HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1996/11/12
Tuesday, November 12, 1996
6:00 p.m.
". declare under penalty of perjury that I a""
employed by the City of Chu:a Vis:s in the
Office of the City Cler;; and th2.( i pS::Gd
this Agenda/Noti;;e en the Dulls ti~ Coord at
the Public S rvi ~s Bu;~din~~ anc,1 a' Cit Hal'l on
DATED. / I 't: SIGNED / /
Council Chambers
fJ, Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Alevy _' Moot _' Padilla _' Rindone _, and
Mayor Horton _'
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Retiring Board and Commission Memhers Resolutions:
Commission on Aging - Dorathea Grindle;
Board of Appeals - Harold Coleman;
Growth Management Oversight Commission - Mike Armbrust;
Human Relations Commission - Elsie Hashimoto;
Library Board of Trustees - Peggy Donovan;
Mobilehome Rent Review commission - Andrew Delgado; and
Town Centre Project Area Committee - Martin Altbaum and William Winters.
b. County of San Diego Solid Waste Update by Supervisor Greg Cox.
*****
Effective April 1, 1994, there have been new amendments to the Brown Act. The City Council must now
reconvene into open session to report any final actions taken in closed session and to adjourn the meeting.
Because of the cost involved, there will be no videotaping of the reconvened portion of the meeting. However,
final actions reported will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 11)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will 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. (Complete
the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to
the staff recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and
Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from the Acting City Attorney stating that there were no reportable actions taken in
Closed Session on 11/5/96. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed.
Agenda
-2-
November 12, 1996
6. RESOLUTION 18488 AUTHORIZlNG THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH THE
SAN DlEGO UNIFlED PORT DlSTRlCT FOR RECEIPf OF FlNANClAL
ASSIST ANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 FOR CHULA VISTA EXPO
'97 AND APPROPRIATING $15,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED
BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND, AND APPROVING THE
EXPENDITURE OF SAID CITY FUNDlNG TO CONDUCT THE 1997
EXPO EVENT PRIOR TO PORT DISTRICT REIMBURSEMENT - In July
1996, the City submitted a financial assistance request to the San Diego Unified
Port District for partial funding of the 1997 Expo event. The Board of Port
Commissions approved the request at their meeting of 8/20/96, and the Port is
now requiring the City to enter into a formal agreement which stipulates
conditions and requirements for receipt of the approved funding. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
4/5th's vole required.
7. RESOLUTION 18489 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF ADA RENOVATIONS PHASE n AT 25 SITES IN
THE CITY (GG-144C) - The work to be done consists of modifying existing
restrooms to accommodate individuals with disabilities. The work includes
minor demolition work, construction of interior walls, plumbing fixtures, doors,
hardware, signage, and interior finishes. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution and awarding contract to Famania Construction. (Director of Public
Works and Director of Building and Housing)
8. RESOLUTION 18490 ACCEPTlNG BIDS AND AWARDlNG CONTRACT FOR "MEMORIAL
PARK STAGE IMPROVEMENTS (PR-168) AND EUCALYPTUS PARK
SITE IMPROVEMENTS (PR-146) IN THE CITY"; AND RE-
APPROPRIATING $8,030 IN pARKLAND ACQUISITION AND
DEVELOPMENT FUNDS FROMPR-183 (PLA YGROUNDRENOV ATION
_ PHASE m TO MEMORIAL PARK STAGE IMPROVEMENTS (PR-168)
On 10/9/96, sealed bids were received. The work to be done consists of
constructing access to the children's play equipment at Eucalyptus Park and
constructing an expansion to the existing stage area at Memorial Park. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution awarding the contract to Fox
Construction _ San Diego in the amount of $114,715. (Director of Public
Works)
9. RESOLUTION 18491 APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH
DKS ASSOCIATES FOR TRAmC SIGNAL SYSTEM UPGRADE
TECHNICAL DESIGN STUDY (CIP TF 237), AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT - On 11/14/95, Council
approved an agreement with DKS Associates to design an adaptive traffic control
signal system. DKS has completed Tasks 1 and 3 of the contract and is
currently working on Tasks 2 and 4. Task 2 includes specifications for the
system and Task 4 is preparation of the plans, specifications and estimates for
Phase II of the project. DKS has submitted a proposal to evaluate use of video
detection in lieu of the standard loop detection and to prepare plans and
specifications for use by the City in the Phase II work. Staff believes it would
be beneficial to include this work under Task 2 of the contract. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-3-
November 12, 1996
10.A. RESOLUTION 18492 APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT 88-3A, EASTLAKE SOUTH
GREENS UNIT 3 (SOUTH HALF), ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE
PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP,
REJECTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY THE OPEN SPACE LOTS
GRANTED ON SAID MAP, ACCEPTING THE EASEMENTS GRANTED
ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID
SUBDMSION, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT - On 7/18/89, Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map
for Tract 88-3, EastLake Greens. On 8/16/94, Council approved the amended
tentative map for EastLake South Greens, Tentative Map 88-3A, and imposed
additional conditions of approval. The amendment to the tentative map covers
the area south of Clubhouse Drive which is designated as EastLake South
Greens. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public
Works)
B. RESOLUTION 18493 APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 3 (SOUTH
HALF) REQUIRING DEVELOPER TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN
UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTIONS NUMBER 15200 AND
17618, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
11. RESOLUTION 18494 DISSOLVING THE COUNCIL APPOINTED INTERIM BECA BOARD
AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO APPOINT THE MEMBERS OF THE
ADVISORY BOARD TO CONTINUE IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY TO
STAFF - On 8/22/95, Council approved an Interim BECA Advisory Board
represented by 11 organizations/individuals. These organizations/individuals
were recommended by staff to provide a mix of public and private entities who
are stakeholders in the regional BECA alliance. The Board's contributious
include working with staff in the areas of coordinating and leveraging regional
resources, enhanced program marketing, and providing technical advice. These
functions may be best served by the Board continuing to act in an advisory
capacity to the BECA program and staff. For the purposes of legal clarification,
staff is recommending the existing Interim Board, as appointed by Council, be
dissolved and the new Board membership be selected by staff. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development)
* * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The foUowing items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by lilw. If you wish to
speak to any item, please ftIl out the "Request to Speak Form" availilble in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
l2.A. RESOLUTION 18416 APPROVING A RESOURCE CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE
OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, TRACT 96-04 - (This is a related item. but does
not require a public heariDlz)
B. RESOLUTION 18417 APPROVING AN INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT WITH VILLAGE
DEVELOPMENT FOR TRACT 96-04 - (This is a related item. but does not
require a public heariIll!)
Agenda
-4-
November 12, 1996
C. PUBLIC HEARING PCS 96-04: CONSIDERATION OF A REVISED TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE OTAYRANCH SPA ONE, TRACT 96-04
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD
BETWEEN PASEO RANCHERO AND THE FUTURE SR-125
ALIGNMENT AND EXCLUDING 288 ACRES IN ASSESSOR PARCEL
NUMBER (APN) 642-060-11 AND A PORTION OF APN 642-080-11- Adopt
a Second Addendum to FEIR 95"()1 and recertify FEIR 95"()1 and the First
Addendum for the Otay Ranch SPA One and Tentative Suhdivision Map for
Village One and Phase I-A of Village Five of the Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula
Vista Tract 96-04, in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions
contained in the draft resolution. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions.
(Otay Ranch Manager) Continued from the meeting of 9/17/96.
D. RESOLUTION 18398 ADOPTING THE SECOND ADDENDUM TO AND CERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FElR 95-01 (SCH #95021012)
AND FIRST ADDENDUM READOPTING THE STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND THE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE FElR AND
APPROVING A REVISED TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
PORTIONS OF THE OTAYRANCHO SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT
96-04, AND MAKING THE NECESSARY FINDINGS AND CONTINUING
ALTERNATIVE TENTATIVE MAP PROPOSALS
13. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT - An amendment to the
development agreement to further guarantee infrastructure improvements where
the developer wants to create parcels for sale prior to finalizing the rmal
subdivision map. The amendment also addresses future problems with regard
to any debt payment tbat might be levied to make public improvements or should
development be only partially completed on any particular project due to any
stoppage of work especially due to a bankruptcy action. Staff recommends
Council place the ordinance on first reading. (Deputy City Manager, Planning
Director, and Otay Ranch Manager)
ORDINANCE 2691
AMENDING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN OTAY RANCH, L.P., A CALIFORNIA
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT ,A CALIFORNIA
GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (first
readimt)
14. PUBLIC HEARING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (AD 93-01) FOR ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS
EAST OF SECOND A VENUE AND SOUTH OF "J" STREET - On
10/15/96, Council accepted the filing of the Engineer's Report by the City
Engineer on the cost of construction and selling 11/12/96 at 6:00 p.m. as the
date and time for a public hearing on an assessment district for alley
improvements east of Second Avenue. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
A. RESOLUTION 18495 CONFIRMING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT BY THE CITY ENGINEER
ON THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AND SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS
ON ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 93-01 FOR ALLEY
IMPROVEMENTS EAST OF SECOND A VENUE AND SOUTH OF "J"
STREET
B. RESOLUTION 18496 ADOPTING A NOTICE OF LIEN TO LEVY AND COLLECT
ASSESSMENTS FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 93-01 FOR
ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS EAST OF SECOND A VENUE AND SOUTH
OF "J" STREET
Agenda
-5-
November 12, 1996
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the
Council'sjurisdiction 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 yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Form" availuble 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. Your time is limited to three
minutes per speaker.
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 individually by the Council
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please
fill out a "Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to five minutes.
IS. RESOLUTION 18497 APPROVING COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING REQUESTS FOR
PAYMENT FOR OUTSIDE LEGAL ASSISTANCE OBTAINED BY
EMPLOYEES APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL - On 6/11/96, Council
directed staff to prepare a policy for Council's consideration regarding legal
representation in special circumstances. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Acting City Attorney)
16. RESOLUTION 18455 APPROVING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE OF MARINA
VIEW PARK TO THE UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING
STAFF TO PREPARE AND EXECUTE A PURCHASE AND SALES
AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS - The City has requested
that the Unified Port District acquire certain City and Redevelopment Agency
properties on the Bayfront, including Marina View Park on Marina Parkway and
three properties on Lagoon Drive (the former Marina Motor Hotel, Shangri-La
and Cappos properties). City staff has been negotiating the sale of these
properties which bave been delayed for a variety of reasons including legal
incumbrance and contaminated soils which are now close to resolution. Staff
has recently received amended terms of sale for the Marina View Park property
which are acceptable and are being forwarded to Council for review and
authorization to proceed. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Community Development) Continued from the meeting of
11/5/96.
Agenda
-6-
November 12, 1996
17. RESOLUTION 18487 CONCEPrUALLY APPROVING THETENTATIVE AGREEMENT WITH
SHARPHEALTHCAREFOR THE PURPOSE OF SATISFYING SHARP'S
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS TO THE CITY - Staff has recently
concluded negotiations with Sharp Health Care representatives regarding a
tentative agreement to satisfy Sharp's contractual obligations with Chula Vista.
