findings at public hearing
pursuant to chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act of 1911 "
Director of Public Work.s~ V
City Manager
(4/5th5 Vote: Yes_No-X)
SlJ'BMITTED BY:
REVIE'\VED BY:
On May 13, 1997, Council adopted Resolution No, 18663 approving the boundary map for AD97-
01. At the same meeting, Council also approved Resolution of Intention No, 18664 (see Exbibit A)
ordering the installation of street improvements on Oxford Street ITom Fourth Avenue to Fifth
Avenue pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (also knOWJ12S the 1911 Block Act) and setting
the public hearings for July 15 and 22,1997, The public hearings are being held to receive public
testimony on the proposed district improvements, The first public hearing was held on July 15. One
property owner spoke in favor of the 2Ssessment district.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council:
1). Hold the public hearing;
2). Receive testimony;
3), Close the public hearing;
4). Approve the resolution making fIndings at public hearing pursuant to Chapter 27 of the
"Improvement Act of 1911 ".
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable,
DISCUSSION:
On April 22, 1997 by Resolution '# 18645, Council accepted a petition, for the formation of an
assessment district (1911 Block Act) for the construction of street improvements, such as curb, gutter
sidewalk and pavement on Oxford Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue, The Act is a
financirrg mec;,~nism which authorizes local agencies to impose assessments 'on benefitted propeny
.
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date iin/9i
.
to finance the construction of public infrastructure facilities. The public improvements proposed to
be financed through Assessment District (AD) 97-01 include widening the existing street to Class
II Collector standards of 40 feet with widening to 52 feet near the intersections of Fourth A venue
and Fifth Avenue, pedestrian ramps, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, traffic signal
modifications, roadway striping and miscellaneous appurtenant structures. Completion of the
improvements is projected for the end of the first quarter of 1998.
Staff has estim2.ted the total project costs at $496,858 with the construction costs at $361,858.
Approximately S31,858 of the estimated $361,858 cost of construction is to be reimbursed from the
property owners upon successful fo=ation of the assessment district. This project is part of the
overall sidewalk safety program, which provides for the construction of sidewalk facilities in the
Montgomery aI"..a.. k;, originally budgeted in the FY96/97 Capital Improvement Program (CIP "#
0735-10-S11.-229), the City proposed to build asphalt concrete sidewalks on the north side of
Oxford Street only, to provide a safe walkway to the children in the area. Funds for this project were
obtained from the Transportation Development Act (IDA) through the San Diego k;,sociation of
Governments (SANDAG). However, since IDA funds will pay only for the sidewalk and not
related items such as curb and gutter, additional City gas tax funding was included. The COnstruction
of the missing street improvements is included in the Capital Improvement Program (ClP) for Fiscal
Year 1997/1998.
- All owners of property within the proposed assessment district (see Exhibit B) were mailed notice
of the two public hearings and the estimated assessment to their properties. The boundary map of
AD97-01 ,vas filed in the County Recorder's Office on Tuesday May 13th, 1997. Also, as required
by the Act, the Resolution of Intention was published twice in the STAR NEWS newspaper on
Saturday June 28th and on Saturday July 12, 1997, with the first publication being at least ten (10)
days prior to the Public Hearing date.
In compliance "'1th the Act, each property owner within the proposed district was also notified to
construct the improvements fronting/abutting their property. The notice also indicated that if
construction is not co=enced v.1thin SD.:ty (60) days after the notice is given, the City shall proceed
with the construction of the impro~ements and the cost of said construction shall then be assessed
as a lien on the property. k;, ofJune 27th, 1997, none of the property owners has applied for a
construction permit to irtstall the improvements. If the assessment is not paid upon confirmation,
the City shall collect the unpaid balance of any assessment semiannually in conjunction with the
conection of City taxes. In accordance with the Resolution of Intention, said balance shan be paid
over a period of ten (10) years at an interest rate of 7% per annum. The assessments are based on
the amount of frontage on Oxford Street. The assessments range from $372 to $2.793, with 18 of
- -.
the 30 assessments at less than $1,000 (see Exhibit C). There are an additional four pro~erties which
have frontage on Oxford Street, but were not included as part of this assessment district since the
street improvements have already been constructed along their frontage (see Exhibit B). Three of
these property ov.llers had submitted a ballot in favor of forming the district while the other property
-'
Page 3, Item_
.\feeting Date ;/22/9;
never returned their ballot. The 3 ballots with zero assessment amount were not considered in the
majority requirement, since they have no financial obligation.
.till property owners were invited by mail to attend a meeting on Thursday January 30, 1997 at which
details of the project were discussed. The major issues discussed were: I) assessment district
pro=dings; 2) project schedules; 3) project cost estimates and property owner's share of costs; 4)
payment schedules; 5) financing alternatives 6) project design; and 7) a question & answer session.
At this meeting, staff presented the idea of e},:panding the project to include the installation of
concrete sidewalks on both sides of the street instead of sidewalk improvements on the north side
only. The reason for this was that due to the grading required for the work along the north side, the
south side would also require grading to acco=odate "the proposed ultimate street centerline grade.
The project extension to the south side could be accomplished provided the property owners would
participate in the fo=ation of a special assessment district, whereby the difference in cost ITom
asphalt to concrete sidewalks would be paid by all area property owners on both sides of the street.
Subsequent to the meeting, staff was also able to resolve those issues which were brought to their
attention. Specifically, those issues centered on the methods of payment, project schedUle and limits
of work.
At the July 15, 1997 public hearing, one property owner made a presentation. Although this
property owner is not opposed to the formation of the assessment district, he raised several traffic
concerns, including speed bumps, which staff is currently reviewing.
In order to comply with the requirements of Proposition 218, the "Right To Vote on Taxes Act",
which was passed by a majority of the state voters in a generally held election of November 5, 1996,
staffhad to prepare ballots. Proposition 218 requires that a ballot be mailed to all property owners
'which may be subject to an increase in their property taxes. V,lhen the ballots are returned, the
majority of the votes for or against, based on financial obligation, determines whether or not this
district is fo=ed. The results of the voting ballot returns as of June 18, 1997 show the following:
31 ballots of 34 returned with 29 ballots in favor ($28,201) and 2 ballots against ($2,124) the
formation of an assessment district. Based on the property owner's total financial obligation of
$31,858, the ballots returned in favor represent 88.52% of the property owner's financial obligation.
.!>..s of June 18, 1997, the other 3 property owners had not yet responded with their ballots, but they
do have until the close of the second public hearing date of July 22, 1997 to cast their vote (see
attached ballot summary Exhibit D). Even if these 3 property owners submit their ballots against
the formation of this district, their sum financial obligation will not be enough to reverse the majority
vote submitted. The property owners which have already submitted their ballots, also have until the
closure of the second public hearing to change their vote, if desired.
Of the 34 properties with ITontage on the 400 block of Oxford Street, four (4) of the properties do
not have any assessment estimate, since along the frontage of their property all of the street
improvements such as curb, gutter, sidewalk and ultimate pavement width are in place. StaJ.'f
-~
.
Page 4, Item_
.\1eering Date 7/22/97
therefore excluded these propercies from the district (''Not A Part"), as shown on the boundary map
(see Exhibit B), and based on financial obligation, their ballot does not impact the formation of the
district.
Estimated Assessments
The estimated project cost is $496,858. The City will finance the construction of the improvements
estimated at $361,858 and will be reimbursed by the property O\'mer's their share of the cost of the
improvements which are estimated at $31,858. The City ",ill collect these funds through the
formation of AD97-01 and the collection of installments with their property taxes. In addition,
design., inspection, district formation costs and contingencies estimated at $135,000, will not be
reimbursed and will be absorbed by the City in accordance with Council Policy #505-01 (Exhibit
E).
As mentioned above, the proposed total assessment amount is $31,858. The estimated amounts to
be assessed to each of the parcels in the district is presented in Exhibit C. In order tb address the
Council's and property owner's concerns over financial hardship in meeting the payment obligations,
staff has included an attachment (Exhibit F), which describes alternative payment methods that
.~'" Council has adopted for other assessment districts. If there is a property owner which has financial
difficulties, they must have Council approval in order to utilize any of the reduced payment
alternatives (Alternatives 2 & 3).
Resolutions
Tonight's action will continue the proceedings for the formation of AD 97-01 pursuant to the "1911
Block Act". By approving the proposed resolution Council ",ill make the following findings:
1. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, has instituted proceedings
pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act of 1911 being Division
7 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California for the construction of certain
authorized improvements in a special assessment district known and designated as
Assessment District No. 97-01 (AD No.97-01);
2. Notice h2s been given in the manner and form as required by law and specificaI1y
Article II, Part 3, of Division 7 of the Streets and Highways Code, and a Certificate of
Compliance is on file in the office of the City Clerk;
3. The City has complied with the requirement of Proposition 218, the "Right. To Vote On
Taxes Act", by mailing out ballots to all property owners subject to an increase in their
property taxes and has counted the ballots returned and found that based on fmancial
~.
/<,~
-.-" "-~
Page 5, Item_
;\1eeting Date 7/22/97
obligation, that 88.52% of the property owner's share, voted in favor of forming the
assessment district;
4. A public hearing has been held and all testimony and evidence heard relating to the
work of the improvement as proposed for the Assessment District if said construction is not
co=enced within sixty (60) days after notice is given to the property owner (by 7/12/97)
cause the work to be done;
). All protests of every nature are hereby overruled and denied;
6. The Superintendent of Streets is hereby directed to proceed and cause the construction
of the works and improvement in said Assessment District if said construction is not
co=enced within sixty (60) days after notice is given to the property owner (by 7/12/97)
cause the work to be done;
7. The works of the improvement shall be done and carried through and finan~ed pursuant
to the provisions of Chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act of 1911" and for all particulars as
to these proceedings, reference is made to the Resolution ordering the instaJlation of the
public improvements and instructing the Superintendent of Streets to give notice;
8. The works of improvement and project shall be financed pursuant to the provisions of
said Chapter 27, and the City shall collect each assessment remaining unpaid following the
expiration of a 30 day cash collection period. Said balance shall be payable over a period
of I 0 years at an interest rate of 7% per annum. The City shall collect the unpaid balance of
any assessment on the district properties semi-annually in conjunction with the collection of
City taxes, excepting those properties for which a payment deferral has been approved. The
collection of assessments on these properties shall be in accordance with the payment
schedule stipulated in their deferral agreement.
Future Actions
Bid results and award of the construction contract would be submitted to Council by September
1997. This ite:w. will include a public hearing where the property owners can review their
assessments based on bids and, if they so desire, request Council to stop the district proceedings.
Pursuant to the "191 I Block Act", conf=ation of the assessments will be brought before Council
on or about July 1998, after the improvements are constructed. The construction is anticipated to
be completed by late March, 1998.
.
All property ov,-ne:s within this proposed assessment district of 30 parcels have been sent a copy of
tonight's City Council agenda statement and attachments.
Page 6, Item_
!>leeting Date 7/22/97
.
FISCAL IMPACT: This project was originalJy approved in the FY96/97 budget as crr project
S1l229 - Oxford A venue Sidewalk Safety between F ourtb Avenue and Fifth A venue. The financing
for this project (project total of $500,000) is being funded through Transportation Development
(TDA) funds ($14 I ,500) and Gas Tax funds ($358,500). Assessment district proceedings will aJ]ow
for the property owners within this district to participate in contributing $31,858 towards the costs
of the construction, preliminarily estimated at $361,858. The estimated property owner's share will
be reimbursed with 7% interest over a period of 1 0 years.
Exhibits:
A - Resolutions # 18663 & 18664
B - Boundary Map
C - Estimated Assessments
D - Ballot Snmm."Y
E - Council Policy # 505-01
F - Description of Payment Alternatives
.
.
FD..E Oi2S-JO-AD97-OIJwy 16, ]997 (J:<2pm)
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\AG2'Ic'DA \AD971 PH1..FXR
--"(
F/r.-?___
e::::;<.t}\ 8lT C
COU~CILAGE^~ASTATEMENT
"
Item /,;-
Meeting Date 711 5/97
. ....-.--'
. Public Hearing on the ResolutiOJi of ID.tention to form Assessment District
97-01, on Oxford Street betw= Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue, pursuant
to the Improvement Act 'of 1911.
SUBMlll.!ill BY: Director of Public Wo;ks ~
ITEM TITLE:
REVIE~DBY:. ~ity~er: .,':." ' (4~thSVote: Yes_NoX)
- - . "
. On May 13, 1997, Courici1adopted :Resolirti'6tN6.' i 8663-'~p~oving the boundary map for AD97-
. "_' ~ - - . '" '"' .-" .._ . ...., .. '_~' .; .._ - ..,.. h. _." '. ' _"
. - OF~t~e'~,~:)riee~~,~~~ ~'iproy~~1~on.of~lltionN:o.18664 (see Exhibit A)
, . - 6rdeniig the.inStallation of street nnprovements on OXford Street :from Fourth Avenue to Fifth
Avenue pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (also kIlown as the 1911 Block Act) and setting
the public hearings for July 15 and 22, 1997. The public hearings are being held to receive public
testiIJiDnYOIl'the proposed diSiriciimprovements. '. -,' , -,
"'T' .', "'. .-
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that 'the CDuncil:
- ~ 1).~~1dthepu~liche;;~;'g;-~~~-- ',~,-~ ,-- :--.'___''.'
'., ?, 2): R'eCciVe testimonY; :..~ ~ -.: _' ,--
'" : 3). Close the public healing;'- ' . .,
c:- 4): Notify the public 'that'a seCOnd publichmg will be held on July 22, 1997 at 6:00 P ,M.
o '. __ _... ~.
".,-" __ ..f, _ "'____"_ ~.
.. '
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMME1\'DATION: Not applicable.
--
DISCUSSION:
On April 22, 1997 by ResDlutiDn # 18645, CDuncil accepted a petitiDn, for the formatiDn of an
- assessment dis1rict (1911 BlockAct) for the constructiDn Df street improvements, such as curb, gutter
sidewalk imd pavement Dn OxfDrd Street between FDurth Avenue and Fifth Avenue. The Act is a
financing mechani<:m which authoriZes local agencies to impDse assessments Dn benefitted property
to finance the constructiDn Df public infrastructure facilities. The public iIDprovements propDsed tD
be constructed include widening the existing street tD Class IT Collector standards of 40 feet with
widening tD 52 feet near the intersectiDns Df Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue, pedestrian ramps,
curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, traffic signal mDdificatiDns, roadway striping and
miscellaneDus appurtenant structures. Completion Dfthe imprDvements is projected fDr the end of
the fust quarter of 1998. Assessment District 97-01 will pay fDr a pDrtion of the sidewalk costs.
Staff has estimated the tDtal project costs at $496,858 with the cDnstructiDn CDsts at $361,858.
Approximately $31,858 of the estimated $361,858 CDst Df constructiDn is tD be reimbursed llom the
prDperty owners upDn successful fDrmatiDn Df the assessment district This project is part of the
overall sidewalk safety program, which provides for the constructiDn Df missing sidewalk facilities.
!.
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 7/15/97
A5 originally budgeted in the FY96/97 Capital Improvement Program (Cll' # 0735-1 O-STL-229),
the City proposed to build asphalt con=te sidewalks on the north side of Oxford Street only. Funds
for this project were obtained from the Transportation Development Act (1DA) through the San
Diego Association of GovemIDents (SANDAG). However, since IDA funds will pay only for the
sidewa1k: and not related ite:ins such as curb and gutter,' additional City gas tID:: funding was required
and included. The construction of the missing stieet improvements is included in the Capital
Improvement Program (Cll') for Fiscal Year 1997/1998.
. -
All owners of property within the proposed assessment district (see Exhibit B) were mailed notice
of the two public hC:arlngs and the estim~ted assessment to their properties. The boundary map of
AD97-01 was:filed in the County Recorder's Office. on T~ May 13th, 1997. Also, as required
. by the Act,'1hC R.es~liition'of~~tio.~:~p~Ji~hed'iWice mthe STAR NEWS neWspaper on
'. S~ Jmie 28th ~~:On ~~yjuly: 1~ '19,~7, With. the fustpubliCarlon bei.Di at least ten (10)
days pnor to the I>ublic Heanng date. . . . .. .
In compliance with the ACt, each property owner.:within the proposed district was also notified to
construct the improvements :fronting/abutting their property. The notice also' indicated that if
construction is not co=enced wit~i.". ~ (60) days after the notice is given, the City shall proceed
with the construction of the improvementS' and the cost of said cOnstruction shall then De assessed
as a lien on the property. ..As ofJune 16th, 1997, none of the PJ:Opert:Y owners. has applied for a
COnstruction permit to install the improvements. If the assessment is not paid Upon confiTTT1~1ion,
the City shall collect. th~ unpaid balance of any assessment Semiannually in conjunction with the
collection of City tID::es. In accordance With the Resolution of Intention, said balance shall be paid
over a period of ten (10) years at an interest rate of 7% per annum. The assessments are based on
the amount of:&ontage on Oxford Street The assessments range :from $372 to $2,793, with 18 of
the 30 assessments at less than $1,000 (see Exhibit C). There are an additional four properties which
have :frontage on Oxford Street, but were not included as part of this assessment district since the
street improvements have aIready been constructed along their :&ontage (see Exhibit B). Three of
these propert)r ownerS had submitted a ballot in favor of forming the district while the other property
never returned their ballot:' The 3' ballots .with ~ro assessment amount were not considered in the
majority requirement, since they have no financial obligation.
All property owners were invited by mail to attend a meeting on Thursday, January 30, 1997 at
which details of the proposed project were discussed.. Thirteen of the 34 property owners attended
this meeting. The major issues discussed were: 1) description of the budgeted project and options
for expansion of the project to include COnstruction of improvements on both sides of the street
through use of assessment district proceedings; 2) project schedules; 3) project cost estimates and
property owner's share of costs; 4) payment schedules; 5) financing alternatives; 6) project design;
and 7) a question & answer session. At this meeting, staff discussed the IDA project to construct
. pedestrian facilities on the north side of the' street and presented the idea of expanding the project
to include the installation of con=te sidewalks on both sides of the street The reason for this was
."
(; / )
-, ./
Page 3, Item_
.'>1eeting Date ilJ 5/97
that due to the grailing required for the work along the north side, the south side would also require
grading to a=mmodate the proposed ultimate street =terline grade. The project extension to the
south side could be acComplished provided the propertY' oWners would participate in the formation
of a special assessment district, whereby the difference in cost :trom asphalt to concrete sidewalks
would be paid by all area property owners on both sides of the street.' Subsequent to the meeting,
staffwas also able to resolve those issues which were brought to their attention. Specifically, those
issues centered on the methods of payment, project schedule and limits of work.
;:.-
In order to comply with the requirements of Proposition 218, the "RighrTo';Vote'On Taxes Act",
which Was passed by amajorltyofthe State vo!= ina geneIany held el~tion ofNovember 5,1996,
staffhad to l'l"~" ballots.;:J'roposition 218 reqmresiliat. a banot be mailed to allproperty owners
which may be subject to iui inCrease'in their'propertY taXes: When the ballots are returned, the
. . - . ,-' ~. ~ . ..-r...:" - _~. ..~_-. :.._._._ _ ';__ .__,.. _,.... .._
majonty 'of the votes for or against, based' on fiDancial obligation, determmes whether or not this
district is formed. The results of the voting ballot returns as of June 18, 1997 show the following:
31 ballots of 34 returned with 29 ballots in favor ($28,201) and 2ballots against ($2,124) the
fonnation:of an aSsessment district.:' Based on the property oWners 'total financial obligation of
$31,858, the ballots returned in favorrepresent 88.52% of the property owner's financial obligation.
As of June 18, 1997, the other 3 property owners had not yet responded with their ballots, but they
'do have until the close of the secOnd'public hi:aring date'ofJuly 22, 1997. to cast therr vote (see
attachedballots,I;m..,~ry &1n'bit D). j Even if these 3 propertY oWners 'submit their ballots against
1he formation 'of this district, their sum financial obligation will not be enough to reverse the majority
vote submitted:. The propcity owners which have already submitted their ballots, also have until the
closure of the second public hearing to change their vote, if desired.
..
Of the 34 properties with :trontage on the 400 block of Oxford Street, four (4) of the properties do
not have any assessment estimate, since along the :trontage of their property all of the street
improvements such as curb, gutter, sidewalk and ultimate pavement width are in place. Staff
th..-refore excluded these properties :trom the district ("Not A Part"), as shown on the boundary map
(see Exhibit B), and based on financial obligation, their ballot does not impact the formation of the
district.
Estimated Assessments
The estimated project cost is $496,858. The City will finance the construction of the improvements
estim~t,..d at $361,858 and will be reimbursed by the property owner's their share of the cost of the
improvements which are estimated at $31,858. The City will collect these funds through the
formation of AD97 -Oland the collection of installments with their property taxes. In addition,
design, inspection, district formation costs and contingencies estimated at $135,000, will not be
reimbursed and will be absorbed by the City in accordance with Council Policy #505-01 (Exhibit
E).
, '
~/'.
Page 4, Item_
Meeting Date 7/1 5/97
As mentionoo above, the proposed total assessment amount is $31,858. The estimated amounts to
be assessed to each of the parCels in the district is presented in Exhibit C. In order to address the
cOuncil's and property owners Concerns over financial hardship in meeting the payment obligations,
staff has included an attachment (Exhibit F), which describes alternative payment methods that
Council has adopted for other assessment districts. If there is a property owner which has financial
difficulties, they must have Council approval in order to utilize any of the reduced payment
alternatives (Alternatives 2 & 3).
Future Actions .." .'
The second public hearing is schoouloo for July 22, 1997 at 6:00 P.M At that time, staff will request
Council aPProval of resolutions II1aIdng cCrtaiii'find;ni~ on the district proceedings and directing the
Superintendent of streets' to pro~d ~th 't1i{ eonSiruction of the improvements. Bid results and
award of the coDstIUction contract Win be subriritted to Council this September.
-. - '7:,-,:1.~~:-::' d':; "-"~h, . _ .;:..' _'. ..___ __. _0, . .'
.'
Pursuant to the 1911 Block Act, the actual formation of the district and confirmation of the
as""""'Dents wilIbe brought ~fore Council after the improvements is Completed. The construction
is anticipated to be cOmpleted by late March, 1998.
All property ~wnerS ~thin this proposed assessment district oBO parcels have been sent a copy of
tonight's City council agenda staienie'iit and'iittachments.
. '. . r ~ '.";.:} _:" '. -..__ ."':'. .~ .. . ",'., .' .." __'. ...... .
FISCAL IMPACT: This project was originalIy approved in the FY96197 budget as CIP project
STI..229 - OxfordAvenue Sidewalk Safety between Fourth A venue and Fifth Avenue. The financing
for this project (project total of $500,000) is being funded through Transportation Development
(IDA) funds ($141,500) and Gas Tax funds ($358,500). Assessment district proceedings will allow
for the property owners within this district to participate in contributing $31,858 towards the costs
of the construction, preJirn;n~riIy estimated at $361,858. The estimated property owner's share will
be reimbursed vvith 7% interest over a period of 1 0 years.
=
Exhibits:
A ' Resolutions #. 18663 & 18664
B ' Boundary Map
C ' Estimatoo Assessments
D ,Ballot S1!mm~ry .
E, Council Policy # 505,01
F - Description of Payment Alternatives
~ 072S-1 (>.AD97-01
H:\HOMElENG!NEERIAGENDA 1AD971PHI.JXR
July E, 1997 (4:47pm)
" /1'-;
.-/ '
EXHI31T A
RESOLUTION NO. i 3663
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING THFBOUNDARY."MAPSHOWING THE
PROPOSED BOUNDARIES FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 97-01
OF;'~'PROPERTIES" TO:'rcBE".':ASSESSED" "FOR :.J:. STREET
IMPROVEMENTS ON THE 40~, S,:L,9.CK OF OXFO~.D S-r:REET
WHEREAS, on April 22, 1997 by Resolution 1 B645~ Coun'cir -a"ccepted a petition for
the formation of an assessment district (1911 Block Act) for the construction of street
improvements, such as curb, guner, sidewalk and pavement on Oxford Street between Fourth
Avenue and Fihh Avenue; and
WHEREAS;, th~.. City Environmental Review Coordinator studies the potential
environmentaf-imPact5'assoi::iated with the implementation of the project and has determined
this project is catefjoric""ijl1y exempt from the requirement for an Environmental Impact Report;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California. has been presented
and hes received a map showing the general nature, location, and extent of the proposed
improvement work, and also designating and describing the boundaries of the area proposed
to be assessed in the assessment district under the provisions and authority of the
"Improvement Act of 1911 ., of the Streets and Highway Code of the State of California; said
assessment district designated as Assessment District 97-01 (hereinaher referred to as the
Assessment District). .'
~
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2. That the map of the Assessment District showing' the general nature,
locatio:1, and extent of the proposed public improvements and also showing the boundaries
of the proposed Assessmemt District and lar.lds and "propefty to be assessed to pay the costs
ande);jjenses 'of. the 'proposed improvements'-design211:ed" as .PROPOSED BOUNDARIES
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 9'7-01 1911" ACT-IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT" is hereby submined,
and the same is hereby approved and adopted. .
SECTION 3. That the original map of proposed boundaries of the proposed
Assessment District and one copy thereof is to be filed in the office of the City Engineer.
SECTION 4.". A Certificate shall.be' endorsed on the original and on at leest one copy
of the map' of the ASsessment District;" evidencing the date and adoption of this Resolution,
and within fiheen'i15J days aher the"adoption of the Resolution fixing the dates, times, and
place of hearings on the formation Dr extent said Assessment District, a copy of said map
shall be filed with the correct endorsements thereon with the County recorder, all in the
manner and form provided for in Section 3111 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State
of California.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~ / ;1;;4-
Jo~n P. Lippin '
Public Works Director
A'I
. ..Lc~~.
M. Kaheny
ty Anorney r:. '13
/
ResoJ'.J:i:>:l i 3563
Page 2
PASSED,. A.pPROVED, and AD9F:'.T~D by lhe City: Council. qf.lhe City of Chula Vista,
California, lhis-;~-3th day of May, 1997,:by. lhe.follow.ing vote:': ;.':",,, ,,'
- - - . . .... . ...... _. .'" -,. . .
:- :.:. :-:: ... . :r...~-'..' '.::. .'.;-;.:.,::, C". . .:..::. ~ '. . :.-: .:' .':- -~=.;:' ....::..:... :
AYES: '.';::',,:, Coun~ilmembers:=.;:';'r.1oot; Padjfl~" Ri':;do[l-e~'a'nd: Horton
. -.. - ... - - - -'- - -. . . ... . -.-.. - .... . .-
-=-~=.:=--~ .. .::.. :.....~ :j.....; .~.-.; -~.
NA YES: . -. Coun'cilmembers': ' '. None
- ....-. ~.:. ::'-:/: ...~., --:-.~. ."
,ABSENT: .. Counc.ilmef1!be!~:' ".~alas ~
..
,-- -- -.
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
.":". ..... . -.
, -.
,.~
.-
'.' .
" .
.. ..
.":
, -
. ..
.. .1' .
"
. ..-
. :;---.; ~
....
.
~TTE~T:
.- .---
-.. .'..
. - '..
. :.. ~: .
, ,
.
~v--' /) ~..
, ',',.V -':"';
Beverly . Amhelel, City Clerk~" .
.., ..'
.... .......:
-
,
. ..
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,), ;,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
~ITY,OF CHULA VJS,TA.."".J
"'7::~. .:.,.-;... . ..: .-: -.:<; . :.'.- :'.~. .:":':: .. -: ;. .;: _ ..c. :. ~ .: ~t. ~'.:: '..... .
1"Beverly A. Authelet, City, Clerk of the City..of Cbula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the )oregoing, ResoIUtio~:No. ,18663' was duly"pa'ssed;approved,' and adopted by the Crry
Council at a regular'meeting 'of the Chula ,Vista City Council helil'ciri the 13th day of May,
.. 1997...'. " "", :' ... , . -. -,
:~, -,......
Executed this 13th day of May, .1997. .
. , - .... ... .. . .. .
, '
"<
- ,_, :'
. .. ....~ ..,.
'. , ": - '.,",:'
.... . -- .
";~~~d'j; .~
,,:,' Beverly A. .f.uthelet, ~ity Clerk ..
,~
... -
. :: I ;~. .
. ..
'. ,..--. ..
"
,.
-. ,.
..
'"
: .....- ..
, -.
, ,
!:'r..7~ '..
..
. ,. '..:, .:~,... : ...
"
'"
..,
..,
/,1 -c
.,
./1' ,
" ~
~ ,
,
:::XHISIT
A
R~SOLUIION r-JO. i 8654
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ORDERING INSTALLATION OF IMPROVEMENTS ON
OXFORD STREET BETWEEN FOURTH A VENUE AND FIFTH
AVENUE, ORDERING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS TO
. GIVE NOTICE AND ORDER CONSTRUCTION AND SETTING
PUBLIC HEARINGS ON RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO FORM
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 97-01 PURSUANTTOTHE BLOCK ACT
OF 1911
WHEREAS, the City Council of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, is desirous
to institute proceedings pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act
of 1911., of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California for construction of
certain authorized imprqvements.in an assessment district known and designated as
AssessmentDistrict 97~01 1911 BLOCK ACT affeCting properties fronting/abutting on Oxford
Street between Fourth and Fihh Avenue (hereinaher known and designated as the
. Assessment District") and
WHEREAS, Sections 5875 and 5876 of said Streets and Highway Code authorize the
legislative body, upon its own motion, to order the installation of authorized improvements
in front of or abutting properties with the costs thereon to be assessed as set forth under the
provision of said Chapter 27. .
~
WHEREAS, Section 5131 requires a resolution of intention to form an assessment
district to perform such work and Section 5132 requires public hearings to hear objections by
those affected by the district formati on. .
NOW, THEREroRE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
. .
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are true and correct.
"
SECTION 2. That the public interest and convenience requires, and this legislative
body hereby orders the construction and installation of certain street improvements such 2S
curb, guner, sidewalk and pavement on Oxford Street between Fourth and Fihh Avenue and
Emerson Street in what is. known as the Assessment District.
SECTION 3. All of the above mentioned works of improvement shall be generally
constructed at the grades, along the lines, between the points, and at the places and in the
manner as shown on the plans for said work designated by the number and the name of the
Assess;nent District, which said plans are hereby approved and adopted. For all particulars
as to the alignment of the works and a fulf and detailed description, reference is hereby made
to said plans and specifications as on file in the Office of the City Engineer.
SECTION 4. That the works of improvements, in the opinion of this legislative body,
will benefit the abutting and fronting properties within said block, and this legislative body
hereby makes the expenses'of said improvement chargeable upon the property or properties
within the boundaries of the Assessment District, which District is declared to be the area and.
abutting properties benefitting by the work and improvements for a general description of the
Assess;nent District and area of benefit, reference is made to a map of said district previously
A -.::, . -
Reso!u~i:):l i 3554
Page 2
1-
approved and said map identified by number of this Assessment District, and said map shall
be kept on file with the transcript of tnese proceedings and open to public inspection.
SECTION 5.. pursuant to the provisions of Section 5875 of the provisi.ons of Chapter
27 of the "Improvement Act of 1911", it is hereby 'declared to be the responsibility of the
owners of the lots or" portions of lots fronting/abutting on Oxford Street between Fourth and
Fifth Avenue where this legislative body, pursuant to said Section, by its own motion, orders
the installation of the improvements, and the property owners shall have the duty and
responsibility of constructing or causing the construction of said improvements
fronting\abutting their properties to commence within sixty (60) days upon flotice so.to do by
the Superintendent of Streets. If the work is not commenced by the property owners within
said period, the Superintendent of Streets shall proceed to cause said work to be completed.
SECTION 6. That all ofthe work and improvements herein proposed shall be done and
carried through and financed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 27 of the' "Improvement
Act of 1911". of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California., For all particulars,
reference is made to said" Act", and the provisions contained therein.
~
SECTION 7. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT ON TUESDAY, THE 15TH AND 22ND
OF JULY 1997. AT THE HOUR OF 6:00 P.M., IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL, BEING THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING. 276
FOURTH AVENUE, CHULA VIST~. CA.. ANY AND ALL PERSONS HAVING ANY OBJECTIONS
TO THE PROPOSED WORK OR IMPROVEMENTS OR THE PROCEDURE ESTABLISHED HEREIN
SHOULD APPEAR AND SHOW CAUSE WHY SAID WORK SHOULD NOT BE CARRIED OUT
IN ACCORDANCE WiTH THIS RESOLUTION.
SECTION 8. If the work is done by the City. and if the assessment cost is not paid
upon confirmation of the assessment, the City shall collect payment of the assessments,
annual installments, and interest in accordance with the. provisions of Section 5895 of
Chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act of 1 911 ", of the' Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California. The number of annual installments shall be 10 and the interest rate shall
""be 7 percent per annum.
SECTION 9. The Superintendent"of Streets is hereby directed to notify the owner or
person in possession of the properties fronting/abutting that portion of the street in the block
where work is to be constructed and" directing them to construct or cause to be constructed
the improvements within sixty (60) days after notice is given, and to diligently and without
interruption prosecute to completion said work.
A. Notice shall be given by mailing a letter. postage prepaid. to the property
owners at their last known address as the same appears on the last equalized
assessment roll used by the City for tax collection, or to the name and address
of the person owning such property as shown on the records of the City Clerk.
B. The City Clerk shall cause a. copy of the proposed boundary map to be filed in
the Office of the County Recorder within fifteen (15) days after the adoption
of this Resolution setting dates, time and place for the public hearings.
;4- </
:-::.::
_.~
:-'.€::S::>IU:lon j 255L
?age ~
C. The City Clerk shall cause the Resolution of Intention to be published tvvice,
with the first publicatiDn Dccurring at least ten (iD) days priDr to the secDnd
public hearing.
SECTION 10. . The: estimated CDst tD the City Df the wDrks Df imprDvement as
propDsed under these proceedings, is estimated to be $496,858.00.
SECTION 11. For any and all information relative to these proceedings, including the
informatiDn relating to the protest procedure, your attention is directed to the person
designated below:
Frank Rivera, Civil Engineer
City of Chula Vista
P.O.Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Telephone: (619) 691-5266
.
Presented by
ApprDved as tD fDrm by
I
/--'<- /c::-
/~n M. Kaheny .'
/ity Attorney
,
ohn P. Lippi
ublic Works Dire-;;tor
A-c;-
.<
-"
"--.-J
/
Reso!U'lj:::>:l j 3564
?age 4
.-
PASSED, APPiiOVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 13th day of May, 1997; by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
Moot, Padilla, Rindone, and Horton
NA YES:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Salas
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers:
None
ATTEST:
~~() ~iZ
Beverly, A. Authelet, City Clerk
~
.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
..1, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista. California. do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 18664 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 13th day of May,
1997.
Executed this 13th day of May, 1997.
Beverly A Authelet, City Clerk
A-(p
.' ,
~
o
I
l'-
~
----.---
EXHI31T
I
I
I
__u_______.j
\
'-.-----
JJiflJA-jrHJ1!.[)Od
~'7I::>.ro,
~ If 'h...
~~
r--<::
Uz
-r:::;
~~
C/)~ ~~
wU-"-'
cr:~ 0:
<(~r--E
~~zU)
:::>l:I:2w
o~~
co~ W
o ~
b5 ~
o~Q..
O-Z::E
~~-~
0- =s r-- ~
u:l. ~ ~
u:l G
~~
~~~
u:l 0') 8
u:l~
<
o
c..:>
:=:1
-
Q
Z
<::
U)
""
o
::-
E-<
z
~
o
u
E--4
~
~
~
E--4
UJ
Q
~
o
~
o
~
u
o
~
c:o
o
o
~
h,.~..I",,"J
1_ I'. "].,"'1'
@""1'"
.. - I" '-. "."
- ' ',{ ,'j
t",J" "
",v:',j @ I
~@G~:t:~~ : I
!; , " Ii. ',: 'CI!
"'"1,', I -
',' '," U
,'.t..., A.
'..J " 'i 'OJ ~
", i '.f----,-.--
I:;;; tRI ~~'::k::'i @;~
'z\::::.l ... ... t--.... ;j
j ~J~;~i @ ~
. .'l.~~
~@ ~r:~~ @\iO
'.'J\.-': ~
~I',,''\
~.::.:s @ l'~),' .;,j A D
"~\..,, ~
~ ~ ,:~I':'" .
~ oi:&1~>:j @D
~-S'
~ e !,~~::.:j @Hi@ 1-
~(,,>! . iN.
:'~~' ' .
!9i""': @,.':.,~
ai,',':'" -
r- I,'" i -', .~
! ", '..s'\. "'.J
r'" "~".,'.,:
", .......J'...., '-:
0..: ..,.... ~.......,
~ e :~~:~~F~.:~J
:~:~.!>>:
t" "
C\., ',1,', I
oj,>f:<j
[,,""1'.,"':
" ... r-o ... 1
1""<" ..
I.::"] Q .', ",r..'.:
'0...,,......1
" '~" ',:
E!!!2'J 6,', ""',' ", 1
~f""")i."','l""":
," .r -.J
"". j ......"
j ,',) " 1
: ~ 8 ~:r<: @ ~-;;7.i
,.f.'! @ :-'::'2
",I, i--
i ~,",.)" ~
~ 8j<>~:':'j@
~, "J' :
:''\'.j.........l
. .~ .... 'I
-
------
@i~
lilflo57IilOJXO
I
@~
@~
@I
@h
i
@~
3fJN3A f1I1JM --
-,
j
i
i
L_
I -----
I
i
1
1
:
1<,-1
B
''''
1:....1
,0
,'"
18
,~
''''
~
""I::
Q.,Z
=>
-0
I~
I~
,-
:::..::::o:s;;
8~z
Qug5
"'....
z- -
_0=1
.WU
--
=--
=- 0
-I-~~
--
u'"
E _
_0
'" u
113.=>!
1_0
""zfj;
o~
~~
OlbJ 5
!2i:::
_z
U')oS:
IU') U
-9. ~
03:=
~ -
== Lo.... u....
_00
~
1-:;:
I~=
5~
u
1:'8
i:::>-
~~
u8
<:5
u
",w >-
!::;!C52=~
~fj;~ I
5L..o-C I
C:;)OL--..~
02::0;::::
'""-'Z ~ z:
V')~Do
~850 .1
o o~
g:~u == I
"'>--
~"'!=C:
_ uo
15:S~ E;! I
~2;::~ I
9:-~b:~
~oo~6
~c~tj5
EDg~cS
:c....:~c;:::3
~~ 5~
__~c.=>>-
1-~::r=L..J::::I
::sO e:;::_
;::::z s,- <6;;
~L.....J~<~
;:::~e< -
r::= V') :::i!- I
?j~<S5 I
b!2-:s I
u...J!:~:~ 0 ~ I
~;::::~O I
--<
_ot;:;<~
~=-
'-='~
~~
~<:
-c;
-0
3\_
_0
0-
,...'"
~~
o~
u~
~u
;::~::j
o ~
_ '" id
w~<:
9"'''-
3~~
>-~5
8:s;;:E
",Z 0
~"'Z
=0-
V}!::: ~
:;5 ~
f5~-
e:=w~
~<~
li t=i zs
O~
I'"
.......C"'<.:
:::->-'
~v=;
"" .
_ "
'Z
L')
NO
~ .
""~
~
'"
c
-'
~
c
S
!;2
g:
v;
'"
o
'-
'-
=>
~
"
c
u
...,
00
G
~~
z_
5,-
'" "
-
'"
'"
-
'"
<5
--
S:::?;:z::-
e::::C::::L..J%
L..J_~L.....J
CDS:QV'1~
~cf:3~
zL.r....V")C>
I- o!c2g:
z- ::E
LU~O-
:::i~txL..-
'" 00
~<25iS
o ~bft:~
~e~ rj
I~ <:
v;
;;:
< :s
;::2 v; ;::2
G '"
- :s u
0 ;::2 -
0
i::: U i:::
G -
0 u
"" i::: ""
'"
w G '"
~ w
U ~
~ u
i::: i:::
G - G
0
'"
'"
w
~ .
u-
=
i:::~
G
'" i
'" I
.... I
0 j
w
u
"'-
2;0
h!:o'~
",0
-
0
~
'"
UC1
u
-
~
K
""
....
o
....'
[:;J~
~oi2
....Z...:/
(1)....;:1
SUg
S~=
R....U
;.::f:Q[I)
O~~
O~:;
OEJ""
...:/;:E....
~~=::
Of;:;)
0(1)
""[I)
-<
~
.~
- -
~ c
c: _
....
~
.::
;;;
c
-
~
<:
.-
_ c
=c;;'
,si-:..