The general parameters of the proposed agreement provides the City with a cash
payout at the close of escrow between Sharp/Columbia~ an extension of medical
benefits with accruing interest through the year 2008, guarantees regarding
Chula Vista representation on the new non-profit Board and guarantees for
Chula Vista regarding potential "upside" gains related to the future sale of
Sharp's remaining interest in the new entity. Staff recommends Council approve
the resolution and direct staff to return with fioal contract language. (Assistant
City Manager) Continued from the meeting of 11/5/96.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar.
Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Coundlmembers.
Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
OTHER BUSINESS
18. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
19. MAYOR'S REPORT IS)
20. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the regular City Council meeting on November 19,
1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
Agenda
-7-
November 12, 1996
....**.
CLOSED SESSION
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 MW 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 MW 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. Nevertheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
21. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
1. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. SNMB, L.P. vs.the City of Chula Vista and MCA.
. Christopher vs. the City of Chula Vista.
2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Metro sewer issues.
. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) Section 54956.9: 1.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RELEASE - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957
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 (CYEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
22. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
"'''''''''''''
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING DORATHEA GRINDLE
FOR HER EXCELLENT SERVICES ON THE
COMMISSION ON AGING
WHEREAS, Dorathea Grindle was appointed to the Commission on Aging
on August 22, 1989 and so ably served as Chair during her tenure; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Grindle brought to the Commission her many years of
experience as a Parish Visitor, and volunteer work for San Diego Hospice,
Community Hospital and Birch-Patrick Convalescent Center; and
WHEREAS, her support in the Commission's efforts to continue to provide
opportunities for recreation, education, and information on subjects of interest to
senior citizens in order to meet their needs proved to be a valuable asset to the
Commission and the community:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby express its gratitude for the dedicated services performed
by Dorathea Grindle as a member of the Commission on Aging.
i/t<. ~ J
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING HAROLD COLEMAN
FOR HIS EXCELLENT SERVICES ON THE
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS
WHEREAS, Harold Coleman was appointed to the Board of Appeals on
August 4, 1992; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Coleman brought to the Board his many years of "hands
on" public service as an administrator, educator and attorney which equipped him
with the sophistication required to effectively manage the political and operational
concerns of a municipality with diverse socio-economic, cultural, and ethnic
interests; and
WHEREAS, his cross-training in engineering, business and law equipped Mr.
Coleman with the insight, judgment and critical analysis so vital to effective
problem solving:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does. hereby recognize the outstanding services that have been rendered
by Harold Coleman as a member of the Board of Appeals and Advisors.
t/a-c2
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING MIKE ARMBRUST
FOR HIS EXCELLENT SERVICES ON THE
GROwrH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Mike Annbrust was appointed to the Growth Management
Oversight Commission on July 27, 1992; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Annbrust brought to the Commission his many years of
experience as a business owner in the downtown area; and
WHEREAS, his tenure on the Commission was marked by a deep concem
for Third Avenue especially in the area of policing and parking enforcement in
order to provide a comfort level for citizens through focus on foot patrols:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby recognize the outstanding service that has been rendered
by Mike Annbrust as a member of the Growth Management Oversight Commission.
7- a -;3
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING ELSIE HASHIMOTO
FOR HER EXCELLENT SERVICES ON THE
HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Elsie Hashimoto was appointed to the Human Rewtions
Commission on February 18, 1992 and reappointed on June 21, 1994; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Hashimoto followed in her husband's footsteps in selVing
on the Human Rewtions Commission; and
WHEREAS, Elsie Hashimoto possesses an understanding of ethnic/cultural
entities within the South Bay Area; and
WHEREAS, Elsie's selVices on the Human Rewtions Commission have made
a major contribution to the insight of our very diverse community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby express its appreciation for Elsie Hashimoto's selVices on
the Human Rewtions Commission for the past four years.
Ya.-1
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING PEGGY DONOVAN
FOR HER EXCELLENT SERVICES ON THE
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
WHEREAS, Peggy Donovan was appointed to the Library Board of Trustees
on July 16, 1990 and so ably served as Chair during her tenure; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Donovan brought to the Board her previous experience
on the Resource Conservation Commission and her dedicated work with the
Genealogy Society as an avid genealogist; and
WHEREAS, her support of the Library assisted in realizing hopes, dreams
and aspirations as they apply to the needs of the citizens in their use of the City's
Libraries.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby express its gratitude for the outstanding services performed
by Peggy Donovan as a member of the Library Board of Trustees.
tJc.- - ~
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING ANDREW DELGADO
FOR HIS EXCELLENT SERVICES ON THE
MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Andrew Delgado was appointed to the Mobilehome Rent Review
Commission on November 26, 1991 and reappointed on September 6, 1994; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Delgado brought to the Commission his diverse life
experience and educational background as well as his work as a Senior Probation
Officer for the County of San Diego; and
WHEREAS, his interest in the operations of city government and the
applicable political process and his concern for mobilehome issues made him an
invaluable asset to the Commission:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby commend Andrew Delgado for his many years of service
on the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission and recognize the outstanding effort
he has provided to the City of Chula Vista.
1/0- - t
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING MARTIN ALTBAUM
FOR HIS EXCELLENT SERVICE ON THE
TOWN CENTRE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, Martin L. Altbaum was appointed to the Town Centre Project
Area Committee on April 22, 1996; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Altbaum brought to the Committee his 33 years of
experience as a business owner in the downtown Chula Vista area; and
WHEREAS, Marty's knowledge and insight to promote growth and aesthetic
considerations for the City of Chula Vista marked his tenure on the Committee
with a deep concern for the downtown area:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby recognize the fine service that has been rendered by
Martin Altbaum on the Town Centre Project Area Committee.
1/4--7
RESOLUTION
COMMENDING WILLIAM WINTERS
FOR HIS EXCELLENT SERVICE ON THE
TOWN CENTRE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, William Winters was appointed to the Town Centre Project Area
Committee on August 4, 1992; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Winters brought to the Committee his 26 years of
experience as the Chief of Police in the City of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, his interest in maintaining an attractive downtown area as well
as seeking those types of business that enhance the City's revenue base assisted the
Committee in reaching productive goals and recommendations:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby offer its heartfelt thanks to William Winters for his years
of conscientious dedication to the Chula Vista community and, in particular, as
a member of the Town Centre Project Area Committee.
LJ4 -:5'
~ ~ It..-
:----.d::-:
~-..::~~
~""-.......~
"""~~"'"
ON OF
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY A TIORNEY
Date:
November 6, 1996
To:
The Honorable
Mayor and City Council
t' 't t (A.rJ\1
Ac lng Cl y At orney
From:
Ann Y. Moore,
Re:
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed session
for the Meeting of 11/5/96
The city Council met in
exposure to litigation
54956.9:1.
Closed Session to discuss
pursuant to subdivision
significant
(b) section
The Acting City Attorney hereby reports to the best of her
knowledge from observance of actions taken in the Closed Session of
November 5, 1996, there were no actions that are required to be
reported under the Brown Act.
AYM: 19k
C:\lt\clossess.no
~-/
276 FOURTH AVENUE, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
i;&Pl:$~Rlo:,dadP4'll'
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: ~
Meeting Date: 11/12/96
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution / 'if ~ ,? 0
Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with the San Diego
Unified Port District for receipt of financial assistance in the amount of
$15,000 for Chula Vista Expo '97; and
Appropriating $15,000 of unanticipated revenues from the General Fund,
and approving the expenditure of said City funding to conduct the 1997
Expo event prior to Port District reimbursement
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Parks and Recreation"H II
I, ,'\
City Manager VJ D V\ ~).j'\ \
~'\ (\ '-;"
(4/5tbs Vote: Yes X No -.J
REVIEWED BY:
In July 1996, the City submitted a financial assistance request to the San Diego Unified Port District for
partial funding of the 1997 Expo event. The Board of Port Commissions approved the funding request
at their meeting of August 20, 1996, and the Port is now requiring the City to enter into a formal
agreement which stipulates conditions and requirements for receipt of the approved funding.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the Resolution:
1. Authorizing the Mayor to execute the agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District for
receipt of financial assistance in the amount of $15,000; and
2. Appropriating $15,000 of unanticipated revenues from the General Fund, and approving the
expenditure of said City funding to conduct Expo '97 prior to Port District reimbursement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION: In July 1996, the City submitted a financial assistance request to the San Diego Unified
Port District for partial funding of the 1997 Chula Vista Expo event, which is scheduled for April 12,
1997. On August 20, 1996, the Board of Port Commissioners approved the funding at the requested level
of $15,000.
The Port District is now requiring the City to enter into a formal agreement which stipulates certain
conditions and requirements for receipt of the approved funding. The agreement includes a General Terms
and Conditions section, which contains Hold Harmless language and insurance requirements. A copy of
the agreement is attached as Attachments "A".
[M:\home\parksrec\A113 - portfund.AI3 - 10-18-96]
1
~-/
Item:
Meeting Date: 11/12/96
c/
The agreement process was instituted by the Port District in 1993, to ensure that all recipients of Port
District funding were utilizing the funds for the purposes indicated on the request for funding, and to
ensure that the Port District was given adequate recognition in advertising and promotions for events that
were co-sponsored and partially or completely funded by the Port District. The City has entered into
similar agreements in the past for Port District funding, including funding for the Symphony Pops
Concerts, Harbor Days, the ArtUro Barrios race, and the 1996 Expo event.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Port has approved $15,000 in financial assistance for the 1997 Expo event,
which will supplement $7,200 of City funding allocated in FY 96-97. The additional allocation of
$15,000 will be used to enhance the event, and will be fully reimbursed by the Port District following
the event.
Attachments: "A" - Port Agreement - Chula Vista Expo '97
[M:\home\parksrec\A1l3 - portfund.A13 - 10-18-96]
2
t -,2
RESOLUTION NO. / Dr 3';{"
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT
DISTRICT FOR RECEIPT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 FOR CHULA VISTA EXPO
, 97 AND APPROPRIATING $15,000 FROM THE
UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND,
AND APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF SAID CITY
FUNDING TO CONDUCT THE 1997 EXPO EVENT PRIOR
TO PORT DISTRICT REIMBURSEMENT
WHEREAS, in July, 1996, the City submitted financial
assistance requests to the San Diego Unified Port District for
partial funding of the 1997 Expo event; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Port Commissioners approved the
funding request at their meeting of August 20, 1996, and the Port
is now requiring the city to enter into a formal agreement which
stipulate conditions and requirements for receipt of approved
funding.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby authorize the Mayor to execute an
agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District for receipt of
financial assistance in the amount of $15,000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
appropriate $15,000 from the unappropriated balance of the General
Fund, and approving the expenditure of said city funding to conduct
Expo '97 prior to Port District reimbursement.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jess Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
CL y ~\hQ
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City
Attorney
C:\rs\SDUPD,xpo
c:, -3
"A"
:c
AGREEMENT
This agreement is made by the SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, a public
corporation, herein called "District" and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a non-profit
corporation, herein called "Contractor."
RECITALS
1.
2.
Contractor has a program for "Chula Vista Expo '97."
The Program to be accomplished by Contractor contributes to a balance
of District navigational, commercial, fisheries, recreational and promotional programs
designed to enhance the well-being of San Diego Bay tidelands.
3. The Program to be accomplished by Contractor is of such nature that
the interests of District are better served by an agreement with Contractor than by
the performance of such a program by District.