"0 _
Ji~a
~Z-;-
::(t/J<:":
--::
"i;'.~ 5 ::
===~
.s~<:..
"0
..
~ -
.- c
~ 'E ::-
;c:.;~::
....
..
~
Oi
"
...
~
<
.!!"is
-->,
=00
_f-o:":
..
"0 _-
.. , c
~-=
Co! (3 :: ~
~tf.J<c.c
=,5
=5;;;:'
1:1 ell - c:
_tfJ<c..
~'-:';-::-..
~ -
- " -
~ - >,
Co! CI ::
au... :.
...
..
~
"5
.:
~
<
- ;;
11:1 - =
_ 0 _
:ao~
_roc:"
"0 _
~ ..!.
> S :: >oc
.. .. -
~tI)<;";
-
.;:1 E;:
~
- - - :>;.
.s~<:e
--
:g~
~u"f
en _ _ +
.~.S +
::::::t;..;-
-:::
~
:;;
~
..
~
~
<:
c;
-
o
,...
~
~Uj=+
.:;a~
~
<;
Z
::
:;;""
~
<:
"
~
....
~
'"
N
...
9
...
o
N
,..:
'"
""
;;;
is
0;
..,
..
8
0;
'"
"1.
;;;
".,
....
.,;
,...
...
'"
-
-
...
o
>.
~
E
~
f-<
-
...
'*
...
9
...
9
...
9
...
9
..
9
...
9
..
'.
9
...
9
..
9
...
9
...
0.:
-<
Z
9
...
...
..
.E
...
~
::E
....
x
'"
~.
;:
;;;
9
...
o
'"
N
,..
'"
;;;
~
~
..j
..,
..
.
,
~
:::
'-
;;;
".,
o
o
,...
...
....
'"
'"
--
~
~
'"
'"' ....
'"
"-
N
....
-
...;
...
9
...
o
'"
N
...
""
;;;
...
'"
,..:
..,
..
..
o
":
....
...
"1.
...
!:;
,..:
,..
...
....
'"
c::
-
--
...
"
::
.~
;;
(;)
,...
~
,,;
N
"!
-
...
9
--
g
'"'
~
;;;
'"
~
N
..
o
'"
,,;
'"
'"
...
'"
"':
....
....
...
".,
....
'"
...
OJ
;>
o
'"
".,
9
...
'*
...
9
...
9
...
9
--
9
..
9
...
9
..
9
...
...
9
...
9
...
-
<:
:i
9
...
.~
"
::E
'"
'"
~
,..:
'"
'"
Z;;
9
...
o
"!
-;;
".,
..;
..
0:
'"'
,..
...
...
o
'"
..;
'"
"'-
N
...
'"
"!
DC
....
...
....
DC
O.
....
--
~
""
..
c.
"
N
,..
,...
-
>i
~.
;;;
9
...
o
...
,..:
~
;;;
....
"'-
..,
..,
..
15
0;
,..
"-
;;;
DC
'"
DC
'"
...
'"
'"
'"
--
...
"
""
.
:>
DC
,...
....
"
~
....
...
9
--
~
..,
'"
N
..;
..
o
'"
,..:
'"
...
o
'"
,..:
~
,...
...;
...
'"
DC
,..
'"'
...
,..
....
"'-
...
~
.;;
;;:
'"
'"
'"
~
~
,....
;;;
9
...
8
.0
o
"1.
;;;
".,
q
..,
..
o
'"
'"'
'"
N.
;;;
:::
'"'
'"
....
,...
DC
DC
...
-
v
~
.!!i'
.;;
o
c:
:2
... ...
...
9
..
9
...
9
...
9
...
9
...
9
..
9
...
9
...
9
--
9
...
:.
<
Z
9
...
u
""
~
u
-
-
9
...
9
...
9
...
9
...
9
...
9
--
9
..
9
...
9
...
9
--
9
...
:.
<
Z
9
....
.
~
....
N
"
~
~
,...
'"
.;
"'.
;;;
-
~
."
-.::
"
:;-
2.
..:
...
..
9
....
.9
2:-
'"
;0
9
--
.
g
~
"
o
2.
o
~
".,
..,
'"
...
8
.,;
!::
"
-5
g
~
"
u
"
2
o
U
.,;>.
" -
'0 ~
c..5-
85-
o
U ....
',;
u.;3
"
.::> "
~ >
~~
o
E-
UJ ~._ bO
t: ~ U .5
~~.5'~
oo~-8
;:...: 5 Vol
2 c::: u """
:::l. 0 0 ~
.5 ~ at
.E 5 c
'O],,=, ~
~ r; .S &0....
~ .1'i;: ,..
.g 0:5.
oQ~
~-5 -;:, 0
.... -
C) .... C,J en
g....s.=> g
!5.8'- g-
ooo~"""........
gVj~'"E2_=.~
- V'7 >. 1::
"C;;,-< t;:"2 0
u~2og.
"i: C!) ....
'V)(g"=-o..
C) UJ 0:
Q"O";:::: '"0 "';
~"::I1S.9
g .E_~ ~ ~
U; ~ ~ ofi]:
~ u 9 -t: r:
~ o.;a 0
<"g53:8
o].~e ~
"08
8 8~;
" OJ
~ -:;;
" >.
'" ~
~
'"
'"
'"
...
o
"'!
~
....
;;;
~
"
~
~
~
.;
N
...
"'-
'"
N
..
.~
u
"
2
o
U
....
]
-0
"
o ~
uOj
" ....
o.B
~.!!!
;;;
'"
<-:
o
"!
DC
".,
...
-
....
...
,...
DC
".,
...
'"
....
DC
...
-.::
"
'"
"
;;
E
~
""
~
'i3
~
"
:::
r;"2
~8~
0.;
< *
z'* : :
:::;
:::
O~
U
~
-
-
05
;;;
'K
"
~
o
~
"
"
o~
"-
'"
""
~
-;:
v
""
~
.
:;:
v
.
c
"i4
~
~
i
.~
....
"
~
U
~
~
~
~
'"
-
'"
,;
v
e:.
~
,
u
.-
-'"
K
~
-
....
o
~r!-
~Q\
~ m
....O~
E-<Z....<
mE-<~
QUQ
"" ~
0:2=:
RE-<U
;..:~m
OQE-<
~E-<~
UZ..,.
o~""
....<2>-
I::Im<
m~
o~
om
~m
<:
o
.~ ;: -
- -
~~:::
~
.
..':
S
C
~
<:
.= c ::
:;:=~
..:~:..
." -
. c
II)...!. ='
>=::>-
CI) 0;.> _ c=
!:r::Uj<:"
iC~gg
";:: E = ~
-;::I t.I = e;
'::tI)<c...
."
.
~ -
-- c:: _
" - >,
. c c
:Z::~:..
...
.
.::
~
;:
~
<:
- -
aI- =
- . -
- -..
"2 0 .
_fooc~
]..l.E
- - -
,,- >,
CJ ~ _ c::
='00<:"
--
. =
ca ' - -
=E5~
c a.> - c:
_tfJ<:..
." -
.
.~] ;...
. c c
::::r-r:,..
....
"
.::
~
E
<:
- .
0-
_ 0 _
- -- ....
c 0 I;
_f-c:...
."
~ . -
-;: .....
~ri.:<::::
~-~-'g~
Qj = c:
_u:1<:";
~
c
~U::;
~ - +
.~ g : ~
=:~=-
-::
~
;;;
'"
"
~
~
<:
.
- c
~ U) = +
-=8~
"
-
c
,..
~
c;
Z
-
;;;".
'"
<:
9
""
::>
N
,..:
~
..
N
..;
N
..
8
...
-g
..
o
'"
,..:
....
""
'"
~
13~
.:e .... 0
c ;;;
~ER
M
'"
'"
""
~
..>i
~
~
:::
N
0;
"
"
..
-
..
9
""
E!
~
'"
;;;
~
"'"
M
..
:z;
'"
-
"'".
;;;
oo
'"
o
....
....
....
o.
'"
""
~
~
'" ....
- -
~,
N
-
~
"'-
-
::>
oo
~
"1
..
'"
~
~
..
::>
oo
N
....
"'..
;;;
....
'"
M
'"
""
....
o.
oo
""
S!
;;;
~
~
'"
oo
~
":
;;;
9
""
::>
N
g
on
N
....
....
N
~
..
::>
N
...
"'"
N
..
-
~
....
o
""
.
.
.
'"
o
":.
""
.,
~
f@
'is.
~
~
oo
-
~
~
N
~
"'.
N
..
9
""
~.
~
'"
"'"
~
..
9
....
::>
N
..;
V
....
i
'"
....
r-
'"
""
:;;
..,;
....
o..
~
..
M
oo
00
'"
""
.
.
.
M
'"
....
N
....
oo
oo
oo
""
N
.
c
-;
.;:;
~
o
~ =
o ~
zo
'"
-
~
ro
..,;
"'"
.....
;;;
9
""
:;;
.;
::>
"1
..
oo
~
-
M
""
::>
v
ct
N.
;;;
'"
~
M
'"
""
o
'"
-
..
9
""
::>
v
,..:
::>
"
..
'"
'"
-,;
'"
....
::>
ro
...
'"
"-
..
....
....
....
'"
""
'"
'"
....
....
!2
~
c;
::;:
-
'"
~
N
"'.
..;
;;:
..
9
""
8
.;
~
..
'"
'"
M
'"
""
~
'"
"
;;;
'"
o
.;
'"
""
o
....
'"
""
~
!<
c
'"
'"
'"
v
-
9
""
:;;
vi
ro
"
;;;
'"
or:
co
'"
""
::>
v
g
..
'"
~
oo
on
""
on
-
co
""
.,
'u
~
.,
D
M
'"
~
N
'"
'"
V
N
o.
""
-,
~
-
..
9
""
~
'"
'"
....
""
on
":
'"
""
::>
~
'"
'"
'"
....
'"
"':
..,
..,
""
.
.
.
::>
....
v
....
N
~
z
"'"
N
N
..
9
""
o
v
Iii
""
;;;
'"
'"
00
..,
""
::>
~
..,
ro
"1
;;;
'"
-
.;
....
""
~
-
""
..
.::
0;
on
'"
N
"'"
-i
ro
-
:;;
,..:
::>
"':.
;;;
oo
'"
00
'"
""
o
ro
00
....
..
....
'"
00
on
""
co
'"
oo
""
."
o
o
:>:
'"
'"
9
""
C
ro
00
N
'"
..
..
9
""
.
:;;
.;
"':.
;;;
M
'"
.;
'"
""
::>
'"
ro
'"
..
....
....
.;
on
""
on
..,
oo
""
~
v
:0
.~
..,
o
'"
....
'"
N
-,
N
~
-
9
""
g
~
r:
..
oo
~
on
'"
""
..
::>
N
vi
..,
"'".
..
'"
'":
....
""
oo
~
""
.=!
;;;
<
oo
'"
'"
'"
N
ro
'"
..
o
r-
oo
""
o
-c
..
U
~
.
::;:
'"
'"
N
"'"
u
U
~
Ol)
'"
'K
"
~
o
""
"
"
.~
"-
'"
..,
~
>
o
..,
~
o
.s
'"
ji
o
=
~
-
-
N.
-
..
~
'"
.~
t:
U
"'-
o
~
"'-
9
""
""iii
9
>,
a.
'"
"
c
"g
~
"
>
;;
'"
"
-5
9
""
"
ti
"
2
o
"
"" >,
Bi::
" "
"Q.5-
::: ~
o '"
" ~
= "i)
:15
.<> "
>
jg
g
N
~
ro
8
.;
....
"":.
;;;
'"
"
o
""
~
'"
"
~
-
~
,:
v
es
.8
ti
"
S
o
"
~
"
-5
o
""
a
"
U7i!
~ ~
-lS
'"
....
o
'"
""
'"
..
.c
.g
U
E
'"
c
o
"
"
"
:::
o
""
.3
E
~
"
>,.,gv'O
i::--:j
" ~ "
g. t..S .D
5.8 .;:
" 00 ~
E.::! 111~ "t:I
.:::... a
~~
- 0 "
.~ S
..= ~ "=
'" 0
Q~ .~
,,-5
'"
~ ~ .~
~ v;
" "
::; "
<-g
'O].~~
"
E
c
0;
-;;;
>,
'"
9
bO
.S
.=
'"
"
""
..
~
ro
..,
"'..
..
~
~ CI.)
~
g ~
CJ "
~.::;
~ ~
.g 0
._Ei
"
tJ~
~~
'" .~
.2 -
'"
~
"
c
~
o
D
~
"
'"
o
5.
'"
~
'"
""
'"
"
:::>
C"'
"
~ ~
'"
-; .5:!
>,t:
"E 8-
o 0
5:! b..
o
-c..
BE
>,
~
"
c
:::: .~
""'"
" c;
=: > g
:::> ~
'"
"
o
""
~
t:
5. g 8
~
"
~
"
tI)
c::~~
C 0._
ZOtI.
c..
<:
z*
*
. ..
. .
~-
u
.-
:e
K
~
.
,
....
o
E-<'
[;:;1!;;
gao!2
E-<Z~
VJE-<~
9u~
SEZ=
~E-<U
VJVJ
....
O~E-<
Z
O~:;
o[;:;1~
~;:g><
~VJ~
_VJ.....
-[;:;1
OVJ
~VJ
<
~
'"".
'.j
.
.
.
o
-
~-:
,.,
o
.
1!
~
~
:;;:
:5 -= _
=::"5c-
-:--
11 c;-
~ ~ :::
~==;:.
c.I c: = e;
:;,:",-<0..
ii...:.E
=;:=~
.5~<:..
'" -
.,
~~.....
,,~::
...
..
~
11
t::
~
<:
~=5
-- ...
"20.
_f-o"c..
'" --
., "
~ ' -
;::"E=~
Co! ~ = =
::::tfj-<:::'-:
:!.:~~
---~
"2 ii = c:
_VJ<:"
'" ."
.,
~ -
- . -
>- - ...
.. 0 .
:::z:~:..
....
..
~
11
t::
~
<:
- "
tG - =
-.-
- -....
-:: 0 I:
'::r-:"
"0 -::-'
~~
~~~!
-
:-.~:: ' -
- - >.
-=J)<~
--
~-;:
c =
]U-5"
V,I _ _ of-
";: ~ of:..
~~e:.
-
~
;;;
~
'"
'"
<:
;;
-
::>
;-.
~
~. ~.E +
o ~
-= U '-'
'"
::
a
z
::
;;;""
'"
<:
-
"
~
~
'"
N
...
9
...
'"
'"
..;
'"
'0.
...
'"
'"
.,;
....
...
g
..;
'"
'"
;;
oo
-
'"
r-
...
'"
'"
'"
...
...
"
.~
"
~
'"
....
~
"
~
N
...
9
...
'"
...
d
~
...
N
...
r-
~
-
'"
...
.
'"
'"
,..:
~
'"
N
...
'"
oo
....
o
...
'"
'"
"";
-
...
,g
"E
"
u
-
....
'"
'"
..
...
N
...
9
...
g
..;
~
'"
N
..
'"
'"
N
..,.
...
g
,..:
...
':
;;
'"
....
,..:
oo
...
r-
N
'"
-
...
>.
~
~
N
....
~
~
....
N
..
9
...
g
,..:
~
'"
N
...
oo
'"
N
a
'"
...
00
...
'0.
;;
N
":
r-
oo
...
oo
N
N.
-
...
E.
::
'"
....
....
~
'"":
-
,.,
~
..
9
...
'"
...
N
,.,
'"
...
N
~
....
...
o
'"
~
N
'"
...
'"
..,.
.,;
N
...
N
r-
....
...
~
"
~
0;
::;;
..,.
....
oo
'"
oo
-
....
...
.
..
?::
~
-:
~
'"
'"
;;
9
...
8
g
'0.
;;
~
'"
....
...
'"
~
..;
'"
....
;;;
'"
-
'"
oo
N
...
...
-
r-
...
~
g
'"
'"
...
;;;
""
~
r-
.
.
.
~
~
E
" ...
... ~
~ ~
<=J",
n
"
~
g
'"
-
;:;
9
...
g
.,;
~
'"
~
...
"
-=
.9
-0
'"
tj
:: '"
.50 a
u 8
5-0>.
. " -
o i) t>
~ - 0.
~ ft 8
'::I S 0..
o " ~
"'=' = .u
~~.:
o ..0 Co)
g ~ VJ _~
o.~~ ~
.....:g = 0
....0;
~ Go)'-
. ~ tj .5
g 0 2.~
U) u; ~
~ -B c "'0
8...... 8 ~
.g ~ g ~
o 0 0
E~~ 2
~ r:;.5 &
"'.:.~E8
~ t>o.
"-...
~-5~ 0
~
" ~ "
5"2.0
10.8 :::
"'" ~
~v)"C
.:: ... iii
"'...
u 0 ~
.. -
1-0 U) ._
;;j 0 .....
'5 ~.~
0-5.8
g.~ ~
;;;-~~
'" '"
C)o2~
Co/) 0 j 0 .....
<--;:0 .0.
V) :; :; ~
~].~ ~
"
~
'"
":
::;
...
'"
~
,..:
~
'"
00
...
~ - '"
'" 0 0
0. C "
'"
'"
"
o 0
ZQ
"-
<
z.
-:>
~
'"
.8
;:;
"
5'
~
""
.~
u
~
.S'
0;;
'"
"
...
o
-0
'"
,!,!
~
.5
.5
'"
a
....
"
~
"
'"
~
~
~
;::;
-
.
'"
"
-"
>
.
"
"
~
.
~
.~
ji
~
g
~
"
.9
>.
""5.
""
'"
g
~
"
o
-0
~
,:
.
~
'"
"
~
'"
"
::>
0'
"
~ ~
~.;1
>.1:::
13 8-
o 0
g S-
o
-0"
9
>.
""5.
'"
"
'"
"
o
2-
.... E
~. ~ ~
"" '"
U:~~
..
. .
. .
~
:;>:::?
BALLOT
SUMMARY
EXillBIT "D"
I I
ASSESSORS
ASSESSMENT BALLOT I STREET PARCEL
NUMBER * ADDRESS NUMBER
CD NO 496 OXFORD STREET 618-270-25
Q) UNKNOWN 488 OXFORD STREET 618-270-49
Q) Y"tS 478 OXFORD STREET 618-270-22
CD YES 472 OXFORD STREET 618-270-21
@ YES 470 OXFORD STREET 618-270-44
@ Y"tS 466 OXFORD STREET 618-270-53
(7) Y"tS 462 OXFORD STREET 618-270-19
CID 1 YES 446 OXFORD STREET . 'I . 618-270-18
@ Y"tS 442 OXFORD STREET 619-270-17
@ YES 438 OXFORD_ STREET 618-270-16
@ YES 4JO OXFORD STREET 618-270-45
(jJJ I YES 1198 OXFORD COURT I 618-380-01
@ I Y"tS 1197 OXFORD COURT I 618-380-09
@ YES 1196 FOURTH AVENUE 1 618-270-41
@ UNKNOWN 497-495 OXfORD STREET I 618-JOI-02
@ YES 485 OXFORD STREET 618-JOI-20
@ I YES 481 OXFORD STREET I 618-J01-19
@ 1 Y"tS 475 OXFORD STREET 618-J01-04
@ I~ YES 467-71 OXFORD STREET I 618-301-05
@ I Y'.s I 465 OXFORD STREET 618-JOI-06
@ YES 459 OXFORD STREET I 618-JOI-07
@ I YES 461 OXFORD STREET 1 618-301-08
@ YES I 453-<153,1. OXFORD STREET I 618-301-09
@ YES 447-449 OXfORD STREET 1 618-350-13
@ YES I 445 OXfORD STREET I 618-350-01
@ 1 Y"tS I 44 1 OXfOP.o STREET I 618-350-02
@ I YES 1 437 OXfORD STREET I 618-350-03
@ NO m OXfORD STREET 1 618-350-04 -
@ UNKNOWN 429 OXFORD STREET I 618-350-05
@ YES 423 OXFORD STREET I- 618-350-06
u_. @ YES 1 419 OXfORD STREET I 618-350-07
@ I YES I 415 OXFORD STREET 618-350-08
@ YES I 409 OXfORD STREET I 618-350-09
@ YES I 1208 FOURJJi AVENUE 1 618-350-10
-
* IS OF 6/i5/97 --~ -
- ,
- - --
COIl"llTtR FllE: C:\RI3\COU\SUPPOO1\STl1..?9\ISSII1D$TDWG
I
/
.'
1--
I .
,
/
.
c--.. ,_ .__...
.J.
.
)
EXHI3/T
~
e-
COUNC1L ?OLJCY
CITY OF C!-IDL-\ V1STA
M -'-'-cr P -.- _ON --,; -.- C..,-v 0- C. '''t '
I .,:,u..::J,.J.::. 1: J....::;O~j!C......:..ll . =-. ~;-..=. l.l.. :- :-i.u_.....
VJ5TA IN J 9J J BLOCK f.CT P"OG?_LJv1
P"OC=-=-DINGS
ADOPTED BY: Rf:5o]utjon No. 11373
Ex- r i:.CTTVE II
DATE PAC
505-01 08-30-83 11 OF
I DATED: 08-30-83
POLlCY
NUMBER
BAOCGROUND
Ther~ 2:"~ prope.""1i~ wirhin !be Chy Emirs !bar do nor hav~ full street improvements. In!be pasr, Council j
direC!~d :h~ owner> of crirical unimproved parc~1s ro insralJ !beir missmg pubEc improve.-nents. Tne 19
BJock k:r Proceedmgs were utilized in mosr ir.s,anc~. As an encourageme.\1r for.propeny owner participarit
!be Ci!y bas conml>UIed' funds for !be compJerion of c=in irems of work (i.e., grading, paveme
insrallarion, erc.). Also,!be Ciry consistenrJy has conm"buted engmeermg inspecDon and adminis!I2ri
services 2I no charge to !be properry oWDer(s)_ However, mere is DO Council adopted policy regardmg Cj
participrion in 1911 BJock Acr improvement construcrion proceedings.
Tnis policy is designed to encoUI2ge me insralJarion of missing improvements along develoDed r~idenrial JOe
Jt speci5::aJJy sets Ory participarion goals for me improveme."1r of comer, non-comer, and doubJe Irontar
r~idenri2J Jots. Tne policy reaffirms Ciry Council intent ro require me ms.allarion of public improvemen:
adjacentro undeveJoDed properry (r~idenrial, commercial, 2nd industrial) rbrough!be formarion of 1911 A:
.AssesSJnent Districts or rbrough !he subdivision and building p=ir approval procedur~.
Tnis policy shall only apply to areas incorporared on or before this policy's eff':cDve dare.
~.
PlJRPOS::
To establish a poHcy for pa,""1icipation by rhe Ciry in !be comrrucrion of pubJic improveme:J!s -"ia !be 191:
BJock Acr Proceedings (G"lapTer 27, Street and Highways Code of me Stare of California).
POLlCY
.
Tne Ciey Council ~,ab!ishes the foJJowing poJicy for Ciry participation in 1911 3Jock Act ProgTa.>:
proc:eedi"1gs:
1. G~:~:2] ParridD2!iDn
a. T.~e Ciry, at no cost to !he propeIT)' owner(s) snaJJ provide all engineermg, inspecDon and
~d.,;"71inistrarive s~-vjces n~(essary to 4"1st2.11 missmg hnprov~ments via the J 911 310ck Act ?rogrzrn
?:oceedings.
b. 11 5h2.11 b: L~e C)~y's responsibiliTy to re)ocate 21] ~xisting public L"T.Iprov~me:l'rs fou.."d to be b
~v:-.Jlict 'NiL!' L~~ proposed street 4"T.1prDVerne!lt cO!ls~ction. Such hnprovemenrs shall include, but
:lot be limited 10: street Hghts, traffic signal sranGa;ds, d..-ainage srructures, fire hycL~ts! eIe.
c. =":"Igi!1eering stQ shal! m~et individual]y with e:au~ property ov'''n~ prior to the pro~'s lie
nez..-ing ro hand deJiver iniriaJ correspondence and ro expJain me pJans, proceedings and this poJicy.
?bal engineeriI1g pla,"1s 2.,)d project specifications shaJJ reflecr as close 2S practicabJe, the prope.-.y
ov:ner(s) conce= provided !hey refleer sra.'1dard engi."1eering pracrice.
,E- !
r//
f.
;
~
-
<-- (.
I
/
,
,~
/
,
,
COuNCIL POLJCY
CITY OF CHULA. vlSTA
,
i
SUill!:.CT: ?A:ZTiG?^.TION 3Y :.-::: CjT! 0:' CHUL"
V1STA iN J 931 3LOCK ACT ??G?_~J,1
PROv - T)L"GS
POLJCY
Nl)MBER
EFFeCTIVE
DATE
PAGE
I
2 OF 6
505-01 08-30-83
I DATED: 08-30-83
ADO}' 1 J:j) BY: Resolution No. J J3 73
<i Prior.w th, "..,d of each ilscal year, the Chy Engineer shall sub;nit 10 Ihe Ciry Council for approval
UDd~ this prognnl, a rerommended ESI of projects for scheduling m L"e ensuing flSCal year.
?u..'1ding for the progra,-n snaH be determined armuaHy and shown in the Capi,al Improvement
?r-o~
. .
eo Ciry parricipaDoD in this program shall be limited to deveJoped parceJs that carmot be spEt inw lots
Dr building sites.
2. DeveJoDed Residential Lors
2.. Non-CDrn~ Lots
It shaJI be the City's respo~fDi1jry 10 overlay Dr reconsITuCt the roadway rraveJway adjacem 10
nOIl-corne; lors when the uzve1way is already improved and needs an overlay Dr ;ecoI'S!TUcDon to
~ccommDdztf: dn.in2ge or!;"2ffic safery r~quire.men!S.
Tne City's responsibility desC!1Ded above is shown on Figure 1 (arrached).
"
..
. ~
b. Corner Lors
For the PU!poses of this policy, the corner JOI iron! Jot line shall be defmed to be the shoTter of the
TWo adjacem street ]ot 1in~. In this c~se of a non-recranguJaT comer lot, !he 110:11 Jot line sh21J be
t:lJf 2v~rage v."ici:L..~ of me JOL (See ?ig'..lre 2).
jr sh21l be :!oe City's respo~f~ijjry to:
(1) In.stal] DL-D, gurrer, sld~v:2.1k and pavement (if nDn.~stent) adjacent to 1/2 the comer Jot's side
s!!eet t-u:::li:2ge.
(2) Overlz)' 0; ;econstrucr :!oe sjde and irontage streers ITavelwzy when needed 10 accommodaIe
dT2..in2g~ or traffic safeI)' requirerne...:'"1!.S.
(3) In w~e eVe;)! that me7"e 2..Te improvements already exisrbg aJong the com~ Jor's side pr"o?erry
frontage 2.1:-faoy exisIbg, t.~ese imp!"Dverne!Jls shaH be credizea to the Clty if they need not be
Tf:::DDVed to accomIDOC2.I.e the improvements to be bsta1]ed..
l":je City's T5pDDsibiliry ci~G1-ped 2Dove is depicted on Figure 3 (attached).
3. D:.:i2} F;-ont2~e Lo:s
It shall be the C1')'S responsibiH')' w:
E-Z-
---'
,
~,,>
/
I
/--
t
I
h.
J,'
J
,
COlJ"NC1L POLlCY
CITY OF CH!J1_A V1ST A
Sl)3J::.CT: ?!-_'\TICi?L.TION 3Y T.-;::: CiTi O? C-JUL"
VJSTA iN ) 911 3LOCK .L.CT ??OG?_tJIi
?ROGEDINGS
POLiCY
NUMBER
Ei- r t:CTIVE
DATE
.,'\.G
13 OF
I
505-01 I 08-30-83
I DATED: 08-30-83
.,
ADOP1J:JJ BY: Reso]utjon No. 11373
2. IZ"'.stall curb, guner, sjd~wcJk. z.nd pavement (if non-existent) adjacent to the ellri:-~ lor's reu str!
ITonrcge.
b. Over12Y Of r~CD~SIrucr me
I:2.ffic safery purposes.
]ors rf.irr Sweet U2v~jw2Y when ~eedtd 10 2CCD1T'u"~lOdare ci.rain2g~
. .
,
ror purposes of Ihis policy, dual frontage lots shall be a Jor having frontage on two paralld
approximarely pa.r.liel streets, one of which is an 'alJey".
4. DevdoDed InduSIriallCommercial Lors
T.n~ City conmDuDon Iov.-ards LiIe CO!!struCt10!1 of lmprovemenrs 2djac~"1t to develop:
i-JduSIriaJ/co=erciaJ Jots shall be Emi1ed ro:
2. Tne overlay or r~cons!T1Jcrion of existing roadway tr2velway areas when fOli.:,d to be required fe
Q.-a.IDa.ge or traffic safery purposes.
..
5.
UndeveloDed ~sidentiaL Industria} and Commercia! LOIS
-
Tnis policy shall reanl!ln the Ciry COUDCj]'S intem ro require the u-.s1allarioD of rnissbg improvement:
adjacent to UDdeveloped Jots [Dorh corner and non-comer wirh and wirhour doubJe s;:-eet fTonrcges:
~ough:
a. } 911 Act Ass~sZlJ.~nr Dismcr proct:durts.
D. S'..lbciivi...sion rt:q~i:~t:n!S, 2nd
c. building permit 2pprov2.1 r~quirtmen!s.
Tner~ shall be DO Ciry contribution towards the com!r~ction of improvements adjacem 10 undeveJoped
re.sjd~!ltia1J indl!SIri212J'1d commerdal1ots. In the event that an ov..'I1~ p!:ririons !he City for indusion of
his/her u11deveJoped parcel in a ) 9)) Block Act Prog:-",-n, aU expemes shalJ be borne by sajd Ov.-11er.
6. ADDli::2b1iiiv
T:':is policy shall be E:??1)c2ble 10 2re2S wIlnin rb~ Chuh Vista Cii)' E=:1i::s on Dr before iIS effective care.
..
F-.3
:-.>
-., ' .~
"./
-:.~.
I
/ I
' .-
, COLTNCIL ?OUCY
/ ,
/ ~ CITY or: CHl,jL-\ Y1STA
/
'f SUB-cr ::>D-n::>ATJb~ --" -- C-f r- C:"-, POUCY ErF!::CTTVE
bJ..t:. : .._~lj,_~_.i . :5. 1:-:.:. .11 ...J;- :l!J_~
VISTA IN 1911 BLOc..: ,;CT PROG?J2.-1 NLJl>13ER DATE ?-".GE
?ROr-""INGS I
505-01 08-30-83 4 OF 6
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No_ 11373 I DATED: 08-30-83
0
I -
>, ~
~ u .
I - e~
/I -
- ~ ",
'<~! II :> "' E
- ",
"' ::; >
1'1 II Ih. I u '"
~ g . . , "".
OJ
I I' '" "' :.. ""
:;'tt' ",
,- I(; :..'::
11 \)1</ ~ o~
h. >, ~
~ >,-
I I' ~~ \1) - '" ><
u - OJ
II lI) '"
I i:;:~ > "-
.~ t!r - o 0
I 11 :?-.u, ~
'0 . /I . ~ 1
>- <>- I
;- )1/
- j
-' It
-
'" I II ""
- oJ!! :=
V> 11 I -
~ I r VI
0 ~
)1 i .
V> I I ", E
~ I "" ~ -
-, ft. 1/ I '" - -
~ I ~ -
- ---~ I- OJ ..
, " p ~
w >, .::. ~
::<: "!~ :x '>< ~ t:
wz - - -
>c::: .. - - '" ",
" 0:::: J >.: ~ J - :.. ~ 0
==t.:> I ><'>< :> - ~
=-0 J ;') - L ~'X :x ':x ">< - ~ '"
~== -<. -l ~ u "0
I '" \) I~ OJ f.'
.. ~ 0 0
1-1- !....._~__-1 "- ~ -
uo Ix>' >< "' 0 "
<-' ::::,. V" I CJ l-
I '" OJ
><== I' - , ->< ~ :..
u'-' 1 II - ~
Oz '" '" '" ~
-'== :x: ""
=>0 I II J 'i: '" ~
u 0 -0 "-
- I - 0
-z I 11 >, VI "-
0'>0 ~ :::. 0
-- :.. "0 -
I iN ", t: - VI
- '" E
0 E OJ
:.. :.. 0 ~'"
'" :.. -~
~ ...
~ :..~
.. I Ii ~ ~ " -' ~ ",~
0> - - -=OJ
"') i::"'C ",'" ~>
- E.- 00
. /);: ~ . :> .,'" ':..
>- - :::.
1 '<:"1 " '" '" -E
I !I ~~ u :::.", "'-
. . .
I 1/ - N ..,
I
I &..I"H-:::wwt-
---:==OZI-C:::t.:>w
~)
E-U
/
~'-"/
I
J
'f
COUNCIL POLlCY
CITY OF Chl.JL4. V1STA
l-
I
5""""0' ?'?-r'?LTION ~v-'- C1-" n- C"PI L
u__..::.. :. ."_.':J...;. ..1 . ::'J. 1.-:'':' ! ~ '....). :1~_.
VETA IN 1911 3LOCK ACT ??OG?jJ>1
??Or-:"7')iNGS
POLlCY
NUMBER
I
505-01 08-30-83 I
I DATED: 08-30-83
Err.t:.CITVE
DATE
fA(
5 OJ
ADOPTED BY: Reso]utjon No. 11373
>-
t-
-J
o
u 9
, Ii . ill
r2 . I
~N 2_ I 1/
D..J
rr J J J
1.1.: I II
II 1 11
U I J I
I i I
I
'"
:z:
~
'"
w
,"-.
- "f;" :.
:. ,off .". .
:z:
..... 1-::
:Z:01-
~-.J~
w:::_
>cz
DZ:::
25;=
===uu
.:::>
+-:C:::.:.J
U-':Z:
<~-
"'-'
>< -
uc:_
01-0
-' U-'
Ow
=: I-
-'%
-%0
0\0::::
-::::1..;.,.
~
.
...
'"
OJ
~
E
'"
.
'"
.J ...
CJ ~
.....
""
., .
= '"
-...
...:iJ
-1.
i
....=
OJ "
""",
....
'"
- "
~
"'.:;
:>>
.J "'OJ
.o,.j-=
rJ 5'"
--- ~....
"'0
-'
vr
\.'
\
u
-=-===::.==\
t rj
j
"
E-S-
----
SLS
!
/1
,
COUNCIL POLlCY
CITY OF CHlJLA. VISTA
SUBJECT: ?A"".TIC?".TION BY 1:"':":: OTY 0:: CHUL'"
VISTA L"; )911 BLOC.:: ACT PROGRA!.-1
PROc=3jNGS
I ADOPTED BY: Resolutjon No. 11373
VC'
1
?'
-
-'
-
=>
-
'"
5
'"
'-I
I-
::z:
==
t:;
,..
g
- ~
~s
L':>
'-0
w::::
<:0.
"" '-
wo
0-,
~
~.:::::'
""
=?E
"'0
-u
.,~
';)~
.
0-:>-
'"
=>
X
:>
>-
I-
'"
=
fl
~
IV
....
-<
~
::.
&
ii;'
~
....
~
0- I.:
~ I II ~ k.
~~II 'u). ~
IV (II "?
I 11 ~ ~
J.I Ii /8-t~
~n Iii I
r-- ~Il
F-' J....- '
~i:..
~ I~,~
..,,-. .............
" r
~
'",
=>
::;
'"
'"
""
=>
='"
-...
'- -
:.:5
""'-
'-
'"
-0
'"
=>...
'"
"'=>
... -
-::;
:;
:.........
:>
.
r-____--,
J I
I 'k I..
I !.:; Qj I\)
J <[I) ,..
I .... ~ '~
I ~2 ~--'
I......., I \Q
I ~ I ~
I I
L.__..J
..J.~ f:) ...!/YOC-d
-..J
N
~,I
':oJ
-I=-
.,.. xx><-y
=T b0...">.\,~Co~ ........ '-
~ ~-~~~
~ ~..L.";;"'~7......;?rrI7..LD7 ......LrrC?';:'
"'~ - ,-. "'--.,
-'1.,:)- ............ :3'
.(2S. -'-==>15 ~P:'-""''Y....J ' --
~\) -....- -~ -'I_-=~
~,.
~ft
..~
,,~
. ,
POLlCY EFFECTIVE
NUMBER DATE PAGE
505-01 08-30-83 I 6 OF 6
I DATED: 08-30-83
>,
...
..
..,
..
....""
og
55;:
- u...
.., U::,l
Ur:<--
::> '"
'- 0 ~
......
'" u
::-..J_
0=....
U:J&';'"
I C ~
~QJ:'"
'- >...
..
~ .::::....e
c
""=>
>-.=~
"'-'"
-~ -
1-v.a-=
..-'"
> x: l.
0:1"'::1
-
-
-
-'"
-
'"
o
=>
'"
~
>,
...
-
w
.
-
'"
-...
I
OJ
...
=
-'" ::>>
'-
'" '"
=>-
OJ
U
>,
...
'"
....
"'... '"
- u =
>'0:::-
:J =.J ~~ 0
"'=' - ";:I u~
"':>
0-""
:-:::1 CJ
'-
:>:>-
...... '"
CI:"'c;
=0..1.,.
~-
-:...~
:::"1..
::>> :>
'='U'I =~~...,
- -- - 4...1
): --...;:L;;t-. ....
........Q)4.,,)1-.-..JoOj
V) U t= '=' VI. E
1... It! 0._ III W
"~.-...I _:.:: = >
1... _""':: Cl C.I 0
t:J - 0 I -.I!...
.-..I t:n~1- __.....
~ 5 If'- ~. if
0'0_ C -.J -- ;-
to 0 :: '-..::: 0'1
- :: ~_ -.I _
..::! C.I c: 0--
J..,. ::....... C.I ~ :;;
::: rt)_ >::_ VI
U__~___,
t:.._ ~ E
--
-
x-
-
-
...~
"'=>
OJ_
'-
-'"
-
'"
=
...
~
'-'>0
'-
""....
g
'"
~
I..
..
:<
D
>,
...
=
I..
...
~
o
I..
-
.
-
N
'"'
I V'>>-"''-IWI- I
I.I...::::::D:::t-<t.:)~
E-(p
...
"'0
--
>,
I ~
~g-:
='='
=01.')
o U
- U U
...",-
'u '-
::>0....
1.....'"
~ '-
",...~
S~.,
"'.....
'->::>>
"''''
2; =:..-=
""'"
>,-
"'-""
-...
I.. '" OJ
"'-...
> >< '"
o OJ."
=>
:: tJ
=>""
>-
"''''
. -'""
...-
-
"'OJ
...... u
"''-
'"
::::..
~:J':
-.J'=;-.I
-.J...J 0'1
'" =
~...:"'t:J
-
-'"
..::! = Co!
;2.=
u"'_
.
-
.
N
-
.....
,
-'-
OJ
~
-
-
~...
0_
~-::>
= ...
"''''OJ
=~,
Cj- -
> "'-'"
'" I..
=::.."'==
'"
.~
=
-
-
..
u
-
",...",
- u-
>'0:::-
'"
x.>< :>
"" u...
'" 0
0_""
:...~ Q,I
I..
00_
.-.J_:I
Q,l1-~
:: 01-
"'-
-1...><
"'-'-
- . t:n o.
..o;?' _ =-';CVl
:ro~;;~;;,,"-~
"'"'.-.:: 1.. !....-..I 0 =..
I.f1 to!- r,:, VI
~ .Q..- VI 2i
-- - )(E>
~~~:=__pOJ,~p
......, ft)::i"U --
~"""':::'I_":: 5-:::
~"'::t:J :::1-_
:::n_ Q):J......, Q)
'<.-- - .- r..... ""::n
";~CJ;t c;_::;_
!:::__'? ~QJo::;
.... 5":::: = > ::::_ LI'I
u=_~ tC___
::..- ~ E
-
u
"'-
~CJ:J
- u--
~1..=
'"
-.J _VI
OJ OJ
OJ",,,,,
'--=:::
...-
-- U
I..:>~-
.
.
-
N
...,
I,I")/.- == W W I-
~-~1.U
-
01-,
j
.
.'--.....
,
.
.=,
~
X
LoW
'"
w
>
1=
<:
z
::::
.....
I--
-'
<:
I--
z
.....
=t
>-
<:
=-
u..
o
z
o
;::
=-
:2
u
'"
.....
o
'" :>
Z
::J
>-
~.2
- -
~ r:
o Q)
-0-
oE
.i::_
OJ 0
n
-r:
'" 0
~ .-
Q)-
>~
o 0
.o;::-~
r:o:::
::J
~ Q)
c..!:
",-
~ r:
Q)'-
!:l.=
~u
o r:
"::J
- 0
~U
"'>-
~..c
Q)
-"
r: Q)
.- >
-00
r: ~
",a.
a.