THE PARTIES AGREE:
In consideration of the recitals and the mutual obligation.s of the parties as
herein expressed, District and Contractor agree as follows:
1 . Proqram: Contractor shall conduct those program activities budgeted
and contained in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as a
part of this agreement. Each specific program activity shall be subject to prior
approval of the District.
2. Contract Administrator: The Community & Governmental Affairs
Department of the District is designated as the Contract Administrator of this
agreement and shall receive and process all reports and requests for payment. All
~ -(
1
correspondence shall be sent to the following address:
Mr. Dan E. Wilkens, Senior Director
Community & Governmental Affairs
San Diego Unified Port District
Post Office Box 488
San Diego, CA 92112
3. Term of Aqreement: The term of this agreement shall be from
August 1, 1996, through July 31, 1997.
4. General Terms and Conditions: The General Terms and Conditions
attached hereto are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein and by
this reference are made part of this agreement.
5.
Pavment:
District shall pay Contractor a sum not to exceed Fifteen
Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) to be used to perform the Program activities shown
in Exhibit A, subject to obtaining prior approval from the District as provided in
Section 1, above.
a. No payment shall be made by District if any report (see
Sections 1, 5, 8 and 9) required by this and previous agreements is not
on file at the time payment is due.
b. Payment shall be solely for reimbursement of expenses
already paid by Contractor. Requests for reimbursement shall be
submitted no more often than monthly and shall provide proof of both
incurrence and payment [See Section 5.c.(2)]. Expenses must be
incurred within the term of this agreement.
c. Payments shall be made upon written request to the Contract
Administrator. Each request shall consist of:
(1) A completed "Request for Reimbursement" form
which shall be provided by the Contract Administrator.
1--5
2
Only expenditures for program activities for which prior
approval from the District was obtained will be reimbursed,
provided, however, the Contract Administrator may in
exceptional circumstances reimburse unforeseen expenses
relating to the funded objectives of the Contractor.
(2) Proof that the expenses were both incurred and
paid. Proof of incurrence and payment is defined in
General Terms and Conditions attached hereto. Expenses
must be incurred within the term of this agreement.
d. Final requests for payment shall be submitted within Sixty
(60l days after the end of the term of this agreement.
e. Payments shall not be made by District unless, and until, Contractor
has provided to Contract Administrator a plan, acceptable to said
Administrator, of appropriate public recognition or credit for the financial
assistance as described herein.
=
f. No portion of District funds under this agreement shall be used
for the purchase of awards, trophies, prizes, gifts, uniforms, capital
outlay or equipment or for the buildup of reserves.
6. Excess Costs: District shall not be held accountable or liable for any
monetary losses incurred as a result of conducting said program. It is agreed that
District's monetary contribution is limited to that stated herein and that District shall
not be responsible for cash costs or support services.
7. Limits of District Responsibilitv: It is expressly understood and agreed that
this agreement constitutes the entire agreement between Contractor and District and
supersedes all prior negotiations. In no event shall Contractor be entitled to any
3
&~~
compensation, benefits, reimbursements or ancillary services other than as expressly
provided in this agreement. No modifications or amendments of this agreement shall
be valid unless duly authorized, reduced to writing and signed by the parties hereto.
8. Reportinq Requirements:
a. Contractor shall submit a Quarterly Performance Report, if
applicable, which shall provide a quantitative indicator of the extent to
which the Program activities contained in Exhibit A have been met for
the immediately preceding quarter and fiscal year to date. This report
form shall be provided by the Contract Administrator.
b. Quarterly reports shall be accompanied by copies of publicity
and advertising material evidencing credit to the District for its financial
support.
c. Contractor shall inform Contract Administrator in writing upon
the resignation, retirement or discharge of its executive director or other
managing agent, or a majority change in the membership of the board of
directors.
9. Financial Disclosure: Within Ninety (90) days after the end of Contractor's
fiscal year, Contractor shall file with the Contract Administrator duly certified copies
of true, accurate and complete documents evidencing Contractor's financial status as
follows:
a. A statement of the expenditure of District funds by Program
activities identified in Exhibit A and compared with budgeted amounts.
b. A statement of compliance with the terms of the District's
agreement.
4
~~7
c. A statement of revenues and expenditures and a balance
sheet of all funds received by the Contractor.
d. If District funding is Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00)
or greater, audited financial statements, including that mentioned in a, b
and c, above, must be prepared by an independent Certified Public
Accountant. (If Contractor receives funding from Two (2) District fiscal
years during Contractor's fiscal year, financial disclosure shall include
separate data for each District fiscal yeaL)
10. No Third Party Beneficiarv: This agreement is made and entered into for
the benefit of the District and Contractor only, and is not intended for the benefit of
any third party or any other person, and no such third party or any other person shall
be a third party beneficiary to this agreement or otherwise have the right to enforce
any provisions of this agreement.
11. Siqnatures Reauired: This agreement shall not be complete nor effective
until signed by either the Executive Director or Assistant Executive Director on behalf
of the District and by the other party.
DATED:
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
By
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By
5 r::, ~6
~
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
These general terms and conditions are part of the terms and conditions of the
attached agreement between the SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, first party,
and the Organization or Organizations described in and signatory to the agreement.
1. Definitions:
a. "District" means the San Diego Unified Port District, a
public corporation.
b. "Executive Director" means the duly appointed, qualified
and acting Executive Director of District.
c. "Board" means the duly appointed, qualified and acting
Board of Port Commissioners of District.
d. "Organization" means the civic organization completely
directing and in complete control of its own affairs through its own
officers or member which is named in the attached agreement and is
signatory thereto. Wherever used herein and when appropriate,
"Organization" shall be deemed to also mean "Contractor" or
"Corporation. "
e. "Related Parties" or "Subcontractor" means an individual
or entity with whom the Organization contracts in order to carry out the
program described in the attached agreement.
f. "Contract Administrator" means the duly appointed,
qualified and acting Contract Administrator as designated by the
Executive Director.
6
b~7
g. "Revenue" means funds received by the Organization from
various sources. All major sources of revenue must be listed separately.
Minor revenue sources can be listed separately or grouped.
h. "Expenditures" means funds disbursed by the Organization
for various expense categories. Where a budget has been established,
the expenditures should be grouped and recorded in accordance with
the budget. If a budget has not been established, then expenditures
would be grouped according to specific expense categories.
2. Proof of Incurrence and Pavment. Requests for reimbursement shall be
accompanied by proof of both incurrence and payment.
a. Incurrence shall be proven by invoice, bill, contract or other
document acceptable to Contract Administrator. All expenses must be
incurred within the term of the agreement between District and
Organization. Allowable exceptions shall be determined. by Contract
Administrator.
b. Payment shall be proven by indicating the check number
and date of check on submitted invoice, bill, etc. Contract
Administrator may require canceled checks as additional support.
c. Request for reimbursement of payroll expenses shall be
accompanied by: i) an independently prepared payroll register, or ii) an
in-house payroll register and canceled payroll checks. Requests for
reimbursement of Payroll Taxes shall be supported by depository
receipts or canceled checks used for paying the taxing authority.
7
& -/(;/
d. District will not reimburse cash advances (e.g. travel
expenses) or refundable deposits (e.g. telephone installation, rental
equipment).
3. Maintenance of Records. Organization shall keep, or cause to be kept,
true, accurate and complete records, including double entry books, a profit and loss
statement, and a balance sheet, making it at all times possible to determine the
nature and amount of revenue and expenditures. Accounting for all revenues and
expenditures shall conform to generally accepted accounting principles: A separate
accounting of the expenditure of funds received from the District shall be maintained
in the accounting records and financial reports. All of Organization's expenditures
and transactions shall be supported by documents of original entry such as sales
slips, cash register tapes, purchase invoices and receipts. Documents supporting a
profit and loss statement shall be retained by Organization until an audit of
Organization's records is conducted by District, or until a period of Three (3) years
has elapsed, whichever occurs first. Organization shall also maintain adequate output
information according to the following guidelines:
a. Information shall include quantitative measurements of
program effectiveness and/or output.
b. Information shall be as directly related to program funding
requirements as practical.
4. Inspection and Audit of Records. All books, statements, documents,
records and financial data of Organization shall be made available in the City of San
Diego and be open at all times for inspection and/or audit by District upon reasonable
notice. The District shall have the right to make copies or excerpts of pertinent
documents. Further, District has the option of conducting an audit of all books,
8 ~ -)1
statements, documents, records and financial data of the Organization's related
parties and/or subcontractors.
5.
Financial Disclosure.
Within Ninety (90) days after the end of
Contractor's fiscal year, Contractor shall file with the Contract Administrator duly
certified copies of true, accurate and complete documents evidencing the financial
status for Contractor's immediately preceding fiscal year as follows:
a. A statement of the expenditure of District funds by
program to be identified in the same categories as contained in the final
budget and compared with budgeted amounts.
b. A statement of compliance with the terms of this contract
with the District.
c. A statement of revenue and expenditures and a balance
sheet of all funds received by the Organization.
d. If District funding is Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00)
or greater, audited financial statements, including that mentioned in a, b
and c, above, must be prepared by an independent Certified Public
Accountant.
(If Contractor receives funding from Two (2) District fiscal years during
Contractor's fiscal year, Financial Disclosure shall include separate data for each
District fiscal yeaL)
6. Independent Contractor. Organization is and shall at all times be and
remain an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of District.
7. Related Parties or Subcontractors. Services rendered to Contractor
through a subcontracted agreement shall be substantiated by detailed invoice.
Services rendered by a consultant shall be substantiated by invoice and contract
9 ~ -/2
,
/'
between Organization and consultant.
Contract Administrator shall determine
=
whether additional reporting or supporting documentation is necessary.
8. Hold Harmless. Contractor shall, to the full extent allowed by law,
defend, indemnify, protect and hold District and its agents, officers and employees
harmless from and against any claims, cause of action or damage or injury to 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 herein, and
all expenses of investigating and defending against same; provided, however, that
Contractor's duty to indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or
liability arising from the established sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the
District, its agents, officers or employees.
9. Insurance. The Executive Director may require Contractor to secure and
maintain liability insurance naming the San Diego Unified Port District as an additional
insured. Such insurance shall be secured from an insurance company acceptable to
the District and in an amount as may be required by the Executive Director.
Organization shall deliver to the District a certificate evidencing such insurance which
shall provide Thirty (30) days notice to be given to District in the event of a
cancellation.
10. Assiqnment. Organization shall not assign this agreement or any right
or interest hereunder without prior written consent of District. An assignment by
operation of law shall automatically terminate this agreement.
11. Interest of Orqanization. Organization, officers and members covenant
that they presently have no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or
10 tfr/3
/
indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of
services required to be performed under this agreement.
-
Organization further
covenants that in the performance of this agreement no person having any such
interest shall be employed.
12. Activities Prohibited. Organization agrees to the following prohibitions:
a. Organization shall not use directly or indirectly any of the
funds received from the District under this agreement for the following
purposes:
(1) To purchase awards, trophies, prizes, gihs,
uniforms or equipment.
(2) To support capital drives or buildup reserves.
(3) For any political or religious activities whatever.
b. Organization shall adopt and follow a policy prohibiting
endorsement of commercial products or services for purposes of
advertisement.