'" '"
n
.::- Q)
~"'5
-="
~ Q)
Q.~
~u
~I.I')""C
= -... Q)
CJ C 10-
:: Q)'::;
~ E cr
:-;j~Q)
D..ro:"-
Q.",
'"
::JQ)-
~ ~ r:
2-=QJ
.:t.~ ~
E.!:!2 ~
tJ"<: t>O
V) j- rc:
Y' .?:- r:;
- ~ ~
r:: OJ "-
~o..Q)
>--Ow
D c."'O
~ Q) '"
~
'0-=0
Q)-
"Er:
.Q-z 10-
~ Q)
OJQ)-
,., ~ r:
--:::; Q)
r::(1;.....
'"
10- 1- ::1
Q) 0 E
1) E
~ '"
~E 2 W
~ r:
::J rn ~
~ Q) 0
->-
raoo.o
~ ~ r:
Q) .-
a.Q)~
..<: .-
--
~_ rtI
o 0::J
" 0'
-"
'" r:
Q)
~n:;~
~ .-
-" ~
0._
rn V>
V) c.. :3
- Q) t/) U
0:;-- u
-~o
~ -
- ~
- Ci3 W .
.U1 E > 1::-
- tf) 0)--
CV1....cU
~ ~.~ Q)
,.... I./') ,.... r-
~< :;: -=
'" ;> ~
~r:t1 ,~
--0.-
-0Q)~
r::~ 10-
:;:1_10--
J:: _ Q) t::
r-ra-QJ
=o."'E
'r.- c:
.- U rc Q)
E .~ .: e:
OJ ~ t>O
U"')!:Ltl'Jrc:
001)
~ ~
Q)2-
....c .-
::~
o ::J
,,0'
r:
Q)-
Q) ~
~ .-
-=~
rc ~
::J
"Etj
::J 0
c ~
c OJ
'" >
~ OJ
Q).....c .
a..!:! >-
-Co-=:::
~~u
" Q)
..... -o'..c
"'Q)-
- ~ ~
'" ~-
Cl) Q).-::
Q:j 'Vi ~
-c_
.::: ~ c
,,-Q)
Q).~ ~
ro >- OJ
::J - ~
E~t>O
Q) rn
::J 0._
U 0 rn
u ~ ~
"' 0.2
"'O~Q)
.c:: -="'0
~Q)rtI
rc E 0
0...- ......
U - C
C Q) ~
"i::':: ~
&_c
- '" Q)
c ~
Q) 0 :g
E E E
>-~
rc Q) ~
o._Q)
Q) ~ c
r: ill ~
o >- 0
N r<)
,-, LoW LoW
> > >
<: <: <:
z z Z
:.: 0::: 0:::
.., LoW LoW
l- I--
- ~ -'
< < <(
-/~/~
, -,
,
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
4.
~
5.
~
I
I
6.
I
I
Date:
EX{.t-18(T D
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of cenain ownership Or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions,
on aIJ matters which wiII require dIscretionary action on the pan of the City Council. Planning Commission, and aJl other official
bodies. The following mformatlOn must be disclosed.
1.
List the names of all persons havmg a fmancial imerest m the propeny which is the subject of the applicallon or the Comract,
e.g., owner, applicant. Contractor. subcontractor. material supplier.
:J A V I E,1Z- .:JIM F I\J E..--z..
2.
If any person" idemified pursuant 10 (1) above is a corporation or pannersbip, list the names of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares in the corporallon or owning any pannership interest in the pannership.
~/A
3.
If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as
director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
iv/A
I
Have you had more than $250 wonh of business transacted with any ~mber of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve momho Yes _ No .t If yes, please indicate person(s):
Please identify each and every person, including any agems, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represem you before the City in this matter.
JAvIER.. J'~Ef.jE2.-
Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the CUTTent
or preceding election period? Yes _ No 2Ssf yes, state which Council members(s):
q-Il-q,
" " " (NOTE: Attached additional pages as necessary) . " "
Amoo^ ~A/,^~~g~)
ignature of Contractor/Applic
<T A II (EI~ ':)1 M E. t-J t:.."Z...
Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant
" EfrEm is defined as: "Any individual, firm, co-pannership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization,
corporation, estate. trust, receiver, syndicate. this and any other counry, ciry or country, ciry municipality, district, or other political
subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a uni!.
23
//
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date October 28. 1997
1c2..
ITEM TITLE:
Annual Fiscal Status Report for Fiscal Year 1996-97 and Quarterly
Fiscal Status Report for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 1997-98
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Finance~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~~ \ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _NolLl
In accordance with Charter Section 504(f), attached for your consideration is a report
covering the final results of Fiscal Year 1996-97 and the first quarter of Fiscal Year
1997-98.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council accept the report as submitted.
DISCUSSION:
Section 504(f) of the City Charter requires quarterly and annual fiscal status reports
to be filed by the Director of Finance through the City Manager. In addition. the
annual report is to be published in the local newspaper. Attached for your
consideration is a report covering both the annual results for Fiscal Year 1996-97 and
the first quarter status for Fiscal Year 1997-98.
The final results for Fiscal Year 1996-97 were somewhat better than projected in the
third quarter status report, with Available Fund Balance for the General Fund at
approximately $4.4 million. This figure reflects an increase from the $3.7 million
balance at the beginning of the fiscal year, based on expenditures and transfers out
of $60.1 million supported by revenues and transfers in of $61.3 million.
The first quarter status for Fiscal Year 1997-98 reflects that all economic indicators
continue to be positive, and that although there may be significant variations in
specific revenue accounts as the result of various factors, overall the budget
projections appear to be reasonable.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact relative to accepting or rejecting the
report, since it is for information purposes only. The City General Fund began Fiscal
Year 1997-98 with an Available Fund Balance of $4.4 million and based on the limited
information available this early in the fiscal year, there does not appear to be any
indication of a significant increase or decrease in that amount as the result of current
year operations.
/;2. -)
COUNCIL INFORMATION
DATE:
October 17, 1997
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA:
John D. Goss, City Manager
FROM:
Robert W. Powell, Director of Finance
SUBJECT:
FY 1996-97 ANNUAL FISCAL STATUS REPORT
FY 1997-98 FIRST QUARTER FISCAL STATUS REPORT
Fiscal Year 1996-97 Annual Fiscal status Report
Available Fund Balance is generally defined as the balance of
resources currently available for appropriation and therefore, does
not include legally required reserves, reserves for encumbrances
(commitments), etc.
The City General Fund began Fiscal Year 1996-97 with an Available
Fund Balance of $3.7 million and ended the year as of June 30, 1997
with an Available Fund Balance of $4.4 million. Expenditures and
Transfers Out for the year amounted to $60.6 million, supported by
Revenues and Transfers In of $61.3 million, resulting in the
increase of $0.7 million in Available Fund Balance from Fiscal Year
1996-97 operations. Please refer to the graphs presented in
Attachment I which display how this year end balance compares to
prior years and to the operating budget. As the second graph
shows, the Available Fund Balance has increased slightly to 7
percent of the operating budget, with the Council Policy reflecting
a target of 8 percent.
The increase is the cumulative total of many factors, both positive
and negative, but the most prominent were; 1) over-realized revenue
in major tax categories such as Sales Taxes, Property Taxes, and
Motor Vehicle Taxes due to the long-awaited general economic
upturn, and 2) significant improvement in development related
revenues such as building permits.
Total Fund Balance for all Funds (excluding Trust Funds, the
Redevelopment Agency, and the Bayfront Conservatory Trust),
including legally required reserves and other reservations of Fund
Balance, increased by $11.7 million during Fiscal Year 1996-97 to
$100.1 million at June 30, 1997. This is fairly significant when
we note that this same figure showed a $4.1 million decrease the
previous year.
/)-2
2
Attachment II is an unaudited Summary Report of Revenues,
Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Equity - All Funds for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 1997. Please note that the column titled
"General Funds" includes not only the General Fund, but other Funds
such as self insurance reserves, which are combined with the
General Fund for financial reporting purposes. As required by
Charter section 504(f), this statement will be published in the
local newspaper.
The detailed data supporting this information is quite voluminous,
but is available at your request. The published Annual Financial
Statements including the opinion of the independent auditors should
also be available within the next ninety days.
Per Council direction, a list of any budget adjustments between
summary accounts approved by the City Manager during the quarter is
also to be provided. Please be advised that no such transfers were
processed during the fourth quarter.
Fiscal Year 1997-98 First Ouarter Status Report
The General Fund Budget adopted for Fiscal Year 1997-98 included
Appropriations for Expenditures and Transfers Out of $63.2 million,
supported by Estimated Revenues and Transfers In of $64.0 million.
During the first quarter, the Council has approved $53,310 in
additional Appropriations supported by additional Estimated
Revenues of $52,510.
Attachments III and IV are Summary Statements of Revenues totaling
$5.3 million and Expenditures totaling $14.8 million for the first
quarter of fiscal year 1997-98. These amounts are consistent with
normal trends for the first quarter of the fiscal year. Due to the
limited amount of data available at this early stage of the year,
these reports are somewhat less informative than they will be at
the end of the second and third quarters.
Although most local economic indicators are being reported as
indicative of an improving trend, this early in the year the
optimistic outlook is not strong enough to cause us to anticipate
any significant variances from the budgeted revenue estimates for
major categories of tax revenues. Just to summarize a few of the
significant revenue ups and downs that we do anticipate during the
year, please be aware of the following: 1) The sale of Marina View
Park should finally be consummated which will result in $381,000 in
unbudgeted revenue to the General Fund and the same amount to the
Agency, 2) Budgeted revenue from development agreements with both
the Water Park and the Amphitheater ($150,000) will be under-
realized by at least $100,000 due to the slow start experienced by
the Water Park and the delay in opening the Amphitheater, 3) That
/.2.~J
3
reimbursement revenue from maj or development proj ects that is
charged to recover General Fund overhead will be under-realized by
at least $75,000 due to temporary delays in several of those
projects.
On the expenditure side of the equation, other than
unquantified impact of labor negotiations, nothing has
attention that would cause us to anticipate any
variances from the budget estimates.
the as yet
come to our
significant
Per Council direction, a list of budget adjustments between summary
accounts approved by the City Manager during the quarter is also to
be provided. Attachment V reflects three such budget adjustments
totaling $7,655.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
/..2 -Lj
GENERAL FUND RESERVES
ATTACHME~T I
j
,
14 ,
I
r
12 __mmuuum_umm
10 --
8
6 --
4 --
2 -
$7
w $6
()
~ $5
--.J ....-..
<{ ~ $4 -
COo
~~ $3
0:::..........
~ $2
w
I 0::: $1
$0
o
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
92-3
93-4
94-5 95-6 96-7 97-8
FISCAL YEAR
Reserves as a Percentage of Budget
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
,
92-3 ' 93-4
,
94-5 95-6' 96-7
Fiscal Year
97-8 /02 ~
ATT CHMENT I
ATTACHMENT II
City of Chula Vista
Combined Summary Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Equity - All Funds
Year Ended June 30, 1997 - Unaudited
Total General Special Debt Service Capital Enterprise Internal
All Funds Funds Revenue Fund Funds Project Funds Funds Service Funds
Total Fund Equity July 1, 1996 $88,345,384 $14,234,266 $36,953,984 $2,269 $28,828,116 $7,189,883 $1,136,886
Revenues 1996-97
Taxes 34,561,531 28,785,840 5,268,686 507,005
Licenses and Permits 2,226,168 1,974,193 251,975
Intergovernmental 25,380,239 17,300,858 5,997,440 29,916 2,052,025
Charges for Services 23,383,272 6,333,071 12,834,098 85,098 1,581,462 2,549,543
Fines & Forfeitures 929,530 671,896 257,634
Revenue from Use of Money & Property 5,380,529 1,062,579 2,323,153 5,311 1,625,651 311,687 52,148
Development Fees 5,098,223 5,098,223
Proceeds from Financing Agreement 3,515,544 3,515,544
Other 1,272,304 446,705 280,679 527,847 1,936 15,337
Total Revenues 101,747,340 56,575,142 27,213,685 5,311 11,389,084 3,947,110 2,617,028
Interfund Transfers In 10,577,863 5,617,824 612,136 1,718,288 2,627,176 2,439
Total Revenues and Transfers In 112,325,203 62,192,966 27,825,801 1,723,599 14,016,260 3,947,110 2,619,467
Expenditures 1996-97
General Government 24,020,678 11,459,068 10,062,511 2,499,099
Public Safety 27,429,818 27,185,002 244,816
Public Works 17,906,241 10,593,841 7,312,400
Parks and Recreation 5,225,213 5,181,445 43,768
Library 3,794,925 3,680,443 114,482
Public Transit 4,101,629 4,101,629
Debt Service 1,755,524 1,722,762 32,762
Capital Outlay 5,836,915 5,836,915
Total Expenditures 90,070,943 58,099,799 17,777,977 1 ,722,762 5,869,677 4,101,629 2,499,099
Interfund Transfers Out 10,521,679 1,981,909 7,102,295 1,312,475 125,000
Total Expenditures and Transfers Out 100,592,622 60,081,708 24,880,272 1,722,762 7,182,152 4,101,629 2,624,099
Fund Equity
Contributed Capital 2,437,776 2,349,152 88,624
Retained Earnings-unreserved 5,729,842 4,686,212 1,043,630
Fund Balances
Reserved 17,610,756 11,176,044 5,535,992 898,720
Unreserved
Designated 38,846,258 3,570,340 512,414 34,763,504
Undesignated 35,453,333 1,599,140 33,851,087 3,106
Total Fund Equity June 30, 1997 $100,077,965 $16,345,524 $39,899,493 $3,106 $35,662,224 $7,035,384 $1,132,254
The Finance Department of the City of Chula Vista has compiled the above Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Equity-All
Funds for the year ended June 30, 1997. Such amounts are subject to adjustment through the annual audit process which is being performed by
an independent public accounting firm. Audited financial statements will be available upon request.
"
/-2~C:
ATTACHMENT II
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
Summary by Revenue Category
Fiscal Year 1997-98 as of September 30, 1997
AMENDED ACTUAL
BUDGET TO DATE
Property Taxes $8,612,000 $242,634
Other Local Taxes
Sales 13,603,900 1,136,303
Franchise 2,585,890 98,230
Transient Lodging Tax 1,425,000 62,915
Utility Users Tax 2,807,000 506,561
Business License Tax 740,000 17,541
Other 250,000 28,461
Total Other Local Taxes 21,411,790 1,850,011
Licenses & Permits
Building, Plumbing Electrical, Housing 1,826,885 321,843
Other 222,900 50,897
Total Licenses and Permits 2,049,785 372,740
Fines Forfeitures & Penalties 627,220 139,975
Revenue from Use of Money & Property 984,307 124,425
Revenue from Other Agencies
State Motor Vehicle License Fee 6,100,000 1,058,935
Other 3,208,819 0
Total Revenue from Other Agencies 9,308,819 1,058,935
Charges for Current Services
Development Related Services 2,287,157 614,198
Other Police, P&R & Mise Charges 1,023,313 220,228
Total Charges for Current Services 3,310,470 834,426
Other Revenues
Reimbursement from Large Development Proj 1,377,521 48,373
Reimbursement - Redevelopment Agency 1,647,900 0
Other Reimbursements 7,765,507 134,608
BECA Revenues 974,601 3,826
Other 582,550 142,047
Total Other Revenues 12,348,079 328,853
TOTAL REVENUES 58,652,470 4,951,999
TOTAL TRANSFERS IN 5,206,628 (1) 335,363 (1)
TOTAL REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN $63,859,098 $5,287,362
(1) Includes $281,363 loan repayment from Otay Valley.
/c2-- ?
Attachment ill
PERCENT
REALIZED
2,8%
8.4%
3,8%
4.4%
18.0%
2,4%
11.4%
8,6%
17.6%
22.8%
18,2%
22,3%
12.6%
17.4%
0.0%
11.4%
26.9%
21.5%
25.2%
3.5%
0.0%
1.7%
0.4%
24.4%
2.7%
8.4%
6.4%
8.3%
Attachment IV
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
Summary by Department
Fiscal Year 1997-98 as of September 30, 1997
Amended Expenditures Outstanding Available Percent
Department Budget To Date Encumbrances Balance Available
105 City Council $407,652 $87,618 $1,124 $318,910 78.2%
110 Boards and Commissions 49,583 6,023 364 43,196 87.1%
129 Community Promotions 264,487 119,139 44,796 100,552 38.0%
150 City Attomey 893,623 151,018 35,297 707,307 79.2%
160 City Clerk 232,538 43,689 7,867 180,981 77.8%
210 Administration 895,265 212,510 37,815 644,940 72.0%
211 Mgmt & Information Services 758,743 175,624 35,361 547,758 72.2%
245 Human Resources 834,145 187,577 6,025 640,543 76.8%
260 Community Development 2,169,798 381,777 160,195 1,627,826 75.0%
400 Finance 1,496,765 331,875 31,613 1,133,277 75.7%
600 Planning 1,760,026 367,563 2,537 1,389,926 79.0%
700 Insurance 810,946 414,326 154 396,466 48.9%
730 Non-Departmental 2,433,078 1,016,878 74,474 1,341,726 55.1%
1000 Police 20,671,521 4,620,693 375,445 15,675,383 75.8%
1200 Fire 7,636,620 1,839,309 15,736 5,781,576 75.7%
1300 Building & Housing 976,839 234,146 21,153 721,541 73.9%
1400 Public Works 11,579,733 2,362,942 422,122 8,794,668 75.9%
1500 Parks & Recreation 5,454,479 1,362,005 57,240 4,035,235 74.0%
1700 Library 3,896,334 873,483 50,015 2,972,836 76.3%
TOTAL EXPEND. & TRANSFERS OUT $63,222,175 $14,788,194 $1,379,333 $47,054,649 74.4%
M:\DA T A\REVMGR\98Q1 EXP. WB1
Ic2---Y
Attachment V
BUDGET TRANSFERS APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATION
July 1, 1997 through September 30, 1997
Department
Amount
Community Development
From: Promotional Expenses
To: Computer Equipment
$555
To purchase a software program to produce promotional materials more
effectively in-house.
Public Works
From:
To:
$4100
Trash Collection
Other Equipment
To purchase an ice machine for field staff to improve hydration and reduce
field stops at convenience stores.
Finance
From:
To:
$3000
Wages
Other Specialized Services
To utilize salary savings to replace faulty computer cabling which results in
work stoppages and time consumptive repairs.
/.:< ~1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
/3
ITEM TITLE:
Report: Existing Pool Rental Fees; Agreements with Agencies for
Rental of Pool(s); Costs of Pool Operation; ~ Results of User Survey
Director of Parks, Recreati~~.~ Open spa~
City Manager J~ b(1 ~ \J4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No--X.J
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At the City Council meeting of September 9, 1997, during Oral Communications, Council directed staff
to return with a report regarding the scheduled closure of Parkway Pool during the fall and winter
months. Staff responded with a report (Attachment "A") to Council September 23, 1997 (minutes
attached as "B"). At that meeting, Council directed staff to return with an additional report addressing
various issues related to rental fees at City aquatic facilities, as well as additional information on the cost
and feasibility of keeping Parkway Pool open for the three (3) months eliminated in the FY 95/96 budget
process.
This report examines existing pool rental fees, identifies three (3) methods of estimating hourly
operational costs of the pools, and provides the results of an informal user survey that was conducted at
Parkway Pool.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1 Direct staff to pursue discussions with all appropriate agencies regarding increased rental fees;
and
2. Direct staff to continue with the scheduled closure of Parkway Pool from November 1997 through
March 1998, and return to Council during the budget process for FY 98/99 with
recommendations and options for closure in FY 98/99.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
EXISTING RENTAL FEES:
Standard Pool Rental Fees:
The standard rental rate for the City's two pools, authorized in the Master Fee Schedule, is $40.00/hour
for resident groups, and $80.00/hour for non-resident groups. This fee does not include the necessary
required Lifeguards, which are provided at a rate of $9.25/hour/Lifeguard. The number of Lifeguards
required for any rental is determined by the Aquatic Coordinator, and varies according to the nature and
size of the rental use.
[H:\HOME\PARKSREaAI13\poolrate.A13]
1
/.7 ~/
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
AGREEMENTS WITH AGENCIES FOR RENTAL OF POOL(S):
Olympic Training Center (OTC) - The rental fee to the OTC was adopted in 1997, through an
amendment to the Master Fee Schedule. For organized use of pools by competitive teams, rental fees
are $15.75/hour, plus required staffing fees. Last fiscal year, the OTC utilized the pool for
approximately 94 hours, generating $1,480 in rental revenues. The Olympic Training Center's use
schedule is somewhat irregular, and is most prevalent during the fall, winter, and spring.
Chnla Vista Elementary School District (CVESD) - The City first entered into an agreement with the
City School District for aquatic programming in 1972, and the agreement was amended in 1975 and again
in 1981. Rental fees are $1O.50/hour, plus Lifeguard and instructional staff fees. This fee is stipulated
in a formal agreement between the City and the Chula Vista Elementary School District. The provisions
of the 1981 agreement currently stand. For FY 96/97, 12 separate elementary schools participated in
instructional swimming programs (the Learn-to-Swim program) for a total of 180 rental hours, and
provided approximately $1,890 in rental revenues. The CVESD does not fund these programs directly
at the current time, and each individual school pays rental and staff fees directly to the City. Schools
provide funding through a variety of sources including student fund-raising activities, PT A sponsorship,
and direct participant fees. The vast majority of the elementary school programs take place during the
spring and fall seasons, when schools are in session.
Sweetwater Union High School District (SUSHD) - The City first entered into an agreement with
SUHSD for aquatic programming in 1972 with a rental fee of $6.25/hour plus staff. The agreement was
amended in 1975, and rental fees were increased to $8.4l1hour plus staff and administrative overhead.
An amendment to the agreement in 1981 raised the rental fee to $1O.50/hour, plus required staffing. The
provisions of the 1981 agreement currently stand. Last fiscal year, 3 local high schools utilized City
pools for competitive team practices and meets (swimming and water polo), and one middle school
participated in an instructional swimming program. For FY 96/97, rental use was approximately 475
hours, generating $4,988 in rental revenues. The majority of SUHSD use is in the fall and spring for
water polo and competitive swimming, respectively.
Competitive Youth Teams - The Chula Vista Aquatic Association and the Chula Vista Diving Team
utilize City pools for practices free of rental charges, although they do pay required staff fees. This fee-
free use has been in place since 1977, when volunteer, non-profit parent groups were formed to
administer these programs when the City was forced to abandon them due to Proposition 13. They
occasionally conduct swimming and diving meets at the pools, and during meets, a $1.00/participantlday
fee is charged. No formal agreements exist between the City and these organizations, other than annual
Facility Use Agreements (Permit to use pool). CVAA and the Diving Team utilized City pools for
approximately 600 hours last year (100 for Diving and 500 for CV AA). Their combined use for
competitive meets generated approximately $900 in rental revenues. CV AA utilizes the pools on a year-
round basis, and the Diving team is active during the spring, summer, and fall.
COSTS OF POOL OPERATION:
Aquatics Budget: The budget for both pools is contained in one budget activity in the Department (Lorna
Verde being open for 12 months per year and Parkway being open for 6 months per year). The table
below lists the major components:
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\AI13\poolrate.A131
2
/3-c-2
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
ITEM IN BUDGET FY 97/98
BUDGET AMOUNT
Salaries & Benefits $316,786
Supplies & Services $162,246
TOTAL BUDGET $479,032
Methods to Calculate Hourlv Costs:
There are a number of methods that can be utilized for estimating the hourly costs at the City's swimming
pools, and the results obtained by each vary significantly. In all methodology calculations listed below,
total "programmatic hours" are used as a common factor.
Programmatic hours are the total number of hours annually that the pools are available for actual
programming. This total is 5,876 hours (3,914 at Loma Verde [12 months open] and 1,962 at Parkway
[6 months open]). It should be noted that the both pools are open concurrently for 6 months each year,
and that several different activities are often occurring at the same time at each pool. For example,
instructional swimming classes, competitive swim team practices, and competitive springboard diving can
be conducted at the same time at a single pool.
Three methods have been developed to determine an hourly pool cost rate:
Method A: Programmatic Hours - The Aquatics budget is $479,032 for FY 97/98. If the budget
amount is divided by the number of hours the pool is reasonably available for actual activities (5,876
hours); then $479,032 divided by 5,876 hours programmatic hours at both pools = $81. 52/hour.
Method B: Full Cost Recovery - Applying Full Cost Recovery factors to the same formula as Method
A, the total budget is $580,681. This figure, divided by 5,876 programmatic hours = $98.82/hour.
Method C: Olympic Training Center - The hourly rate that was approved by Council in March of 1997
for the OTC's rental of the pools ($15.75/hour) was based on actual 12 month operational expenditures
(natural gas, electricity, chemicals, and water only).
The table below summarizes these costs, and depicts comparable rates currently paid by users:
Category Hourly Rate Hourly Rate Incl. FCR
FY 97/98 Aquatics Budget - Methods "A" & "B" $81.52/hr. $ 98.82/hr.
Standard Pool Rental Rate $40.00/hr. Non-Resident $80.00Ihr.
Olympic Training Center Rate - Method "C" $15.75/hr. Not Applicable
High School and Elementary Schools $1O.50/hr. Not Applicable
[H:\HOME\PARKSREOAI13\poolrate.A13]
3
/3~3
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
RESULTS OF SURVEY (REGARDING IDGHER FEES FOR OPENING PARKWAY POOL):
The adult and senior participants at Parkway Pool were asked to respond to a simple survey regarding
the impacts of the scheduled pool closure, and possible higher use fees for extended operations. Forty-
eight (48) surveys were returned to staff.
Adult Recreational Swimming Participants:
1. 71 % of survey participants would not use Lorna Verde Pool if Parkway Pool remains closed
during the winter months.
2. 100% the survey participants stated they would use Parkway Pool on a regular basis if the pool
remained open through the end of December.
3. 94 % of the survey participants stated they would use Parkway Pool on a regular basis if the pool
were re-opened for the entire winter closure period.
4. 88 % of the Aquatic Pass Holders who completed the survey stated they would continue to
regularly use the pool if the quarterly pass price was increased by $10.00.
5. 37% of the Aquatic Pass Holders stated they would continue to regularly use the pool if the
quarterly pass price was increased by $15.00.
6. 75 % of the Aquatic Pass Holders stated they would not continue to regularly use the pool if the
quarterly pass price was increased by $20.00.
7. 86% of the Single Use Admission Fee participants who completed the survey stated they would
continue to use the pool if the single-use admission fee were increased by $0.50/day.
8. 73% of the Single Use Admission Fee participants stated they would not continue to use the pool
if the single-use admission fee were increased by $I.oo/day.
9. 92 % of the Aquatic Exercise Class Participants who completed the survey stated they would
continue to regularly participate in the class if the fees were increased by $5.00 for a pass.
10. 56 % of the Aquatic Exercise Class Participants stated they would continue to regularly participate
in the class if the fees were increased by $0.50/day.
Summary of Survey:
1. Most Parkway users will not use Lorna Verde Pool if Parkway Pool remains closed.
2. Users wish the pool to remain open for the entire 3 months of proposed winter closure.
3. Users would pay a higher pass fee, if increased by $10 and not higher, to continue to use
Parkway Pool.
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\AI13\poolrate,A13]
4
!:J--1(
L
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
4. Single admission fee users would pay an additional $0.50/day to continue to use Parkway Pool.
5. Aquatic Exercise Class participants would pay an additional $5.oo/pass to continue to use
Parkway Pool.
ATTENDANCE TRENDS FOLLOWING POOL CLOSURE AND RE-OPENING IN FY 96/97:
Parkway Pool closed at the end of September in 1996 for a six month period of time. Attendance at
Adult Recreational Swimming periods at Lorna Verde Pool immediately increased by approximately 45 %.
This increase represented approximately 33 % of the participation figures at Parkway Pool prior to the
closure. In April of 1997, when Parkway Pool re-opened, there was an immediate decrease in
participation during Adult Swimming periods at Lorna Verde Pool of approximately 39 % . Although
attendance and participation figures normally fluctuate on a seasonal basis, these immediate and significant
changes appear to indicate that a certain number of participants from Parkway Pool were able to utilize
Lorna Verde Pool during the closure of Parkway Pool last fiscal year.
SURVEY OF POOL RENTAL FEES CHARGED BY OTHER CITIES:
Seven other municipalities in San Diego County were surveyed to determine what rental fees were
charged for various rentals. For purposes of this report, only rental rates charged for local swim clubs
(like Chula Vista Aquatic Association) and high school swim teams are listed.
City Hourly Rate for Swim Hourly Rate for High Staff Fees
Clubs School Swimming
Oceanside free free none
La Mesa $17 . 25/hour $14.25/hour $8.75/hour
Carlsbad $5.25/hour $4.45/hour $1O.75/hour
Coronado free free $1O.90/hour
National City $ 15/hour $20.00/hour none
Poway $23.63/hour $23.63/hour $10. 15/hour
San Diego $26.50/hour $26.50/hour $11.25/hour
Chula Vista free $10.50/hour $9. 25/hour
POTENTIAL NEW REVENUE IF RENTAL RATES ARE INCREASED:
As Council's direction is to re-negotiate pool rental rates with the affected school districts, the following
examples could be used to estimate potential new revenue from increased rental rates. The proposed new
rental rates used; $15.00, $20.00 and $25.00 per hour, are for illustrative purposes only.
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\Al13\poolrate.A13]
5
/JrS
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
If rental fees are increased from $10.50 per hour to $15.00 per hour, the schools combined hourly use
(655 hours in FY 96/97) would be multiplied by the difference and potential new rental revenue would
be $2,947 annually.
If rental fees are increased from $10.50 per hour to $20.00 per hour, the schools combined hourly use
(655 hours in FY 96/97) would be multiplied by the difference and potential new rental revenue would
be $6,222 annually.
If rental fees are increased from $10.50 per hour to $25.00 per hour, the schools combined hourly use
(655 hours in FY 96/97) would be multiplied by the difference and potential new rental revenue would
be $9,497 annually.
CONTACTS WITH OTHER AGENCIES REGARDING POTENTIAL FEE INCREASES:
A letter has been sent to the Sweetwater Union High School District, and a meeting to discuss an increase
in rental rates has been set. Discussions would affect competitive swimming and competitive water polo
teams from local high schools, and at least one instructional program from a middle school.
The Chula Vista Elementary School District has not been contacted, since they are not involved directly
with current school usage. No contacts have not yet been made with any individual school sites at this
point.
The Chula Vista Aquatic Association and the Chula Vista Diving Team currently do not pay rental fees
for practices at the pools, and pay only the $1.00/participant/day fee during competitive meets. These
groups have not been formally contacted regarding possible fee increases.
AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER AGENCIES:
Staff is proposing to place all pool rental fees in the Master Fee Schedule. New agreements with the
school districts would not need to be re-negotiated to formalize a proposed pool rental fee increase. Any
agency wishing to rent the pool would complete a Facility Use Permit stating the conditions of the rental,
and such agency would pay the fee as prevailing in the Master Fee Schedule. In preliminary discussions
with the Sweetwater Union High School District, they are amenable to the Master Fee Schedule, and
believe a formal agreement is unnecessary.
Staff Recommendation Rel!ardinl! Closure of Pool for November 1997 throwh March 1998: At the
September 23, 1997 Council meeting, Council authorized the continued operation of Parkway Pool for
October; without an additional appropriation to cover costs. Based on Council direction following
consideration of this report, staff will require time to discuss increased rental fees with user groups.
Although, as discussed below in the Fiscal Impact section, new rental revenue could offset the costs
associated with keeping Parkway Pool open, staff recommends that the Parkway Pool be closed
November 1, and re-opened April I, 1998.
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\AI13\poolrate.A13J
6
/3-~
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
Parkway Pool has historically been closed for three months in the fall and winter'. This is a very low
use period; and staff is not therefore recommending that Parkway Pool be re-opened for a six month
period (for a total twelve month operation). Staff will be returning to Council with a report and
recommendations for increased fees. Any resulting revenue received from rental rate increases would
not be fully realized until FY 98/99. Staff believes Council should consider the re-opening of Parkway
Pool during the FY 98/99 budget process, when revenues can more accurately be estimated.
FISCAL IMPACT: It is difficult to determine what the actual cost of re-opening Parkway Pool would
be, because the costs to operate the pool and the revenue received is seasonal. For illustrative purposes,
staff could use the three month budget example depicted in the September 23, 1997 Council report
(Attachment "A").
Estimated Costs to Keep Parkway Pool Open for Three Months: If Parkway Pool was not closed for
three months, the operating costs for the three month period are estimated at $14,470 (gas, electricity,
water and chemicals) and $7,860 in personnel costs to increase the 0.50 FTE benefitted Senior Lifeguard
position to 0.75 FTE in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Department budget. In addition, janitorial
staff budgeted in the Public Works Operations budget would have to be increased by $3,080 for part-time
hourly staff.
This amounts to a total cost for three months of $25.410.
Budget Item 3 Month Cost
Gas, electricity, water and chemicals $14,470
Increase in 0.50 FTE Sr. Lifeguard to 0.75 FTE $ 7,860
Janitorial Services $3,080
Total $25,410
New Rental Revenue to Support Three Month Opening at Parkwav Pool: As discussed above, should
new rental rates for the schools be set at a higher rate (the example above used increment rates of $5.00
per hour ($15.00; $20.00; $25.00 per hour), and the schools continue to rent the pool(s) at their current
annual combined rate of 655 hours per year; then the table below depicts potential new revenue.
This revenue would be offset by the expenses associated with opening the pool for an additional three (3)
months of $25,410. Revenue of $2,947 against expenses of $25.410 would be a revenue offset of 12%.
Revenue of $6,222 against expenses of $25,410 would be a revenue offset of 25 %; or a revenue of
It should be noted that for the last 14 years, one of the City pools has been closed for
three months per year. This facilitates maintenance should one pool need to be closed;
and programs could be switched to the closed pool without displacing existing
participants.
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\AI13\poolrate.A13]
7
/3-7
Item:
Meeting Date: 10/28/97
$9,497 against expenses of $25,410 would be a revenue offset of 37 %. Staff however, cannot guarantee
that the affected schools/agencies would utilize the pool at the same number of hours per year.
New Rental Potential New Revenne
Rate Revenue Expenses Offset
Schools @ 655 hours $15.00 $2,947 $25,410 12%
$20.00 $6,222 $25,410 25%
$25.00 $9,497 $25,410 37%
Attachment:
"AtI_
Agenda Statement - September 23, 1997 . _~1>
Council Minutes of September 23, 1997 SC~"-
t-\O't
"B" -
{H:\HOME\PARKSREC\AI13\poolrate.A13J
8
/.5~ ?'
Attachment "A"
COuNCIL AGENDA STATEMEl\'T
Item: /6
Meeting Date: 09/23/97
ITEM TITLE:
Report: Seasonal Swimming Pool Closure
Director of Parks, Recreation ~~n Space ~91/
City Manager0l:t bO ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No..xJ
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At the City Council meeting of September 9, 1997, during Oral Communications, Council directed staff
to return with a report regarding the closure of Par1.-way Pool during the fall and winter months. This
report provides a brief budget history of the annual pool closures, identifies the proposed fall and winter
pool operations schedule for FY 97/98, provides a history of scheduled pool closures over the past few
years, identifies the anticipated impacts of the scheduled closure as it relates to existing programming at
both pools, and provides a brief narrative on the basis for staff's recommendation to close Par1.-way Pool
as opposed to Lorna Verde Pool.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council accept the report, and direct staff to
continue with the closure of Parkway Pool for six months and to return to Council during the budget
process for FY 98/99 to determine the feasibility of whether Parkway Pool should be re-opened during
the winter months.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A.
DISCUSSION: At the City Council meeting of September 9, 1997, during Oral Communications,
Council directed staff to return with a report regarding the scheduled closure of Parkway Pool during the
fall and winter months.
Budeet Historv
From 1982 to 1995, the annual Aquatic Section budget reflected 21 months of operations between Lorna
Verde Pool and Par1.-way Pool. One pool was operational for 12 months, and the other was operational
for 9 months each year. The 3 month closure normally occurred during the winter months.
. ,
. ,
. ,
In 1995, the annual Aquatic Section budget was amended, and annual operations between Parkway and
Lorna Verde Pool were reduced to 18 months (12 months at one pool, and 6 months at the other).
During the budget process for FY 95/96, three months of operations at Par1.-way Pool were eliminated,
with an estimated cost savings of $14,470. In addition, the 0.75 FTE part-time benefitted Senior
Lifeguard position was reduced to a 0.50 FTE part-time benefitted position, with an estimated savings
of $7,860.
Scheduled Parkwav Pool Closure for Fall and Winter - FY 97/98
Par1.-way Pool is scheduled to close for the season on October 4, 1997, and is scheduled to re-open on
April 4, 1998. The re-opening date coincides with the start of the public school's spring break schedule.
111:\HOME\PARKSREC\A 113\POOLCLOS.AIJ]
1
~/3~/
Item:
Meeting Date: 09/23/97
This six month closure conforms to the decision to close Parkway Pool for six months as a budget savings
measure. Lorna Verde Pool is scheduled to remain open for the entire 12 months of the budget year.
History of Scheduled Pool Closures
Both Lorna Verde and Parkway Pool have had scheduled closures for extended periods of time for more
than a decade. Without exception, one pool has remained operational at all times. Listed below are the
scheduled closures that have occurred during the past seven years:
Parkway Pool closed from January through March of 1990
Parkway Pool closed from early March to mid June of 1991; renovation of circulation and
filtration system at pool
Parkway Pool closed from late November of 1991 to early March of 1992
Lorna Verde Pool closed from early December 1992 through late January of 1993. Parkway Pool
subsequentJy closed during the month of February of 1993
Lorna Verde Pool closed from early December of 1993 to early June of 1994; closure was in
excess of the 3 month budgetary constraint due to the fiberglass resurfacing renovation at Lorna
Verde Pool
Lorna Verde Pool closed from early January to late May of 1995; closure was in excess of the
3 month budgetary constraint due to major renovations of the circulation and filtration system at
Lorna Verde
Parkway Pool closed from mid-September of 1995 to late April of 1996; closure in excess of the
6 months due to major renovations at Parkway Pool and the Parl.-way recre~tion complex.
.' II
'."
Parkway Pool closed from mid-September of:l~96 to mid-March of 1997
Lener and Petition
The participant who addressed City Council on September 9th submined the anached communication and
petition during her presentation. The points from that communication and staff's response are:
The letter indicates that some current participants would not be able to continue to swim due to
problems with transportation. This fact is noted later in this report, and is supported by a
disproportionate change in attendance following past pool closures.
The letter indicated that the City was negotiating a rental agreement with a National City-based
swim team. The National City Swim Club has approached the City regarding winter use of the
pool, since the National City pool will be closed for an extended period of time. However, it is
unlikely that the swim organization can pay the City's non-resident rental fees of $89.25/hour.
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\A113\POOLCLOS.AI3]
2
~ J3-/IJ
Attachment ITA"
Item:
Meeting Date: 09/23/97
The letter addressed that fact that Parl..'Way Pool tends to be a warmer environment. This is true,
due to the fact that Lorna Verde Pool is more susceptible to prevailing winds that cause cooler
water and deck conditions, However, wind screening has been added to the chain link fencing,
around the Lorna Verde Pool, to help mitigate this situation.
Anticipated Participation Impacts of the Parkway Pool Closure
The scheduled closure of Parkway Pool will have immediate participation impacts on several on-going
programs that are currently being conducted at Parkway Pool. These activities include Adult Recreational
Lap Swimming periods, two contractual water exercise programs for adults, a long-term rental of the pool
by a private vendor providing therapeutic activities for adults, and a competitive springboard diving
program serving youth and adults. The table below indicates the average daily attendance in these
programs, at Parl..'Way Pool, at the current time:
PROGRAM DAYS TIMES AVERAGE DAILY
ATTENDANCE
Morning Adult Mon-Fri 6:30-8:30 AM 22
Recreational Swim
Mid-Day Adult Mon-Fri 11:00 AM - 1:00 PM 26
Recreational Swim
Aquatic Exercise MonlWed/Fri 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM 10
PrelPost Natal Exercise MonIWed./Fri 12:00 - 1:00 PM 5
Therapy Rental TueslThur 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM 9
Springboard Diving MonlWed/Fri 6:00 - 7:00 PM , 10
, ,
Costs Per Day to Keep Pool Open Based on Participation for Three Months: The participation
figures cited above at Parl..'Way Pool equate to 333 participants per week. If the pool was not closed for
three months, the operating costs for the three month period would be $14,470 (gas, electricity, water
and chemicals) and $7,860 in personnel costs to increase the 0.50 FTE benefitted Senior Lifeguard
position to 0.75 FTE in the Parks, Recieation and Open Space Department budget. In addition, janitorial
staff budgeted in the Public Works Operations budget would have to be increased by $3,080 for part-time
hourly staff. This amounts to a total cost of $25,410. The cost per participant to operate the pool per
week if the pool is opened for the three months is $6.36 ($25,410/12 weeks [3 month closure] =
$2,117.50 per week/333 participants/week.