13. Equal Opportunity and Non-Discrimination. Contractor hereby agrees to
comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, the California Fair
Employment and Housing Act, and any other applicable Federal and State laws and
regulations hereinafter enacted prohibiting discrimination, including without limitation
laws prohibiting discrimination because of race, color, national origin, religion, age,
sex or handicap.
,
14. Withholdinq of Funds and Termination. The District may withhold funds
from the contracting Organization and terminate its entire obligation upon notice to
the Organization if the Organization violates any of the terms of the agreement, or for
other good cause shown even if not related to a violation of the terms of the
11 c-: ~/f
agreement.
The Executive Director shall thereafter advise the Board of the
notification of termination made to the Organization.
12
~
6-8
EXlllBIT A
CITY OF CHULA VISTA - CHULA VISTA EXPO '97
--
City af Chula Vista shall pravide all administrative functians, suppart services, supplies and equipment
to. produce and present a multi-venue cemmunity-based festival, "Expo. '97 in April ef 1997, at Marina
View Park and/er Bayside Park.
1. The event will be planned thraugh a broad-based community planning committee invelving lecal
businesses, colleges, high schools, middle schoals, elementary schoals, service clubs and
arganizatians, and business organizations.
2. The event will feature three stages of live entertainment including music, dance, drama, and
demanstratiens by a wide variety ef groups. Local artists will also. demanstrate their skills
thraughaut the day. Fund raising faad and beverage cancessians aperated by local nan-profit and
net-fer-profit groups and erganizatiens will be included, as will a wide variety of displays,
baoths, and infarmatien distributian areas. Specialized activities fer children will be conducted
threughaut the day. Pre-event activities and centests will be canducted at the cammunity callege.
high schaol, and elementary scheollevels, with final campetitiens, judging and exhibitians taking
place at the event.
3. City shall provide all required equipment, supplies, and services fer the event, including:
A. staging, public address systems, shade canopies, tables, chairs, display baards. signage
B. Palice services fer security. traffic, and crawd cantrel
C. partable tailets to supplement permanent restroem facilities
D. trash receptacles and trash centrol
E. shuttle bus service (free to. the public)
F. event administratian and caardinatian
G. en-site staff fer operation ef the event and distributian ef evenLprograms
H. electrical pewer and suppert services
4. City shall provide prematiens and media expasure far the event, identifying the San Diego
Unified Part District as the primary ca-sponsar ef the event:
A. preparatian and distributien ef press packages and press releases
B. direct centact with lecal and area multi-media providers, encauraging pramatians and
release af public service announcements and feature articles
C. purchase ef paid advertising space in lacal and area newspapers
D. design, printing, and distributien ef appreximately 25,000 event flyers
E. design, printing, and distributian af approximately ef 5,000 event pragrams to. be
distributed at the festival
F. anneuncement in the City's Quarterly publication which is distributed by mail to.
appraximately 53,000 hames and businesses in the City
H. announcements in the Parks and Recreatian Department's Winter and Spring Activity
brochures which will be distributed to approximately 20,000 hames in Chula Vista via
a distributien threugh City schoels
1. design, printing, and posting af event annauncements in all Chula Vista Transit busses
~-/I-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 7
Meeting Date 11112/96
j8"Ij'8"'j
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Accepting bids and awarding contract for
"Construction of ADA Renovations Phase II at 25 sites in the City of
Chula Vista, CA (GG-144C) _ . /
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~ ~
Director of Building and "us:ng~~\..""~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ V~ (J}Y~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ NoX)
At 2:00 p.m on September 18, 1996, in Con~ren~oom 2 in the Public Services Building,
the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for "Construction of ADA Renovations
Phase II at 25 sites in the City of Chula Vista, CA (GG-144C). The work to be done consists
of modifying existing restrooms to accommodate individuals with disabilities. The work
includes minor demolition work, construction of interior walls, plumbing fixtures, doors,
hardware, signage, and interior finishes.
RECOMMENDATION: The Council accept bids and award contract to Famania
Construction, Inc., National City, in the amount of $153,250.00.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: Funds for modifying existing buildings to accommodate persons with
disabilities were included in the FY 94-95, FY 95-96, and FY 96-97 CIP programs (GG-144).
Approximately 46 locations within various City facilities, including but not limited to, Main
Public Library, Police Building, Public Services Building, Public Works Building and Rohr
Manor, require modifications to accommodate individuals with disabilities in accordance with
ADA. Plans and specifications for these modifications were prepared by the Building and
Housing Department. See Attachment A for a brief description of the work to be done at each
of the locations included in this project. Bids for this project were received from three
contractors as follows:
Contractor
Bid Amount
Famania Construction, Inc. - National City
Har Construction, Inc. - National City
CDM Construction - El Cajon
$153,250.00
$198,547.01
$206,272. 31
7--/
Page 2, Item 7
Meeting Date 11/12/96
The low bid by Famania Construction, Inc. is below the Engineer's estimate of $214,950.00
by $61,700.00 or 28.7%. A significant portion of the difference (approximately $54,000)
between the low bid and the Engineer's estimate can be traced to the Rohr Manor Project,
which includes an exterior ramp and other interior modifications. The Engineer took a very
conservative approach, due to the fact that the full scope of the work cannot be determined
until actual excavation for the exterior ramp adjacent to a possible retaining wall occurs. It
should be noted that the bids from all three bidders for this portion of the project are in line
with one another, averaging $21,000.
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Goal
The bids documents set forth participation requirements per Federal Regulations for meeting
the disadvantaged and women-owned business goals. Juan P. Arroyo, Housing Coordinator,
has reviewed the bid documents submitted by the three lowest bidders. His conclusion is that
the lowest bidder, Famania Construction, Inc. does meet the City's requirements for DBE
participation (See Attachment B).
Staff also reviewed Famania Construction Inc.'s eligibility status with regard to Federal
Procurement Programs and the status of the State Contractor's licenses. Neither Famania
Construction Inc., nor any other listed subcontractors are excluded from Federal Procurement
programs (list of parties excluded from Federal Procurement or non-procurement programs as
of August 9, 1996).
The Contractor's license for F amania Construction, Inc. is current and in good standing.
Famania has never done work for the City, however, a check of their references indicates their
work has been acceptable and that they consistently adhere to award contract price with
minimal change orders, if any.
Disclosure Statement
Attached is a copy of the Disclosure Statement from Famania Construction, Inc. (See
Attachment C).
Environmental Status
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project
for the ADA building modifications and has determined them exempt under section 15301 (a),
Class I of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Prevailing Wage Statement
The source of funding for this project is Community Development Block Grant funds.
Prevailing wage scales are those determined by the Federal Department of Labor.
7-~
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11/12/96
7
Financial Statement
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount $153,250.00
B. Staff (Inspection and Design) $ 41,000.00
C. Contingencies (approximately 20%) $ 30,650.00
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $224,900.00
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. ADA Modifications $224,900.00
Various Accounts (GG-144)
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $224,900.00
FISCAL IMPACT: The above action awarding this contract will authorize the total
expenditure of $224,900.00 from budgeted CIP projects After construction, only routine
maintenance of the City restrooms and facilities will be required.
Attachment:
from
A - List of location where ADA modifications are being made (pages taken
specifications)
B - Memo from Housing Coordinator
C - Disclosure Statement
M:IJI011E\ENGINEER\AGENDA \GG144.SLH
?~:J
RESOLUTION NO. / 'iPlfr7'
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ADA RENOVATIONS
PHASE II AT 25 SITES IN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CA. (GG-144C)
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on September 18, 1996, in
Conference Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the Director of
Public Works received the following three sealed bids for
"Construction of ADA Renovations Phase II at 25 sites in the city
of Chula vista, CA (GG-144C):
Contractor
Bid Amount
Famania Construction, Inc. - National City
Har construction, Inc. - National City
CDM Construction - El cajon
$153,250.00
$198,547.01
$206,272.31
WHEREAS, the low bid by Famania Construction, Inc. Is
below the Engineer's estimate of $214,950.00 by $61,700.00 or
28.7%; and
WHEREAS, the bid documents set forth participation
requirements per Federal Regulations for meeting the disadvantaged
and women-owned business goals; and
WHEREAS, Juan P. Arroyo, Housing Coordinator, has
reviewed the bid documents and concluded that the lowest bidder,
Famania Construction, Inc. does meet the City's requirements for
DBE participation; and
WHEREAS, staff also reviewed Famania Construction Inc. 's
eligibility status with regard to Federal Procurement Programs and
the status of the State Contractor's licenses and neither Famania
Construction Inc., nor any other listed subcontractors are excluded
from Federal Procurement programs; and
WHEREAS, the city's Environmental Review Coordinator has
reviewed the work involved in this project for the ADA building
modifications and has determined them exempt under section 15301
(a), Class I of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is
Community Development Block Grant funds and prevailing wage scales
are those determined by the Federal Department of Labor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby accept bids and award the contract
for construction of ADA Renovations Phase II at 25 sites in the
city of Chula vista to Famania Construction, Inc. in the amount of
$153,250.00.
?~r
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby
authorized and directed to execute said contract for and on behalf
of the city of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
r) \ t -vll, (.
,~ \, -,_ V iv, ~:r( '.----9
Ann Y. Moor, Acting city
Attorney
c:\rs\ada.bid
'}-5
/~ TJ He rt /") ~ wr H
Special Provisions (Continued)
(
PART 2
SPECIAL PROVISIONS - TECHNICAL
SECTION 01010
SUMMARY OF WORK
PART 1 GENERAL
1.1 REFERENCES
The publication listed below forms a part of this specification to the extent referenced. The
publication is referred to in the text by the basic designation only.
. l.U RELATED DOCUMENTS
{
Attached to these specifications is a copy of Part I: General Provisions, taken from the 1994
edition of the Standard Specification for Public Works Construction. Many of the provisions
of Part I are pertinent to this project and are considered as part of these specifications (See
Appendix B).
1.2
WORK COVERED BY CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
1.2. I Project Description
. PHASE 2 PROJECT SUMMARIES
· PROJECT 1 ADMINISTRATION
Work is completed and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 2 PUBLIC LmRARY
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition work, the
construction of interior walls, plumbing fIXtures, doors, hardware, signage, and interior
finishes. The work required for this project is shown on plan sheets A-l/2 through A-2/2.
.
PROJECT 3 POLICE STATION
(
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition work, the
construction of interior walls, plumbing fIXtures, doors, hardware, signage and interior
fmishes. The work required for this project is shown on plan sheet A-l/3.
M:IENGINEERIAOM INICONTRAC'T\AOAPHSII. 9C(BOILER. H UOI 90
7-1--
~.
(
(
Special Provisions (Continued)
.
PROJECT 4 PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition work,
interior wall infill, doors, hardware, plumbing fixtures, patching and repairing, signage and
interior finishes. The work required for this project is shown on plans sheet A-1/4.
· PROJECT 5 PARKWAY COMMUNITY CENTER
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, interior
wall infill, plumbing fixtures, doors, hardware, signage and interior finishes. The work
required for this project is shown on plan. sheet A-liS through 4/5. (See Appendix C.)
· PROJECT 6 LOMA VERDE RECREATION CENTER
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition work,
interior wall infill, plumbing fixtures, doors, hardware, signage, and interior fmishes. The
work required for this project is shown on plan sheets AlI6 through A2/6.
.
PROJECT 7 LAUDERBACH COMMUNITY CENTER
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition work,
interior walls, plumbing fixtures, doors, hardware, signage, and interior finishes. The work
required for this project is shown on plan sheets A-ln.
.
PROJECT 8 EUCALYPTUS PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 9 OT A Y PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 10 LOS NINOS PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 11 GREG ROGERS PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
M:\ENGINEER\ADMIN\CONTRAC'l\ADAPHSIl.9C(BOILER.HUD) 91
7-?
Special Provisions (Continued)
(
.
PROJECT 12 PUBLIC WORKS BLDG.
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition work,
interior wall inflll, doors, hardware, plumbing, fixtures, hardware, signage, painting, and
interior finishes. The work required for this project is shown on plan sheet A-1I2.
· PROJECT 1.3 EL DORADO BLDG.
Refer to PROJECT 34.
· PROJECT 14 VISITOR'S INFORMATION CENTER (E STREET INFORMATION CTR.)
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, plumbing
fixtures, patching and repair, signage, hardware, movement of fixtures and/or dispensers,
and interior finishes. The work required for this project is shown on drawings 1/14 through
3/14. (See Appendix C.)
.
PROJECT IS NATURE INTERPRETIVE CENTER
(
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, painting.
plumbing fIXtures, patching and repair, signage, hardware, movement of fixtures and/or
dispensers, and interior finishes. The work required for this project is shown on drawings
1/15 through 4/15. (See Appendix C.)
.
PROJECT 16 BAYS IDE PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 17 MARINA VIEW PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 18 NORMAN PARK SENIOR CENTER
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: replacement and movement
of restroom signage. (See Appendix C.)
.
PROJECT 19 MEMORIAL PARK
.
Project done under separate contract and is not included in bid proposal.
PROJECT 20 ROHR MANOR
(
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition work,
interior wall inflll, doors, hardware, plumbing fIXtures, patching and repairing, signage and
interior fmishes. The work required for this project is shown on plan sheet A-l/20.
M:IENGlNEERIADMINICONTRAC1\ADAPHSII. 9C(BOI~ER. HUD) 92
7-~
(
(
(
Special Provisions (Continued)
.
PROJECT 21 ROHR PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 22 PARKING GARAGE
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, painting,
and signage. The work required for this project is shown on drawings 1/22 through 3/22.
· PROJECT 23 FIRE STATION #1
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: movement of paper towel
and one soap dispenser. The work required for this project is shown on drawing 1/23. (See
Appendix C.)
. · PROJECT 24 FIRE STATION #2
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
.
PROJECT 25 FIRE STATION #3
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
.
PROJECT 26 FIRE STATION #4
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 27 FIRE STATION #5
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· 'PROJECT 28 TERRA NOVA PARK
.
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, installation
of handrail extensions, movement of fIXtures andlor dispensers, plumbing fIXtures and
interior finishes. The work required for this project is shown on drawings 1/28 through
3/28. (See Appendix C.)
PROJECT 29 PARKWAY RECREATION CENTER-POOL GYM
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following:" minor demolition,
replacement of plumbing fIXtures, movement of fIXtures and/or dispensers and interior
fmishes. The work required for this project is shown on drawings 1/29 through 2/29. (See
Appendix C.)
M:\ENGlNEER\AOMIN\CONTllACTlAOAPHSII. 9C(BOILER. HU OJ 93
7-1
Special Provisions (Continued)
(
.
PROJECT 30 WOMEN'S CLUB
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: signage, movement of
dispensers and interior finishes. (See Appendix C.)
. PROJECT 31 SOUTH BAY YMCA
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 32 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
Work is completed and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 33 WOODLAWN LIBRARY
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
.
PROJECT 34 EL DORADO BUILDING
(
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, interior
wall inflli, doors, hardware, plumbing fixtures, patching and repair, signage, movement of
fixtures and/or dispensers, and interior fmishes. The work required for this project is shown
on plan sheet A-l/34.
.
PROJECT 35 HERITAGE MUSEUM
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, movement
of fixtures and/or dispensers, signage, plumbing fixtures and interior finishes. (See
Appendix C.)
· PROJECT 36 BONITA LONG CANYON PARK
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, plumbing
fIXtures, signage, movement of futures and/or dispensers, and interior finishes. The work
required for this project is sho'Ml on drawings 1/36 through 4/36. (See Appendix C.)
· PROJECT 37 CHULA VISTA GOLF COURSE
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
.
PROJECT 38 DISCOVERY PARK
(
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: minor demolition, signage,
plumbing fixtures, movement of fixtures and/or dispensers, and interior fmishes. The work
required for this project is shown on drawings 1/38 through 4/38. (See Appendix C.)
M:IENGlNEERIADMINICONTRAC1\ADAPHSlI.9C(BOlLER.HUD) 94
7-/d
(
(
(
Special Provisions (Continued)
.
PROJECT 39 FRIENDSHIP PARK
Tmif proJect fu5 0eeII ~'-i;",,,~~f ami Iii IIllt iiII:fuaea in mcf proposal.
· PROJECT 40 EL RANCHO (INDEPENDENCE) DEL REY PARK
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: installation of signage. The
Work required for this project is shown on drawing 1/40. (See Appendix C.)
· PROJECT 41 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC PARK
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 42 SUNBOW PARK
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: installation of signage. The
Work required for this project is shown on drawing 1/42. (See Appendix C.)
.
PROJECT 43 SUNRIDGE PARK
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: installation of signage. The
Work required for this project is shown on drawing 1/43. (See Appendix C.)
.
PROJECT 44 TIFFANY PARK
The scope of work includes but is not limited to the following: installation of signage. The
Work required for this project is shown on drawing 1/44. (See Appendix C.)
· PROJECT 45 YOUTH CENTER
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
· PROJECT 46 ANIMAL SHELTER
This project has been eliminated and is not included in bid proposal.
1.2.2 Payment
Compensation for all labor, material, tools and equipment necessary to complete each project
complete in place is considered included in the lump sum price bid in the proposal.
1.2.3 Location
The work is located at the address listed in the proposal.
M:IENGlNEERIADMINICONTRACT\ADAPHSIl. 9C(BOILER. HUD) 95
?--//
f-Jif (-fe-I). NI FN -r b
MEMORANDUM
October 23,1996
TO: Cliff Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer
FROM: Juan P. Arroyo, Housing coordinato~
SUBJECT: Minority and Women Business Enterprise Construction Program - Construction
of ADA Renovations Phase II (GG144C)
I have reviewed Famania Construction, Inc. bid proposal for compliance with the City's Minority
and Women Business Enterprise Construction Program and have determined that the contractor
has provided the necessary documentation to indicate that the company plans to achieve the
City's goals for minority and women business enterprise participation.
JNjef
cc: Roberto Saucedo, Senior Civil Engineer
Shale Hanson, Civil Engineer
7-/).,
I J I ,. -'. ,... r-'" -
" are required to me a Statement of Disclosure of cenam ownership or fmancial interests, payments, or campaign contributions,
oD all matters which will require discretionary action on the pan of the City Council, PI arming Commission, and all other official
bOdies, The following information must be disclosed:
List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the propeny which is the subject of the application or the Contract
, e.g" owner, applicant, Contractor, subcontractor, material supplier, .' />
~ r;...-.c." f ~ ) PfU F;I~ /'
~
2. If any person. identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares in the corporation o~wning any pannership interest in the partnership.
Ii\." iW' t;;~r't.A"'1 q J1f.;.~ Ic:tvf-
lGQ .
3. If any person. identified pursuant to (I) 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.
JJ/Jr
.
... Have you had more than $250 wonh of business transacted with any m er of the City staff, Boards, Commissions.
Committees, and Council within the past twelve month? Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s):
S. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
V lit-
6. Have you andlor your officers or agents, in the gregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the current
or preceding election period? Yes No If yes, state which Council members(s):
Date: 'f - t i - 't l.
Signatur of Contractor! Applicant
~~ l~ ~~(
Print or type name of Contractor! Applicant
_'person is defined as: . Any individual, firm, co-parmership. joilll venture. association, social club, fraternal organization,
corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate. this aruJ any other county, city or coumry, city municipality, district. or other political
subdivision, or any other group or combilUl1ion acting as a unit.
,-.
S1 7-/3
~
~~~
,,~~.. ..~
....~- ., .,.-......-.,......
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item:
Meeting Date: 11/12/96
~
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution I?'/ 9 ~ccePting bids and awarding contract for "Memorial Park
Stage Improvements (PR-I68) and Eucalyptus Park Site Improvements (PR-I46)
in the City of Chula Vista, CA"; and re-appropriating $8,030 in Parkland
Acquisition and Development funds from PR-183 (Playground Renovation - Phase
II) to Memorial Park Stage~ovements (PR-168)
Director of Public Works
Director of Parks and Recreati~y"l1(tv9v'
City Manager",-JCi bO /10\
(4/5tbs Vote: Yes---X... No--->
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
At 2:00 p.m. on October 9, 1996 in Conference Rooms 2 & 3, the Director of Public Works received
sealed bids for "Memorial Park Stage Improvements (PR-168) and Eucalyptus Park Site Improvements
(PR-146) in the City of Chula Vista, CA." The general scope oftbe work is as follows:
Eucalyptus Park Play Equipment
The work to be done consists of constructing access to the children's play equipment at Eucalyptus Park.
The work includes construction of asphalt concrete surfacing, I foot to 20 foot slope walkways and other
miscellaneous work as shown on the plans.
Memorial Park Stage Improvements
The work to be done consists of constructing an expansion of the existing stage area at Memorial Park.
The work includes construction of access walkway at the rear stage, artistic surfacing on the stage, columns
and dome, restoration of planting and irrigation and other miscellaneous work shown on the plans.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
I. Accept bids and award the contract to Fox Construction - San Diego III the amount of
$114,715.00; and
2. Re-appropriate $8,030 in Parkland Acquisition and Development (PAD) funds from PR-183
(Playground Renovation - Phase II) to PR-168 (Memorial Park).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: Included in the CIP Program, over the last few years, are funds for construction of
improvements at Eucalyptus Park and Memorial Park. Specifically, a State of California Parks and
Recreation Grant has been received, in the amount of $98,500, for the improvements of the stage at
Memorial Bowl in Memorial Park. The initial improvements for Memorial Park and the construction of
<6~/
Page 2, Item. 7
Meeting Date: 11/12/96
the stage were the Phase One Improvements for the Memorial Park Master Plan. The cost of Phase One
was approximately $1.5 million and encompassed the demolition and grading in the central area,
construction of the drainage "stream", walkways, lighting, landscaping, irrigation and stage area with stairs
and handrails incorporated into the existing seating area.
Following construction of the First Phase of the Memorial Park Master Plan, the new stage area, as
constructed and installed, proved to be too small, in many instances, to accommodate the musical venues
that perform in the Park. This is especially apparent during the summer when the Summer Concert Series
is held at Memorial Park. Because of the experience with our successful concert series, staff believes it
is beneficial to increase the size of the stage to better accommodate the performances showcased on the
stage.
The improvements at Eucalyptus Park will be the forerunner of eventual renovation of the City's oldest
park. This construction is an initial effort to improve access to bring the play area into conformance with
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Bids were received from five contractors to perform the work; however, one of the bids was ineligible
because of the lack of submittal of a bid bond. Listed below are the bid results from the four eligible
bidders.