Revenue accrued for the period of closure from the participants is estimated at $3,450. Using the same
cost per participant per week, the revenue received per participant during the three month period would
be 86c per week.
fH:\HOME\PARKSRED.A113\POOLCLOS.AI3]
3
~ /5-//
Item:
Meeting Date: 09/23/97
In summary, for a cost to operate the pool per participant per week for three months is $6.36, the City
receives 86c per participant per week.
Costs Per Day to Keep Pool Open Based on Participation for Six Months: Should the Council desire
to re-open Parkway Pool for the entire six months that is scheduled to be closed; the participation figures
at Parkway Pool would equate to 666 participants per week during a six month period (for the programs
designated in the Table). The operating costs for the six month period are $28,940 (gas, electricity,
water and chemicals). The cost of $7,860 in personnel expenses to increase the 0.50 FTE benefitted
Senior Lifeguard position to 0.75 FTE in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space budget would not
change. Janitorial staff budgeted in the Public Works Operations budget would have to be increased by
$6,160 for part-time hourly staff. This brings the total cost to $42,960. The cost per participant to
operate the pool per week if the pool is opened for the six months, is $2.69 ($42,960/24 weeks [6 month
closure] = $1,790 per week/666 participants/week.
Revenue accrued for the period of closure from the participants is estimated at $6,900. Using the same
cost per participant per week, the revenue received per participant during the six month period would be
$1. 73 per week.
In summary, for a cost to operate the pool per participant per week for six months is $2.69, the City
receives $1.73 per participant per week.
Selection of Lorna Verde Swimminl! Pool for Year-round ODerations
In the absence of maintenance or construction constraints, Lorna Verde Pool is the pool that has been
selected for year-round operations based on the following physical plant considerations.
Lorna Verde Pool is approximately 30% larger than Parkway Pool.' This includes usable water
space, deck space, and locker and shower room capacities. During the period of time that only
one facility is operational, programs are combined and compressed. Shared use of the pool is
common throughout the year, and is magnified dUring a facility closure. Difficulties in meeting
community needs by combining programs and scheduling shared use are exacerbated at Park-way
Pool, where less space is available. .
Lorna Verde Pool has larger enclosed areas to accommodate dry-land program-related activities.
This includes team meeting, parent meetings, safety presentations, and classroom activities
required for water safety courses. .
Lorna Verde Pool houses a variety of dry-land weight-training equipment provided and utilized
by the competitive teams that utilize the pool. It would be virtually impossible to re-Iocate this
equipment to Park-way Pool.
This is the main reason Lorna Verde Pool is chosen to be open in the winter months.
This does not preclude; however, that Parkway Pool can be opened in the winter when
Lorna Verde Pool must be closed for construction, maintenance, special activities, etc.
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\A113\POOLCLOS.A13]
4
~3~/-2
Attachment IIAII
Item:
Meeting Date: 09/23/97
Lorna Verde Pool is equipped with deck-anchored hardware used by a number of programs. This
includes starting blocks and backstroke flag lines used for City, contractual, and school district
activities, and, and water polo goals used by City and school district programs. Parkway Pool
is not designed to accommodate this equipment.
Lorna Verde Pool has three diving boards, as compared to two at Parkway Pool.
Lorna Verde Pool has a built-in handicap access ramp, which allows for unassisted access to the
water. Parkway Pool is equipped with a deck-anchored lift that requires staff assistance.
Convenient parking, and parking capacity at Lorna Verde Pool, far exceeds that at Parkway Pool.
This is more critical during large events such as swim meets, but can be a factor during routine
daily operations, notably during the late afternoon and early evening.
Lorna Verde Pool has a larger capacity for spectator seating, and is better equipped to safely
handle occasional on-deck spectator requirements.
Protective wind screening was applied to all exposed chain link enclosure fences at Lorna Verde
Pool last fiscal year in response to concerns related to colder winter water and deck conditions
caused by prevailing winds. This screening, in combination with the continued use of solar
heating panels and thermal pool covers to supplement pool heating, should help to maintain more
constant water temperatures at the facility.
The Aquatic Coordinator's office is located at Lorna Verde Pool. This is advantageous from an
administrative point of view, since all operations can be directly monitored, and the Coordinator
can still function out of his permanent office. Supervisory staffing levels during the winter
months are reduced to a certain degree, and it is advantageous to have the Coordinator
immediately available to assist with emergencies or unusual conditions.
The current program participants from Parkway PoDi,: could be accommodated, :in similar eXlstmg
programs at Lorna Verde Pool. For instance, Lorna. Verde pool currently offers identical Adult
Recreational Swimming periods, and participants currently utilizing Parkway Pool could take advantage
of the same programs at Lorna Verde. However, it is very likely that a certain percentage of participants
currently utilizing Parkway Pool would be unable or unwilling to travel to Lorna Verde Pool to continue
to participate in aquatic programs.
Even so, the anticipated increase in participation would create more crowded conditions during these
periods. Similar mid-day exercise programs (conducted by different contractual instructors) are also
offered at Lorna Verde Pool, and could accommodate additional participants. The competitive diving
team could share use of the pool with a competitive swimming team currently utilizing Lorna Verde Pool.
The rental use of the pool by the therapy group would most likely have to be re-scheduled prior to 11:00
[H:\HOME\PARKSREC\A113\POOLO..OS.^13]
5
~/J~JJ
Item:
Meeting Date: 09/23/97
a.m. or after I :00 p.m. The table below indicates the current attendance at existing programs at Lorna
Verde Pool.'
Participation at Lorna Verde Pool:
PROGRAM DAYS TIMES AVERAGE DAILY
ATTENDANCE
Morning Adult Mon-Fri 6:30-8:30 AM 12
Recreational Swim
Mid-Day Adult Mon-Fri 11:00 AM - 1:00 PM 16
Recreational Swim
Aquatic Exercise Mon-Fri 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM 14
Aquatic Exercise Mon-Fri 12:00 - 1:00 PM 14
High School Water Mon-Fri 3:00 - 5:00 PM 39
Polo
Competitive Mon-Fri 4:00 - 7:00 PM 44
Swimming Team
Masters Swimming Mon-Fri 7:00 - 8:00 PM 8
Team
Aquatic Exercise MonIWedlFri 7:00 - 8:00 PM 21
Adult Lessons TueslThur 7:00 - 8:00 PM 7
The participation figures cited above at Lorna Verde,;pool equate to 812 participants per week, In
comparison to the 333 participants/week at Parkway .p~Ql.
OPtions for FalllWinter Pool Operations 1997/98
Option 1: (Staff Recommendation) Status Quo. Parkway Pool would continue to be closed for a period
of approximately six months. and programming would be offered exclusively at Lorna Verde Pool. There
is no fiscal impact with this option. Staff will present to Council during the FY 98/99 budget process.
the option to re-open Parkway Pool in the winter for a three month or six month period.
Option 2: Parkway Pool would remain open for an additional three months (October - December).
bringing total pool operational hours back to the level that was achieved for a number of years prior to
,
It should be noted that adding the participation attendance at Parkway Pool to the
participation attendance at Lorna Verde Pool would reflect an inaccurate attendance
picture; since not all participants would choose to transfer to Lorna Verde Pool.
1H:\HOME\PARKSREC\A113\POOLCLOS.AI3)
6
~ /y~/'I
. I
;
Attachment HAil
Item:
Meeting Date: 09/23/97
the budgetary amendments made in FY 95/96. An additional $14,470 in operational costs, $7,860 in
personnel costs in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Department (to increase the Senior Lifeguard
position from a 0.50 FTE to a 0.75 FTE level), and $3,080 in personnel part-time costs in the Public
Works Operations budget; would be required to exercise this option. Based on current attendance at
Park-way Pool in the existing programs identified earlier in this report, the projected general fund revenue
from these programs would be $3,450 over the three month period.
Option 3: Parkway Pool would remain open for the entire twelve months of the calendar year. An
additional $28,940 in operational costs, $7,860 in personnel costs in the Parks, Recreation and Open
Space Department (to increase the Senior Lifeguard position from a 0.50 FTE to a 0.75 FTE level), and
$6,160 in personnel part-time costs in the Public Works Operations budget; would be required to exercise
this option. Based on current attendance at Parkway Pool in the existing programs identified earlier in
this report, the projected general fund revenue from these programs would be $6,900 over the six month
period.
Option 4: Parkway Pool would remain open for the entire twelve months of the calendar year, and
Lorna Verde Pool would be closed for six months. As discussed above, this option is not practical due
to the impact that it would have on all programs during the closure period. The physical size of Park-way
Pool is not conducive to conducting all programs when Lorna Verde Pool is closed, and shared-use
opportunities (more than one large group using the pool concurrently) are greatly reduced due to limited
space.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with continuing the closure of Parkway
Pool. If the option to re-open the pool for three months is considered, then staff would need to return
with a proposal for an appropriation of approximately $25,410 for expenses associated with operations.
These expenses would be offset with a potential revenue of $3,450.
If the Council wishes to consider the re-opening of the pool for six months is considered, then staff would
need to return with a proposal for an appropriation of approximately $42,960 for expe,nses associated with
operations. These expenses would be offset with a pot~ntial revenue of $6,900. "
Attachment:
Petitions NOT SCANNED
(H;\HOME\PARKSREC\A 113\POOLQ.QS.AI3)
7
~3-i-5
,
./
Attachment liB"
Minutes
September 23, 1997
Page 7
that we can make a decision that we don't have various applicants who are in a furth~r stage of a development
project that are going to be brought to a halt because we are at a position where our existing polices will not allow
the issuance of additional pennits because we are at full capacity and we have growth management limits that are
set. Looking to the future, how are we going to deal with this.
Mr, Swanson stated that the planning department working with the engineering division brought a policy forward
to the City Council about a year ago on trip deferrals and implementing basis to allow some of these maps to go
ahead. In that we created a hierarchy whereby final maps that were already approved would have apriority.
Someone like EastLake that has put in a lot of infrastructure, did so mostly through assessment districts, and those
areas with the assessment districts for tbe constructing the street facilities were given a priority within the system.
In our baseline study, we have about five to seven years of growth, that is reserving certain trips for places like
those subdivisions that have development agreements with reserved traffic rights, Some of the developers who have
put in a lot of infrastructure and still have those outstanding have not gotten up to that point with their number of
trips still have trips to go. Those trips are built into the model. One of the ways a developer can get a priority for
a larger area is by putting in those needed facilities. So we do recognize that.
Mr, Goss stated that we could develop a report to indicate wbat we bave done by way existing policy to reserve
trips for the developers that have done that. He felt, however, that the developers did not want to collectively get
into competition fighting each other over trips. That is why they were agreeable to have the DIF for Route 125,
and that is why they are talking about seriously punching through Orange Avenue or Palomar.
Councilmember Moot asked that with the report if staff could let Council know the status of SR-125. He had heard
'that Senator Filner was going to try to pull federal funding for the interchange at I-54 and divert it someplace else.
Mr. Goss stated he had talked with Supervisor Cox and he thought that the amount of federal funding if it were
pulled would just basically require more transnet money to be taken from other projects in the region. He did not
feel it was a real threat. His second point was that he saw the recovering economy in this state as well as some
assurances that he had gotten that under ICET, (a) there could be as much as $135 million available to make 1-905
an expressway and that (b) over the next five years there would be sufficient money to do 905 anyway. He felt that
there would be sufficient money for both projects.
Mayor Horton stated that We did have some dialog with Filner's Washington D.C. oftl~e and that we have
forwarded a letter from SANDAG supporting the additional fUnding for 905 with the understanding that it would
not hurt any of the efforts that have been made with SR-125. She believed the comments by Mr. Goss were correct
and the funding is already available and allocated for SR-125.
* * * Councilmember Padilla left the dais at 7:28 p.m. * * *
RESOLUTION 18785 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER SALAS, heading read, text waived, passed and
approved 3-0-2 (Padilla and Rindone absent),
* >I< >I< Councilmember Padilla returned to the dais at 7:40 p.m. >I< >I< >I<
16. REPORT SEASONAL SWIMMING POOL CLOSURE - On 9/9/97, Council directed staff to return
with a report regarding the scheduled closure of Parkway Pool during the fall and winter months. The report
provides a brief history of pool closures over the past few years, identifies the proposed fall and winter operations
schedule for 1997/98, identifies the impacts of the scheduled closure as it relates to existing programming, and
identifies the relative costs involved in swimming pool operations during the fall and winter months. Staff
/:3 -/~
Minutes
September 23, 1997
Page 8
reconunends Council accept the report and direct staff to proceed with one of the options provided within the report.
(Director of Parks, Recreation and Open Space)
Item pulled by the public.
Council member Salas asked if the school districts were involved in using the pool. What does it cost to operate
the pool per hour.
Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Open Space, replied that both the elementary and high school
districts use the pool at different times during the year. We have an agreement with both agencies where we realize
$10.50 per hour plus the staff time which we add into the agreement with the school districts. Both agreements
were consummated many years ago, and we were thinking about amending that, but the school district was
concerned about students and their ability to afford any kind of increased fee for pool use. He continued that the
cost to operate the pool per hour varies between $80 and $150 and that takes into consideration the staffmg time,
and utilities to operate the facility.
Councilmember Salas stated that we should not be subsidizing the school districts at the expense of our residents.
If we are shutting off access to the pool because we cannot afford to keep it open, and yet we have another public
entity that has revenues that can pay for use of the pool and .they are not paying their fair share, she felt we should
explore the idea to see if the school districts paid for the cost of using the pool, if that would create enough revenue
to keep the pool in operation.
Those addressing Council opposing the pool closure were:
· Ken Carpenter, 2230 Denver Street, San Diego, uses the Parkway pool during his lunch hour.
. Lenawee Garcia, 621 Gretchen Road, Chula Vista, 91910, speaking in behalf of those needing the
therapeutic exercise at the Parkway pool. The water temperature was warmer at Parkway which was better
therapeutically for the disabled and the seniors.
· Sharon Voelkle, 242 Glover Avenue, Chula Vista, a health educator and nursing instructor, stated there
are many who do not have the transportation to Lorna Verde pool. She wondered if there were more
available hours, the youth would use the pool after school. She would be happy to pay a higher fee to use
the Parkway pool during the winter months.
· Jon Harms, 3751 Alta Lorna Drive, Bonita 91902, a school teacher, urged that Parkway remain open
because many seniors cannot get to Lorna Verde.
. Pat Mahoney, 1503-C Apache Drive, Chula Vista, expressed a desire to keep Parkway pool open during
the winter months.
· Dean Zrucky, 4343 Montavo, San Diego, 92107, head varsity water polo coach for Hilltop High School
for both boys and girls. He stated that while they are in the pool between 3 and 5 p. m., there are lessons
going on for about twenty kids. Whether they were there are not, the pool would still have to be open for
the lessons.
· Alex Balamonte, 2315 Long Ridge Road, Chula Vista, a daily user of the Parkway pool.
Councilmember Moot stated that it would cost each participant who would use the pool approximately $12.00 per
month extra. If we had a winter rate of an additional $12.00 per month, would people continue to use the pool
J;J---J7
Attachment liB"
Minutes
September 23, 1997
Page 9
during the winter. He asked if we were in a position right now to take a gamble to try a winter rate, monitor it
for three months, and see whether people still corne at the higher price.
Mr. Valenzuela felt that some people would pay that fee. But, what we are working on for Council are ways of
keeping that pool open in the future by trying to assemble sufficient number of programs together so that pool would
pay for itself over that 6-month period. One way to keep the pool open would be to assess a fee; another way
would be to couple it with other programs.
John Gates, Senior Recreation Supervisor, responded that currently the seniors pay $35 for three months and adults
pay $45 for three months. If you are looking at a three-montb extension, you are increasing tbe fee by $12 per
person. We used to maintain the pools open during the winter months and charged a special fee that was outside
our normal annual pass fees. At that time, the three-month fee was $50 per person.
Councilmember Padilla felt it was premature to begin examining how we can increase the rate structure before we
get an opportunity to meet with the school districts and get those users who are not up to the regular rate to that
level first. He would not support enhancing the revenues by raising fees until that information was available. He
had a difficult time increasing fees on the users while we're having a large component of users who aren't even
paying the basic rate. He will not vote to do that.
Mr. Goss stated that we could make a commitment to open the pool for one more month and in the meantime come
back with a report after we have surveyed the users about additional fees, look at the history of fees that we have
had in the past, and look at the premium rate that we may have had at that time, as well as what other cities charge.
MSC (Horton/Moot) to approve an extension for Parkway and leave it open through the month of October
and staff will come back within that timeframe and share with us the additional information that has been
requested. Motion approved 4-0-1 (Rindone absent).
* * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * *
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
· Laura Hunter, 1717 Kettner Blvd., San Diego 92101, representing Environmental Health Coalition.
reported on a vote by the Interagency Panel for San Diego Bay. The fmal comprehensive management plan was
approved, and the most significant part was that the conceptual approval of a South Bay National Wildlife Refuge
was included in tbe plan. She was here because Chula Vista was registered as a "no" vote on that item. She
wanted to verify that it was Council's position and then maybe obtain clarification about the vote. The vote was
intended to be a conceptual approval for a South Bay National Wildlife Refuge of some kind. They were concerned
because the vote sends a message that the South Bay may not be the safest place for ecotourism-type developers to
look. She felt that an abstention would be a more appropriate position for Chula Vista to take on this item at this
time. She urged: (1) a letter be sent to the Chair stating that an abstention was a more accurate category for Chula
Vista on this matter, given that we have not taken a position; and (2) that the Council set aside a time for the Fish
and Wildlife Service and others to come and talk about this proposal.
Mayor Horton stated that staff bas been looking into this. The City of Coronado abstained, but the Port voted no
as well as the County. The reason for this is because of the uncertainties in that the environmental assessment is
not available for public review at this time and the boundaries were not definitive. She expressed that conceptually
we could approve this, but at the time our staff felt that they were getting into too many specifics.
/3~/6
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / t.j
Meeting Date 10/28/97
SUBMITTED BY:
::'::::~:J~ :;~ C"y CouocU Prio"',"
Budget Manager~ rr
Public Information Coordinat
(4/5ths Vote: Yes _ NoX)
ITEM TITLE:
REVffiWED BY:
The City Council previously had work sessions to discuss and develop city-wide priorities. On
September 11,1997, City Council completed a ftnal review of the priorities and identifted seven
city-wide priorities. The City Council received public comment and input on the proposed top
seven priorities at a public hearing on October 21, 1997 which was continued to this Council
meeting. A third public hearing will be held on January 13, 1998 at 6:00 p.m. to allow for
further public input and comment with the intent to complete public testimony and then formally
adopt the priorities at the third hearing.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept public testimony on the seven priorities, follow
the staff recommendation for further publicizing the priorities and schedule a third public hearing
for ftnal adoption on January 13, 1998 at 6:00 p.m.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The City Council has had four work sessions to speciftcally discuss the development of city-wide
priorities. They met for a total of 13 and one-half hours and narrowed a list of 226 staff priorities
to a ftnal list of approximately 63 goals and sub-goals that the City Council believed to be the
highest priority for completion. At the ftnal work session each Council member selected their top
8 goals and from those selections the ftnal 7 were identifted.
To assist Council in this process Rod Davis, representing the Chamber of Commerce, attended
the first worksession to offer the Chamber's priorities. In addition Council held two special
worksessions on two of the proposed priorities, which took another 5 and one half hours, on the
Bayfront and Town Centre I. During the worksession on the Bayfront the Council received input
from the following groups: Chula Vista Yacht Harbor Coalition, Bayfront Conservancy Trust,
Environmental Health Coalition, San Diego Audubon Society, Rohr, the Port District, Save Our
Bay, SDG&E, and several citizens. At the worksession on Town Centre I Project Area, which
represents Third Avenue, the Council received further input from the Downtown Business
.
...
/1/-/
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
Association, Chamber of Commerce, Southwestern College Small Business Development and
International Trade Center, Economic Development Commission, Sweetwater Union High School
district and several Third Avenue business owners.