Contractor
Bid Amount
Fox Construction - San Diego
Builders Staff Corp. - Cardiff by the Sea
Valley Crest Landscape Inc. - San Diego
Single Eagle Inc. - San Diego
$114,715.00
$121,375.00
$141,576.00
$153,429.23
The low bid by Fox Construction is above the Engineer's estimate of $73,787.50 by $40,927.50, or 55%.
Although the low bid is above the Engineer's estimate, four legitimate bids were received for construction
of this project and it is believed that the bid amount does reflect the actual cost to perform the work. The
difference between the Engineer's estimate and the low bid is due to three (3) factors. They are:
1. Bid item #4, Concrete Masonry Unit Wall with Rock Veneer. This item was estimated at $35.00
per lineal foot, with a quantity of 200 lineal feet. The total amount identified in the Engineer's
Estimate was $7,000.00. The lineal foot price bid by the three contractors was $100.00 ($20,000),
$90.00 ($18,000), and $165.00 ($33,000) respectively. This is a $13,000 difference.
2. Bid item #10, Concrete Surface Finishing. This process, called Arte Povere, is a surface treatment
created by Progressive Concrete in Escondida, CA. This process is a sole source installation and
has not been matched or duplicated by any other contractor to date.
In addition to the increase in size of the stage area, recommendations from musical performers
identified that the glare and reflection was causing difficulty and overheating during performances.
Staff investigated the potential of constructing a shade structure, with the cost of such a feature in
the $150,000 range. The application of the Arte Provere surface treatment after the construction
7--~
Page 3, Item. r
Meeting Date: 11/12/96
of the expanded stage area will solve the glare and heat issue from the shiny concrete, and will also
provide a uniform treatment and consistent image. This material is also graffiti proof which is a
benefit over plain concrete. The scope of the area to be treated is the stage surface and columns.
The dome is to be prepared and painted in a color to complement the Arte Provere treatment.
In working with Progressive Concrete for the design of this installation, an initial estimate of
$14,260.00 was quoted by the company. However, during project design the stage area was
greatly increased from 1,647 sf to 3,175 sf and the material was also added to 27 columns, which
increased the cost to over $23,000. Seventeen percent was added to this for overhead and profit,
bringing the total to $27,160.00. This would increase the cost by $12,900.
3. Bid item #28, 5 'h" thick P.C.c. Paving. This item was not included in the original cost estimate
and was subsequently identified in Addendum #1. The estimated amount was $9,000. The bids
came in at $7,500, $7,500 and $5,775.
Staff reviewed the bids and all four bidders were consistent in their pricing of these items. Based on that
review, staff believes the bids are appropriate and recommends award of the contract. The low bidder
has performed previous work for the City and their work has been satisfactory.
Prevailin~ Wa~e Statement
The source of funding for this project includes State grant funds in PR-168 (Memorial Park) and PR-146
(Playground Renovation - Phase I). It was determined that the project would require the paying of
prevailing wage rates. No special minority or women-owned business requirements were necessary as part
of the bid document. Disadvantaged businesses were encouraged to bid through the send of Notice to
Contractor through various trade publications.
Disclosure Statement
Attachment "A" is a copy of the contractor's Disclosures Statement.
Environmental Status
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is categorically exempt under
Class I, Section 15301(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (Minor alternations of existing
Public Improvements or Public Structures).
FISCAL IMPACT: As the bid recommended exceeds funds available, staff recommends the following in
order to fund the two projects:
I. Existing grant funds in PR-168 currently are $94,510 (funds having already been expended for
staff time involved in preparing the construction documents and the bid documentation). The
funding portion of the bid which relates to the stage improvements is $102,540, or $8,030 short,
to complete the stage improvements. Staff recommends that $8,030 be re-appropriated from PR-
183 (Playground Renovation - Phase II) to PR-168 (Memorial Park). The re-appropriation of the
7-3
Page 4, Item. i
Meeting Date: 11/12/96
$8,030 from PR-183 (Playground Renovation) will have no effect on existing or future playground
renovation projects. This project account is for the city-wide renovation and upgrading of existing
playgrounds, access and safety.
2. The remainder of the bid for access improvements at Eucalyptus Park is to be funded from PR-146
(Playground Renovation - Phase I). The amount of funds available from PR-I46 is $47,248. This
portion of the bid which funds the Eucalyptus Park Access Improvements is $12,175.
3. Additional funds are required for the completion of the project to meet staff costs and contingency
funding. $11,472 is needed for projected staff costs affiliated with the project and $17,207, or
15% of the bid, is requested for contingency funds. These two amounts total $28,679, which is
available in PR-I46.
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount $114,715.00
B. Staff Costs (inspection and design) $ 11,472.00
C. Contingencies (15 %) $ 17,207.00
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $143,394.00
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. PR-168 - Memorial Park $ 94,510.00
B. PR-183 - Playground Renovation (Phase II) $ 8,030.00
C. PR-146 - Playground Renovation (Phase I) $ 40,854.00
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $143,394.00
Construction of this project will authorize the expenditure of $143,394. As staff is re-appropriating funds
from other approved CIP projects, staff anticipates a re-organization of the Playground Renovation
program and a possible request for additional funds during the CIP budget process for FY 97/98.
Routine city maintenance of playground equipment, play areas, and park grounds will be required.
Attachment:
"A" - City of Chula Vista Disclosure Statement
M:\HOME\\ENGINEER\AGENDA \PR168,SLH
?~~
RESOLUTION NO.
/?'11o
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR "MEMORIAL PARK STAGE IMPROVEMENTS
(PR-168) AND EUCALYPTUS PARK SITE IMPROVEMENTS
(PR-146) IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA" AND
REAPPROPRIATING $8,030 IN PARKLAND ACQUISITION
AND DEVELOPMENT FUNDS FROM PR-183 (PLAYGROUND
RENOVATION - PHASE II) TO MEMORIAL PARK STAGE
IMPROVEMENTS (PR-168)
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on October 9, 1996 in Conference
Rooms 2 & 3, the Director of Public Works received the following
four eligible sealed bids for "Memorial Park Stage Improvements
(PR-168) and Eucalyptus Park Site Improvements (PR-146) in the city
of Chula Vista, CA.:
Contractor
Bid Amount
Fox Construction - San Diego
Builders Staff Corp. - Cardiff by the Sea
Valley Crest Landscape Inc. - San Diego
Single Eagle Inc. - San Diego
$114,715.00
$121,375.00
$141,576.00
$153,429.23
WHEREAS, the low bid by Fox Construction is above the
Engineer's estimate of $73,787.50 by $40,927.50, or 55% and
although the low bid is above the Engineer's estimate, four
legitimate bids were received for construction of this project and
it is believed that the bid amount does reflect the actual cost to
perform the work; and
WHEREAS, the difference between the Engineer's estimate
and the low bid is due to (3) factors. They are:
1. Bid item #4, Concrete Masonry unit Wall with Rock
Veneer. This item was under estimated based on
preliminary information received from material
supplies.
2. Bid item #10, Concrete Surface Finishing. This is
a sole source product and provider and only one
contractor in the country does this process. The
amount used in the engineer's estimate was based on
information provided by this provider. However,
based on the actual plans, the bid came in
considerably higher.
3. Bid item #28, 5- >, "Thick P.C.C. Paving. This
item was an item added to the proposal after the
engineer's estimate was prepared.
1
y~
WHEREAS, staff reviewed the bids and all four bidders
were consistent in their pricing of these items and based on that
review staff believes the bids are appropriate and recommends award
of the contract to the low bidder who has performed previous work
for the City and their work has been satisfactory; and
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project includes
State grant funds in PR-168 (Memorial Park) and PR-146 (Playground
Renovation - Phase I) and it was determined that the project would
require the paying of prevailing wage rates; and
WHEREAS, no special minority or women-owned business
requirements were necessary as part of the bid document, however,
disadvantaged businesses were encouraged to bid through the send of
Notice to Contractor through various trade publications.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby accept bids and award the contract
to Fox Construction - San Diego in the amount of $114,715.00.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
contract for and on behalf of the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city Council does hereby
re-appropriate $8,030 in Parkland Acquisition and Development (PAD)
funds from PR-183 (Playground Renovation - Phase II) to PR-168
(Memorial Park).
Presented by
Approved as to form by
o /'- 1/f! A)-f 9---0-
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\pr168.bid
2
(f/ ~
A,-,t'4cttM-Ii'N T L-
ate required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or fmancial interests, payments, or campaign contributions,
od all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official
bOdies. The following information must be disclosed:
List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the Contract
, e.g., owner, applicant, Contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
~ ~M~) ptz1ri,JwJ .."
.
2. If any person* identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares in the corporation o~wning any partnership interest in the partnership.
CLI'tW' J:;IVlA"", ';, as Ict.vf-
lGQ ,
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.
,.;/~
,
... Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any m er of the City staff, Boards, Commissions.
Committees, and Council within the past twelve month? Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
vllr
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the gregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the current
or preceding election period? Yes No If yes, state which Council members(s):
Signatur
O~&d
of Contractorl Applicant
1;~t
L.- .
Date: 'f - t "7 - <t ~
t'\,
Print or type name of Contractorl Applicant
_ Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization,
corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city or country, city municipality, district, or other political
subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
Sl g- /' 7
.~
,,~?-.
',~
'"~,""""'''''','.''''''' "~~
'-.'.'
,-.' ~.'
._.~". - ~"!""'" .~ ~"..""'F~.""
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Iteml
Meeting Date 11/12/96
/!'f~/
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving the first amendment to the agreement with DKS
Associates for Traffic Signal System Upgrade Technical Design Study (CIP TF
237), authorizing the Mayor to Execute the Amendment.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager J~; r'~1 6il:1 (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No~)
On November 14,1995, by Resolution l8l<OaOU;~~ approved an agreement with DKS Associates
(DKS) to design an adaptive traffic control signal system. DKS has completed Tasks 1 and 3 of the
contract and is currently working on Tasks 2 and 4. Task 2 includes specifications for the system and
Task 4 is preparation of the plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for Phase II of the project.
Subsequent to approval of the original contract, DKS suggested that staff consider the inclusion of
video detection into the PS&E for Phase II of the work. The City has received approval of Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in the amount of $200,000 to do the work being performed
by DKS. The contract approved by Council was for $169,000 leaving $31,000 available for additional
work and staff time reimbursement.
DKS has submitted a proposal to evaluate use of video detection in lieu ofthe standard loop detection
and to prepare plans and specifications for use by the City in the Phase II work. They propose to
perform this work for $24,650. Staff believes that it would be beneficial to include this work under
Task 2 of the contract.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the first amendment to the agreement with DKS
Associates, authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Chula Vista has received State approval to utilize federal funds under the Federal
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Congestion Mitigation Air Quality
(CMAQ) program to upgrade the city's traffic control system to a state of the art flexible timing
"Adaptive Urban Traffic Control" system for the first phase of a three phase project. This project is
identified in the city's FY 95/96 Capital Improvement Program (C1P) budget as TF237 - Traffic Signal
System Upgrade and is also shown in the 1995 San Diego Regional Transportation Improvement
Program as Federal Aid Project # 11-5203. Program Supplement Agreement No. 008 between the
9-//
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/12/96
City and the State will assure State reimbursement to the City for all costs associated with the traffic
signal design study up to the amount of the grant which is $200,000.
Council on November 14,1995 approved a contract with DKS Associates to complete Phase 1 for
$169,000. Phase 1 consists of system design study. This phase ofthe project will provide a listing
and specifications of the computer software and hardware required. Additionally this phase will
provide construction drawings for modifying approximately 10 adjacent signalized intersections. The
signal locations are on East "R" Street and on either side of East "R" Street on Otay Lakes Road.
Phase 2 of the traffic signal system upgrade consists of the purchase of traffic control equipment and
software and the installation of vehicle detection and signal modifications at the ten locations studied
in Phase I. Phase 3 consists of installation of vehicle detectors and signal modifications at 80 to 100
additional locations .
ADDITION TO CONTRACT SCOPE OF WORK
DKS has provided a proposal to the City to evaluate the use of video detection in lieu of standard
loop detectors at traffic signals and to provide a set of plans and specifications for use by the City
as part of the Phase 2 project. Video detection is beneficial over the traditional loop detectors because
of their flexibility. In order to act as a " traffic detector", the video camera works in conjunction
with a computer to determine when the traffic passes over the "detector loop". The computer
superimposes an image of a loop over the image from the computer. When traffic passes through
the "loop" and changes the image within the area of the video "loop", traffic is registered by the
computer, placing a call for the appropriate signal phase. Thus, the location of the "loop" can be
changed easily to match future changes in the travel lane configuration and/or will be unaffected by
pavement reconstruction work which would cut traditional loop wires. This is desirable because the
detector location can be moved and the system tested to see if the most beneficial location is being
utilized. In addition, when work is done in the intersection there will no longer be the need for the
signal to be placed on fixed time while the loops are being replaced. These are particularly important
considerations for an adaptive signal system, whose effectiveness relies heavily on the detection
system. Out-of-service detectors would significantly reduce the adaptive signal system's ability to
adjust the signal timings to adapt to changing traffic conditions.
Another benefit to the use of video detection would be the long term savings associated with not
replacing loop detectors due to overlays, utility work and reconstruction. Installation of standard
loops cost approximately $400.00 per loop when replacing damaged loops and $250 per loop when
loops are installed in larger intersections requiring between 60-70 loops. This represents a total cost
for a new intersection of $15,000 to $17,500 per intersection whereas video detection for the same
intersection would cost approximately $20,000 to $35,000. Therefore the use of video detection
9-,2
Page 3, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/12/96
would save the City the cost to install new loops, replace damaged loops, loops overlayed by asphalt
or loops being replaced as a result of intersection modification.
DKS Associates have assisted a number of cities to evaluate and develop specifications for use of
video detection. Video detection has been used in Santa Ana, Stockton, Fresno, Irvine and other
locations. The cost of commercially available video detection equipment ranges from $5,000 to over
$35,000 per intersection depending on the different capabilities and constraints contained in the
camera. For instance, the camera's come in black and white or color, have the ability to transmit
data back to a central location and to do traffic counts or they can simply be used for communication
with the controllers. Therefore staff believes it is important to evaluate the specific needs of the City
and determine a set of functional specifications that best fit our needs.
DKS Associates propose to evaluate the commercial systems available for the following:
. systems deployed
. error rate
. night detection accuracy
. weather condition sensitivity
. cost effectiveness
. installation requirements
. maintenance and operation issues
They propose to prepare specifications for implementation of the video detection system for use in the
adaptive signal control system and to prepare traffic signal plans which include video detection in the
adaptive signal control.
REVISED DATES AND TIMES OF DELIVERABLES
The original contract provided for the overall work to be completed in 240 days and for each task
to be completed within a certain number of days from the notice to proceed. This specified time
frame was due to project management aspects, but was not critical to the City as is the time frame
specified for construction contracts. These time frames were also dependent upon staff's ability to
provide information and/or respond. Therefore, there were no liquidated damages associated with
this contract. The work being performed by DKS Associates has been dependent upon obtaining
funding for the work covered under the contract, funding of Phase III of the project, staff review of
the items submitted, and staff providing information to the consultant.
Funding for the project was approved in late December 1995. The official notice to proceed was
given as January 2,1996. The overall completion date, based on 240 working days was December
12,1996. Completion of the tasks indicated in the original agreement have been delayed for several
reasons which were not the result of the consultants inaction. The delays were associated with the
9~3
Page 4, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/12/96
inability to perform certain of the tasks without knowing whether funding was available for Phase
III; staffs inability to review submittals and provide information needed by the consultant in a timely
manner as a result of reduced staff and shifting of staff to cover higher priority projects.
Staff has revised the section of Exhibit A of the contract under Dates or Time Limit for Delivery of
Deliverables and Date of Completion for All Consultant Services to reflect new dates of delivery.
Staff has included a statement that allows the City Engineer to extend the date of deliverable if
approved in writing.
FISCAL IMP ACT:
Funding in the amount of $200,000 for evaluation and design of a Chula Vista Adaptive Traffic
Control System (Phase 1) has been provided by CaITrans under the CMAQ Federal Grant
program. Phase 1 is identified in the FY 1995-96 CIP budget as TF237 - Traffic Signal System
Upgrade. The work required of this project is being performed by DKS Associates consulting
firm under the direction of traffic engineering staff. The addition of the $24,650 associated with
the addition of video detection into the contract, DKS Associates contract will total $193,650.00.
All of the consultant services will be reimbursed by the State under the provisions of the CMAQ
federal grant. The remaining $6,350 of the grant money is available to reimburse for staff time
charges. The CIP budget included $30,000 in Traffic Signal Funds as a contingency anticipating
that staff time would not be eligible for reimbursement and/or the consulting contract amount
would not leave sufficient funds to cover staff time. As of September 24,1996, staff time costs
amount to $9,191.40. Therefore, $2,841.40 plus any future staff time costs will be charged to
the Traffic Signal Fund. The amount the CIP budget should adequately cover the remaining staff
time costs. The Traffic Signal Fund will lose a minor amount of interest based on the difference
in time between when payments are made on the project and reimbursement funds are received.
The actual amount of this loss is unknown, although minor, since we anticipate reimbursement
will be between two and three months of when payments are made.
Attachments:
Exhibit "A" Resolution 18106
Exhibit "B" 11/14/95 Agenda Statement Agreement
Exhibit "e" Agreement Approved by Resolution 18106
File: 0735-10 TF237 BN-003
M:\HOME\ENGINEERIAGENDA\DKSVlDW AU
9--t/
RESOLUTION NO. / !J' Y 9 /
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO
THE AGREEMENT WITH DKS ASSOCIATES FOR TRAFFIC
SIGNAL SYSTEM UPGRADE TECHNICAL DESIGN STUDY
(CIP TF 237) AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
THE AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, on November 14, 1995, by Resolution 18106,
Council approved an agreement with DKS Associates (DKS) to design
an adaptive traffic control signal system; and
WHEREAS, DKS has completed Tasks 1 and 3 of the contract
and is currently working on Tasks 2 and 4; and
and Task
estimates
WHEREAS, Task 2 includes specifications for the system
4 is preparation of the plans, specifications and
(PS&E) for Phase II of the project; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to approval of the original contract,
DKS suggested that staff consider the inclusion of video detection
into the PS&E for Phase II of the work and the City has received
approval of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in
the amount of $200,000 to do the work being performed by DKS; and
WHEREAS, the contract approved by Council was
$169,000 leaving $31,000 available for additional work and
time reimbursement; and
for
staff
WHEREAS, DKS has submitted a proposal to evaluate use of
video detection in lieu of the standard loop detection and to
prepare plans and specifications for use by the City in the Phase
II work and proposes to perform this work for $24,650; and
WHEREAS, staff believes that it would be beneficial to
include this work under Task 2 of the contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve the First Amendment to the
Agreemnt with DKS Associates for Traffic Signal Upgrade Technical
Design Study (CIP TF 237), a copy of which is on file in the office
of the city Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby
authorized and directed to execute said First Amendment for and on
behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
u~ L1 ~~o
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City
Attorney
C:\rs\dks.1st
9-~
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND
DKS ASSOCIATES
FOR AN ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPGRADE
TECHNICAL DESIGN STUDY
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR AN ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC
SIGNAL UPGRADE (AMENDMENT) is entered into as of November , 1996, by and between
the City ofChula Vista (City), a municipal Chartered corporation of the State of California, and DKS
Associates (Consultant), a Corporation, whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth
on Exhibit A, Paragraph 6.
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has approved an agreement (Agreement) with DKS Associates
dated November 14,1995 and approved by Resolution 18106; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provided for a Traffic Signal System Upgrade Technical Study (CIP- TF
237), and
WHEREAS, an amount of $200,000 was appropriated to fund the work indicated in the Agreement,
to pay for additional work and to reimburse the City for staff time costs; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement with the Consultant was approved in the amount of$169,000; and
WHEREAS, this study is intended to improve the coordination between traffic signals and the use
of video detection in lieu of standard traffic signal loops and will provide an ability to adjust the loop
detector location easily to determine the most effective location; and
WHEREAS, both the City and Consultant desire to amend the Agreement approved by Resolution
18106 to include video detection in the design of the adaptive traffic signal system.
NOW, THEREFORE, Exhibit A of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:
A. Amend 8A. Scope of Work and Schedule as follows:
Add to TASK 2 an evaluation of video detection as system detectors with the following
items to be considered:
. systems deployed
M:IHOMEIENGlNEERITRAFFICIDKSAMD96. W AU
Page 1
9-f
. error rate
. night detection accuracy
. weather condition sensitivity
. cost effectiveness
. installations requirements
. maintenance and operations issues
Evaluate the items indicated above by:
. Visiting locations in the field that contain video detection to identify design and cost
Issues.
. Obtaining literature on video systems from vendors
. Discuss system capabilities with vendor representatives to identify the most
appropriate system for Chula Vista.
Include in the deliverable the following:
. An analysis of the results of the evaluation and provide a recommendation and
criteria for use of video detection for the pilot corridor and future use.
Deliverables:
1) A Technical Memorandum documenting the video detection evaluation and location
of system detectors.
Add to TASK 4 preparation of detailed plans and specifications for the implementation of
the recommended video detection devices to be incorporated in the plans, specifications and
estimates (PS&E) for Phase II.
Deliverables:
1) Include in the preparation of the PS&E for Phase II detailed plans, specifications and
estimates to include video detection in the adaptive system control.
B. Amend 8C. Dates or Times for Delivery of Deliverables to read as follows:
Phase I
Working Days from
Notice to Proceed
Deliverables for Task 1:
Complete
Deliverables for Task 2:
255
M :\HOMEIENGINEERITRAFFICIDKSAMD96. W AU
9-/
Page 2
Deliverables for Task 3:
Complete
Deliverables for Task 4:
280
Deliverables for Task 5:
Not Required
Deliverables for Task 6:
320
The number of working days for each task may be increased by the City Engineer prior to exceeding
the number of working days indicated for each task if said increase is authorized in writing.
C. Amend 8D to read as follows:
Date for completion of all consultant services:
Phase I shall be completed in 320 working days from the notice to proceed unless extended
by the Citv Engineer in writing prior to the date of completion.