Through this process a total of six major goal areas were identified with sub-goals under each of
these major headings. (See Attachment 1) From this total list of approximately 63 different goals
or projects, each Council member selected their top 8 priorities. By matching those selections
Council identified 7 projects or goals which they agreed were the highest priority.
The top seven (7) priorities identified are Bayfront, Downtown Revitalization, Broadway
Revitalization, Otay Valley, Educational Center/Environmental Institute, SR-125 and Revenue
Enhancement.
A brief description of each of these follows:
B~front
Continue the redevelopment and replanning of the Bayfront Project Area to encourage and
facilitate quality visitor-serving commercial, recreational and residential development for the
undeveloped coastal related properties west of 1-5 between SR-54 and "L" Street. The
redevelopment and replanning efforts are to include furthering the joint planning process with the
San Diego Port Commission toward the collective goal of expanding the Bayfront Project Area
boundaries to include the Port District properties adjacent to the Chula Vista Yacht Harbor,
extending "H" Street westerly to Marina Parkway and establishing the Chula Vista Bayfront as
a resort destination.
Otay Valley
Continue the redevelopment and replanning of the Otay Valley Road Project Area to encourage
and facilitate quality commercial, entertainment, recreation and industrial development along the
Otay Valley Road corridor between 1-805 and the eastern and southern City limits. The
redevelopment and replanning efforts are to capitalize and expand on the opportunities created by
the Auto Park, Universal Amphitheater and White Water Canyon projects toward the goal of
improving the image and character of the area.
Third A venue - Downtown
Continue the revitalization of the Town Centre I Downtown District along Third Avenue from "E"
to "I" Street by encouraging and facilitating quality infill commercial and office development as
well as attracting quality commercial tenants. The revitalization efforts are to include continued
marketing, leasing, and image enhancement programs with the Downtown Business Association
toward the goal of re-establishing the Downtown as the commercial-civic focus of the City.
)f/-2
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
Broadway Revitalization
Implement a focused revitalization effort along the Broadway commercial corridor to impede the
proliferation of blighting influences and encourage quality commercial/retail development. The
revitalization effort should include coordination with the Broadway Business Association and
further the progress made with the Palomar Trolley Center, the auto dealership relocations, and
the completed Broadway Street improvements.
Higher Education CenterlEnvironmental Sciences Institute
Continue to advance the planning for a "Higher Education Center and Environmental Sciences
Institute" concept to involve the establishment of a single campus which would house academic
programs from San Diego State University, University of California at San Diego, and
Southwestern College with emphasis in the areas of high technology and biotechnology, as well
as environmental research and commerce. The planning efforts should include further definition
of organizational structure, academic and research focus, as well as siting and financial issues.
SR-125
Continue to support the construction of a highway to serve the eastern area north/south traffic
movement. The facility will be a 6 to 10 lane divided and controlled access highway built to
freeway standards beginning at I-90S in Otay Mesa and traversing north to SR-54. The project
has regional funding in the amount of $70 million (approx) to pay for the San Miguel Connector
(between SR-54 and San Miguel Rd.) It is important to keep political interest and support for the
funding with State, Federal, and local elected officials.
Improve City Revenues Base
Continue to focus on increasing the revenue base for basic City services, actively participate in
lobbying efforts to "return" funds taken from the State, limit the use of one-time revenue sources,
make progress toward the Council goal of an 8% reserve, and generally ensure an improvement
in the City's long term financial stability.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Since it is Council's intent to have their priorities confirmed by the community, the proposed
goals are being approved during three Council sessions at public hearings. In order to inform
residents about the City Council's seven top priorities for the City and garner public input, prior
to this meeting staff has taken the following actions:
. Press Relea~e: A press release was issued describing the seven priorities and publicizing
these meetings. It was distributed to the media serving Chula Vista as well as the
Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Association (DBA), Broadway Business
Association (BBA) and Bonita Business & Professional Association (BB&PA).
;1/-3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
. Information notice on televised Council meetings: A short information notice was run
about the priorities and the opportunity for public input at these meetings as part of the
City Council meetings of Oct. 7 and 14 which were televised on Cox Communications and
Chula "ista Cable.
Additional Recommendations
It is recommended that the Council take additional steps to publicize these priorities and/or to gain
further community input. The following are actions which can be taken at no additional cost and
are recommended to be implemented:
1. "Chula Vista Ouarterly" : A story is planned for the next edition of the City's newsletter
which will be published in late December/early January. This newsletter reaches virtually
every household and business in the City. (Approximately 26,000 are mailed to Laidlaw
single-family household customers and another 31,000 are directly mailed to multi-family
dwelling units and businesses for a total distribution of more than 57,000.) Publication
of the newsletter is already included in the budget.
2. Service Club presentations: The Mayor and/or City Council members will be scheduled
to give presentations to the major service organizations in Chula "ista including Rotary,
Optimists and Kiwanis clubs. Staff will provide information and support for these
presentations. This will be accomplished with no additional budget costs.
3. Publicity in other newsletters: A press release will be submitted to other community
organizations for publication in their newsletters including the Rancho del Rey and
EastLake developments. (The Chamber, DBA, BBA and BB&PA have already received
the release.) This will be accomplished at no additional budget costs.
4. Citv web site: Information about the priorities will be placed on the city's web site and
any resident input could be E-mailedto the Mayor and Council. This will be
accomplished at no additional budget cost.
5. Board and Commission members: Each City board and commission member will be sent
a letter detailing the identified priorities and asking each group to provide any input
regarding these priorities to the Council. This will cost approximately $100 which will
be absorbed in the current year budget.
6. Flyer: A flyer summarizing the Council's seven priorities will be developed and placed
in the City's libraries, counters at City Hall and in other City facilities. This flyer will
include a section for community input. This will cost approximately $200 and will be
absorbed in the current year budget.
Additional Option It is recommended that this additional option of a citizen survey be considered
during the budget process for 1998/99 because of the cost and time to plan, implement and
/J/-f
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 10/28/97
evaluate.
7. Survey: A mail or phone survey could be taken of local residents to gain their input
regarding the City's top priorities. This could Dill be accomplished with existing staff and
depending on the method used and the size of the sample, could result in additional budget
costs ranging from $5,000 to $25,000. Staff recommends that if a citizen survey is
authorized that it also be designed to attain input regarding a broad range of City services.
Because of budget cutbacks in the past several years, a formal citizen survey has not been
conducted by the City since the late 1980s.
ONGOING PROCESS
The process recently completed by the City Council provided valuable direction to staff to
establish a better plan for achieving these identified priorities. This direction will allow staff
resources and time priorities to be focused on these main projects. All remaining projects on the
list will be worked on within existing time and staffing constraints.
In order to provide regular feedback to the Council on the status of these seven priorities and all
other Council identified priorities, it is recommended that a semi-annual review be incorporated
into the budget process.
Annual Priorities Workshop
Since the Council has identified the need for one workshop per month, it would be recommended
that the September workshop be set aside for an annual review of the Council's priorities. This
would set the tone, clarify any changing priorities to work plans so that they can then be
incorporated into the beginning phase of the budget process. By having Council's direction and
input prior to each department's budget development, it will ensure that the budget is prepared
with that input in mind rather than adjusted later as a result of Council feedback.
Budll-et Review Work Sessions
In addition to the annual workshop, it is critical that the priorities actually appear as part of the
budget document. One way to do this, which fits well within the new budget format, is to
incorporate these priorities into the "goals" of the City Council as listed with the Council's
budget. Since "goals" are general in nature, these broad priorities would fit into the current
structure very well. During the budget review work sessions in May, the Council may then take
another look at the priorities andrevise them as necessary.
These two review periods will provide for semi-annual review of Council's priorities and
incorporation of those priorities into the budget process.
/Lj-~
FISCAL IMPACT:
The semi-annual review of the City Council's priorities will not create additional direct costs. If
the Council desires to implement the additional option (citizen survey) to obtain public input this
year, the cost would need appropriated. The other publicity steps can be accomplished within the
existing budget.
In order to accomplish these proposed priorities, it may be necessary to reduce the prioritization
of other projects or reallocate staff and other resources. Implementation plans and budgets to
accomplish these priorities have yet to be developed by the impacted departments. Such items will
be brought back to Council as appropriate, either within the current fiscal year or as part of the
workshop process for the 1998-99 budget.
A:\CCPRIA2.113
1
/r-t
ADDITIONAL COUNCIL PRIORITY GOALS:
In order to be the best that the City of Chula Vista can be in preparation for the twenty-first
century, the following goal areas are proposed:
. Insure Long-Term Financial Stability
1. Balance budget by:
. reducing expenditures
. reducing reliance on one-time revenues
. continue to bring Redevelopment Agency out of the red
2. Implement three-year financial plan
. investment policy
. potential revenue streams
. examine future needs
3. Continue utilization of performance-based budgeting
. establish measures/standards
. how do we know when we "get there"?
. Promote Economic Development
1. Attain four-star quality hotels/resorts within city limits
2. Review all franchise and other agreements
a. SDG&E
b. Cox Cable
c. Laidlaw
d. Electric Utility Restructuring
3. Promote individual economic development projects
a. IDEC
b. School administration building relocation
c. WERC
d. EastLake Business Park
e. BECA
4. Joint corporate yard
. Promote Quality of Life Indicators
1. Air Quality - annual report required from Air Pollution Control District on impact
of growth on air quality.
2
!L/-7
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
9.
Fiscal - annual report required to evaluate impacts of growth on city operations,
capital improvements, and development impact fee revenues and expenaitures.
3.
Police - respond to 84 % of the Priority I emergency calls within 7 minutes and
maintain average responded time of 4.5 minutes. Respond to 62 % of Priority II
urgent calls within 7 minutes and maintain average response time of 7.0 minutes.
Fire/EMS - respond to calls within 7 minutes in 85 % of the cases.
Schools - annual report required to evaluate school district's ability to
accommodate new growth.
Library - provide 500 square feet of library space adequately equipped and staffed
per 1,000 population.
Parks and Recreation - maintain 3 acres of neighborhood and community parkland
with appropriate facilities per 1,000 residents east of Interstate 805, and continue
to evaluate the quality and condition of the parks
8.
Water - annual report from water service agencies on impact of growth and future
water availability
Sewer - sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Annual report from metropolitan Sewer Authority on impact of growth on sewer
capacity.
10.
Drainage - storm flows and volume shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Annual report reviewing performance of city's storm drain system.
11.
Traffic - maintain Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better as measured by observed
average travel speed on all signalized arterial streets, except, that during peak
hours, an LOS "D" can occur for no more than any two hours of the day.
Those signalized intersections west of Interstate 805 that do not meet the above
standard may continue to operate at their 1991 LOS, but shall not worsen.
12.
Higher Education - (has not been officially adopted by the City Council)
. Evaluate and Assess Land Use and Planning
1. Process land use plans effectively and efficiently while implementing and
protecting the City's policy interests.
2. Review and update land use projects:
A. Project Specific
(l) Replanning EastLake III
(2) San Miguel Ranch - next phase
(3) Salt Creek Ranch (aka Rolling Hills Ranch)
(4) Otay Ranch SPA I (including West Coast land change of ownership)
(5) Umversity
(6) Lower Sweetwater Area Plan
(7) Sunbow
3
/1/ - r-
B. Area wide
(1) DIF Update
(2) Prepare Master Plans for Fire, Parks, and Library
(3) Restudy Development Phasing Plan
(4) Finalize Agreement with County for Preserve Owner Manager
. Update Administrative Policies and Procedures
1. Look at incorporating performance-based budgeting process for budget planning -
to be completed prior to July I, 1997
2. Examine the benefits of multi-year or two-year budget process as an approach - to
be completed prior to July I, 1997
3. Examine a short -term Financial Plan as a possible benefit to the City - to be
completed by January 1998
4. Staff review and recommend a policy-review cycle (3 year, 4 year, whatever) -
within next 3-4 months
5. Staff to develop systematic way to prioritize individual land use requests
6. Staff work on developing a long-term strategic economic development plan.
. Promote and Influence Regional Issues
Maintain a presence and/or achieve a role at meetings involving regional issues which have
potential impact on Chula Vista (e.g. SANDAG, Water, Trash, Brown Field, NAFTA,
Jobs Training, Regional Library Bond, Regional Work/Force and Employers Center,
MSCP, Sewer-wastewater, 905, Regional Transit issues, Welfare Reform Impacts).
H:\HOME\ADMIN\DAWN\GOALS.A13
4
) ~ ~c;
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item g--
Meeting Date 10/28/97
Ordinance ;< 7/ r Amending Schedule X of a Register of Schedules
maintained by the City Engineer as provided in Section 10.48.020 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code - Established Speed Limits in Certain Zones
and establishing a speed limit of 35 MPH on South Greensview Drive ITom
Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Parkway, adding this location to Schedule X
Director of Public worki f'f::!!
City ManageuGt ~ ~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code Section 22357 and 22358, and pursuant to
authority under the Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 10.48.020, the City Engineer has
determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the
promotion of public safety, there is a need to establish a speed limit on South Greensview Drive
between Clubhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway. This street has recently been completed and opened
to traffic serving major portions of EastLake Greens. An engineering and traffic survey as required
by State law has been conducted and it has been determined that the appropriate speed limit in this
area is to be posted at 35 MPH.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Ordinance establishing a 35 MPH speed limit on South
Greensview Drive from Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Parkway.
DISCUSSION:
Construction in the EastLake Greens subdivision has created several miles of new streets to be
opened to the public. The City Engineer has determined the need to establish a posted speed limit
on South Greensview Drive between Clubhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway. This is necessary to
comply with the California Vehicle Code Section 40803, Speed Trap Evidence. Section 40803
requires evidence that a traffic and engineering survey has been conducted within five years. There
has not yet been a speed limit posted on this portion of roadway and it is currently subject to a State
law prima facie 65 MPH speed limit. An engineering and traffic survey as required by State law has
been conducted for this roadway segment.
South Greensview Drive in this area is a 48' to 60' curb-to-curb residential collector street 1.25 miles
in length with no direct access to the residential property which lines the street on both sides of the
roadway. There is an elementary school and a public park which ITont a portion of this street. South
Greensview Drive in this area is striped with a combination of striping patterns which generally
delineate one lane of traffic in each direction. There is basically no on-street parking allowed with
the exception of the area on the west side of the street which is adjacent to Olympicview Elementary
School and Dolphin Beach Park. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) at the present time is 2,000 on
South Greensview Drive in this area, and is predicted to reach 5,000 by the year 2010.
/~/
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 10/28/97
The above-mentioned engineering traffic survey shows an 85th percentile speed of 44 MPH. The
accident rate is 0.00 accidents per million vehicle miles (A VM) which is lower than the statewide
average of2.07 A VM for similar roadways in the State of California. This accident rate is based on
the fact that the street has only recently been completed and there is no accident history available at
this time. The speed limit normally should be established at the first 5 MPH increment below the
85th percentile speed. However, in matching existing conditions with traffic safety needs of the
community, engineering judgement may indicate the need for a further reduction of 5 MPH. Other
factors that need to be considered include, but are not limited to: roadway design speed, safe
stopping distance, superelevation, shoulder conditions, profile conditions, intersection spacing and
offsets, and pedestrian traffic at intersections with unmarked crosswalks.
The area adjacent to North and South Greensview Drive is residential and recreational in character.
There is a school, multiple neighborhood parks, and there are golf course greens, all of which are
adjacent to the highway. The parkway along the sides of the street is heavily landscaped with
parkway trees lining the street on both sides of intersections. While the horizontal alignment has a
minimum radius of 500 feet which reflects a design speed of less than 40 MPH, the visibility along
the inside of these curves is further limited by the vegetation which reduces sight distance at the
intersections, particularly on the inside of the curves.
The survey will be good for a period of five years, at which time State law requires that it be redone.
Based on the factors outlined above, it has been determined that the speed limit should be posted at
35 MPH except when children are present (25 MPH) in order to comply with the California Vehicle
Code requirements or else this roadway is considered a speed trap and police radar enforcement of
the posted speed limit cannot be conducted. Special regulatory school signs, ("School" "25 MPH
Speed Limit" "When Children Are Present"), will also be installed on South Greensview Drive.
This new current survey will expire on August 12, 2002. It is recommended that the City Engineer's
Register of Schedules be revised as follows:
10.48.020 Schedule X - Established Speed Limits in Certain Zones - Designated
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed Limit
S. Greensview Drive Clubhouse Drive Hunte Parkway 35 MPH
North Greensview Drive, which is the other half of this loop type street, has already been established
and posted as a 35 MPH speed zone. This item was posted as a public notice as an agenda item as
required by law. Dr. Susan Mahler, the principal of Olympicview Elementary School has been sent
a copy oftonight's agenda report.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to place signs and pavement legends is $150.00.
~ent: Area Plat
Engineering and Traffic Survey
<bC File Number: 0760-95-CY029
~O'\
M:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \SGREENSV.DMW)
/y;<
I
ORDINANCE NO. c2? / f
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SCHEDULE X OF A REGISTER
OF SCHEDULES MAINTAINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER
AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 10.48.020 OF THE CHULA
VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHED SPEED
LIMITS IN CERTAIN ZONES AND ESTABLISHING A
SPEED LIMIT OF 35 MPH ON SOUTH GREENSVIEW
DRIVE FROM CLUBHOUSE DRIVE TO HUNTE PARKWAY,
ADDING THIS LOCATION TO SCHEDULE X .
WHEREAS, based on the provisions of the California
Vehicle Code section 22357 and 22358, and pursuant to authority
under the Chula vista Municipal Code section 10.48.020, the city
Engineer has determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic
hazards and traffic congestion, and for the promotion of public
safety, there is a need to establish speed limits on South
Greensview Drive between Clubhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway because
this street has recently been completed and opened to traffic
serving major portions of EastLake Greens; and
WHEREAS, a engineering and traffic study, as required by
State Law, has been conducted and it has been determined that the
appropriate speed in this area is to be posted at 35 MPH.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula
vista does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Schedule X of a Register of Schedules
maintained by the City Engineer as provided in section 10.48.020 of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Established Speed Limits in certain
Zones and Establishing a Speed Limit of 35 MPH on South Greensview
Drive from Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Parkway, adding this location
to Schedule X, is hereby amended to include the following changes:
Chula vista Municipal Code section 10.48.02 - SCHEDULE X
ESTABLISHED SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN ZONES
Name of Street Beqinninq At Endinq At Proposed
Speed Limit
S. Greensview Clubhouse Hunte Parkway 35 M.P.H.
Drive Drive
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Director of
CL~.~
John M. Kaheny, City
Attorney
/5-;1
John P. Lippitt,
Public Works
c: \OR\SPEED. EST
.
01 f'. 'i LA,,-E-S f'.0
DRIVE
N
~......./................... Af
fected St
reet
MAP KEY
DRAWN BY
GREENSVIEW
DATE
D.M. Wolfe
October 10. 1997
TJ:TLE
AR8~A PLAT
SPEED LIMIT - ENGINEERING / TRAFFIC SURVEY
STREET: South Greensview Drive
LIMITS: Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Parkway
Existing Posted Speed Limit NP MPH
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
Segment: Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Pkwv
Date Taken: 8/12/97
No. Vehicles on Sample: 100
85th Percentile Speed: 44 moh
Range of Speeds Recorded: 25 - 52 moh
Block #: 1100 - 1400
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Width 48' - 60' feet
No. of lanes for both directions: 2
Horizontal Alignment:
Rmin = 500' (Design soeed is less than 40 mohL
Vertical Alignment: 200' VC. G, = 1.0%. G2=3.20%. (Desian soeed is less
than 45 mohL
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Average Daily Traffic:
2000
Street Parking: No oarkina allowed. exceot alona west side of curb on S.
Greensview Dr. Bike lanes on both sides.
Special Conditions: Elementarv school between Boulder Creek St. and Crvstal
Sorinas Dr. Sinale-familv dwellings with no direct drivewav access to homes.
Accident History: The accident rate on this segment (0.00 accidents oer million
vehicle miles) is lower than the average rate (2.04) for similar roadwavs in the State
of California. Intersection accident rates are not critical on this seament.
SURVEY RESULTS
Study was prepared by: Evanaelina Diaz
Date: 8/12/97
Recommendations: Establish 35 moh saeed limit and 25 mph soeed limit in
vicini of school due to roadwa ch racteristics and s ecial
/~f
Date R""a~pproved:
By: ~)--t0/
Approved Speed Limit: 35 MPH
Per CVC 40803, Survey Expires: 8/12/02
q- '3 ~ '1 7