D. Amend l1A. Compensation to read as follows:
Single Fixed Fee Amount: $193,650.00, payable as follows:
Task Amount
1. Evaluate adaptive systems
2. Develop specifications
3. Recommend communication system
4. PS&E for Phase II
5. Optional task
6. Contractor selection
$43,773.00
$52,285.00
$ 7, 567.00
$78,336.00
o
$11.689.00
TOTAL
$193,650.00
E. Except as modified herein, all other provisions of the Agreement approved by Resolution
18106 approved on November 14, 1995, shall remain in full force and effect.
M:\HOME\ENGINEER\TRAFFIClDKSAMD96. W A U
9-Y
Page 3
714-543-0402 D~S riSSOC - D.C.
459 P05
NOU 05 _ _
Signature P"ile
for the First Amendment to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and DKS Associates
for an Adaptive Traffic Signal System_
IN W11NESS WHEREOF, City and Consultllnt have executed thil; First Amendment
thereby indicating that they have ree.d and understood same, and indicate their full and complete
co~ent to its tems:
Dated:
,19_
City ofChula Vista
by:
Shirley Horton, M"yor
Attest;
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as to fonn:
CL-.... 'YV1~ 9"'-9--
.Aun Moore, lnterim City AUO\11ey
Dilted;
B:
nllIlle of person
~~.
~~
By:
[natne of pelWn, title]
Exhibit List to Agreement
( ) Exhibit A.
M:>HOMElENCiINl!U\Tl\AFflt:=S1,M09S.\lI AU
1'1".
ATTACHMENT "A"
.777'
RESOLUTION NO. 18106
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH DKS ASSOCIATES FOR
A TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM UPGRADE TECHNICAL DESIGN
STUDY (CIP-TF237), AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
THE AGREEMENT, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
WHEREAS, on June 8, 1995 the Director of Public Works received proposals from six
transportation consulting firms to perform the traffic signal system design study to determine
the merits of upgrading the City's "fixed" coordinated timing signal system to a more real time
responsive ("adaptive") coordinated timing signal system; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Council Policy, a City Manager's Consultant Selection
Committee (Committee), after evaluating the proposals and interviewing four firms, selected
DKS Associates as the most qualified firm to perform the traffic signal upgrade design study;
and
WHEREAS, when the State executes this agreement (approval is a formality and is
expected to occur within 30 days!. the consultant will be given notice to proceed as so
stipulated in the consultant agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PC:SOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does
hereby approve agreement with DKS Associates for a Traffic Signal System Upgrade
Technical Design Study (CIP-TF237), a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk
as Document No. C095-227.
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 amount of $200,000 is hereby appropriated as
a loan from the Traffic Signal Fee Fund to cover the actual expenditures until the
reimbursement is received and since the grant will not pay interest costs, the loan will be an
interest free loan with the Traffic Signal Fund foregoin a lost reven e during the interim
period.
ohn P. Lipp tt
ublic Works Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
~ 9-/~:
~9
\
- This Page Blank -
/J-.;L
ITEM TrfLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENT "B"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 10
Meeting Date 11/14/95
Resolution \ 8 '05 approving a Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality "CMAQ" Program Supplement between the City of Chula Vista
and Caltrans for Federal-Aid funding to design an Adaptive Traffic
Control Signal System.
Resolution I ~ I OCt, Approving Agreement with DKS Associates
for a Traffic Signal System Upgrade Technical Design Study (CIP-
TF237) , authorizing the Mayor to execute the Agreement, and
appropriating funds therefor.
Director of Public wor~
City Manager (4/Sths Vote: Yes X No->
The City of Chula Vista has received State approval to utilize federal funds under the Federal
lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Congestion Mitigation Air Quality
(CMAQ) program to upgrade the city's traffic control system to a state of the art flexible
timing "Adaptive Urban Traffic Control" system for the first phase of a three phase project.
This project is identified in the city's FY95/96 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget as
TF237 - Traffic Signal System Upgrade and is also shown in the 1995 San Diego Regional
Transportation Improvement Program as Federal Aid Project # 11-5203. Program Supplement
Agreement No. 008 between the City and the State will assure State reimbursement to the City
for all costs associated with the traffic signal design study upon notice from the State that they
have executed the reimbursement agreement.
On June 8, 1995 the Director of Public Works received proposals from six transportation
consulting firms to perform the traffic signal system design study to determine the merits of
upgrading the City's "fixed" coordinated timing signal system to a more real time responsive
("adaptive") coordinated timing signal system. In accordance with Council Policy, a City
Manager's Consultant Selection Committee (Committee), after evaluating the proposals and
interviewing four firms, selected DKS Associates as the most qualified firm to perform the
traffic signal upgrade design study. When the State executes this agreement (approval is a
formality and is expected to occur within 30 days), the consultant will be given notice to proceed
as so stipulated in the consultant agreement.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) approve the resolution approving Program
Supplement to Local Agency-State Agreement for Federal-Aid Projects No. 11-5203 between
the City of Chula Vista and State of California Department of Transportation for Phase I of
the City's Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) "Adaptive Urban Traffic Control"
~ / -II
ATTACHMENT "B"
Page 2, Item-1O-
,<leeting Date 11-14-95
system project, and authorize the Mayor to execute the supplement; 2) approve the resolution
approving an agreement between the City and DKS Associates to perform a Traffic Signal
System Upgrade Design Study (TF-237), authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement; and
appropriating Traffic Signal Funds in the amount of $200,000 to cover the cost of the project.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: The City's current traffic control system, referred to as an Urban Traffic
Control " UTC" system (JHK series 2000), controls and monitors 128 traffic signals.
Coordination of traffic signals are implemented in this system by running "fixed cycle" signal
timing plans at different times of the day and different days of the week. The "fixed cycle"
timing plans are based on pre-determined peak traffic volumes taken during different times of
the day or week. The timing plans assume that the same traffic volume patterns will remain
fixed during these pre-determined time periods. This system is, thus, limited in its ability to
adapt and respond automatically to variations in peak hour volumes and the times these
variations occur, particularly when considering future traffic demands that will be placed on
the City's circulation system as a result of expected future growth.
The proposed adaptive traffic control is a dynamic system that uses real time, electronically
collected, traffic volume data. The adaptive traffic control sy~tem continuously measures
traffic demands on all approaches to signalized intersections and transmits this information to
a master controller which, in turn, electronically adjusts the timing of affected signals. The
timing and coordination of traffic signals is performed continuously, thereby responding to ever
changing traffic flow conditions. The adaptive traffic control system is considered to be the
state of the art in coordinating and optimizing the sequence of timing traffic signal system
networks.
The cost to implement this new state of the art traffic control system is being made available
to the City of Chula Vista under the Federal lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
ISTEA), Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) program through the State and our
regions transportation agency, SANDAG.
Implementation of the new traffic (adaptive) control system is planned to take place in three
stages over a three to five year period for a total cost of approximately $2,000,000.
Phase 1
Phase one ($200,000), is a system design study. This phase of the project will provide
a listing and specifications of the computer software and hardware required.
Additionally this phase will provide construction drawings for modifying appoximately
10 adjacent signalized intersections. The supplemental agreement, the subject of this
report, requires Council approval before funds in the amount of $200,000 can be
released for payment to the consultant engaged to perform the Phase one of the signal
upgrade project. This phase of the project has been designated as Federal-Aid Projects
No. 11-5203. Execution of the attached Program Supplement is a Federal requirement
for the expenditure of the $200,000 grant.
~ 7~/.2
AI I ACrll'Iti1 I "D"
Page 3, ItemJ(L
Meeting Date 11-14-95
Phase 2
Phase two consists of the purchase of traffic control equipment and software and the
installation of vehicle detection and signal modifications at ten locations.
Approximately $700,000 of CMAQ funding will be needed to implement this phase of
the project. The city's request for CMAQ funding from the 1996 appropriation for this
phase has received regional approval from SANDAG. This phase appears in the FY
1996 regional transportation program as amendment number 5. The requested $700,000
of CMAQ funds are expected to be available at the conclusion of phase I subject to
final federal approval.
Phase 3
Phase three consists of the installation of vehicle detectors and signal modifications at
80 to 100 locations. The cost to implement this last phase is estimated to be
$1,100,000. The City's request for additional CMAQ funding from the 1997 FY
. program for phase three has received tacit approval from the San Diego Traffic
Engineering Council (SANTEC), a SANDAG standing committee. SANTEC is
charged with the responsibility of reviewing CMAQ candidate projects applications
from jurisdictions throughout the region and recommending to the SANDAG board of
directors which projects should receive CMAQ funding.
Acceptance of Federal Funds
Acceptance of Federal CMAQ funds to conduct a design study (Phase 1) according to the State
Program Supplement Agreement, does not commit the City to proceed with implementation of
the upgrade proposed project, Phase 2 and or 3. Phase 1 is a stand alone study which will
provide a blue print for upgrading the City's existing signal system. Although the City has
received Federal approval to proceed with Phase 1, there is no obligation to the City to proceed
with Phase 2 or 3 at City expense, if Federal funds do not become available in the future.
Consultant Selection
Subsequent to SANDAG and Federal approval of the City's project, a Request for Proposals to
perform a traffic signal system design upgrade study was sent to 32 transportation consulting
firms. It was determined that City staff did not possess the necessary expertise, experience, or
staffing level to conduct the traffic signal system up grade study in house. After a thirty day
time certain closing date period, staff received siX proposals. The six proposals were evaluated
by the Manager's Consultant Selection Committee. Members of the Committee were: Hal
Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer; Cecil Chau, Signal System Engineer; Duncan Hughes, Associate
Traffic Engineer for the City of San Diego; and Edward Krolikowski, City Traffic Engineer for
the City of El Cajon. The Committee evaluated the proposals for completeness, cost,
qualifications of personnel, understanding of the project, experience with traffic signal operations
and knowledge of computer signal system applications. The Committee, after evaluating the
proposals, interviewed the four highest ranked consulting firms:
~
~?-/J
ATTACHMENT "8"
Page 4, Item~
Meeting Date 11-14-95
Consultant Cost Proposal
DKS Associates(1) - Irvine, CA $169,890(2)
$169,000(3)
Darnell & Associates(1) - San Diego, CA $169,018
KOA/NET/BRW(I) - San Diego, CA $172,984
JHK(I) - San Diego, CA $186,168
UMA - Irvine, CA $192,517
Frederick R. Harris - San Diego $193,306
(I) _ Four highest rank firms
(2) _ Original Cost Proposal
(3) _ Negotiated Cost
Based on the submitted proposals, and taking in consideration costs, system design proposal, and
the results of the interview precess, the Committee selected DKS Associates as the best firm.
DKS had, by far, the most hands on experience with adaptive traffic control systems and a
strong team of individuals who have a good reputation for their expertise in this field. They
demonstrated a more thorough knowledge of the City's existing system and understanding of our
objectives in comparison with the other consultants. All of the other proposers had weaknesses
in various areas such as experience with adaptive systems or personnel and staffing depth. Some
of the other consultants made weak proposals and/or presentations that appeared to indicate a
lack of ability to meet the City's needs. Therefore, regardless of the cost, DKS was top ranked
and would have been selected for an agreement. However, staff negotiated with them for a
more acceptable price as part of the contract negotiations.
Scope of Consultant Agreement
The attached DKS traffic signal system upgrade contract being considered by Council includes
six tasks to be completed over an eight month period. Assuming work commences by December
1995, the design study would be completed in July 1996. The following is a summary of the
tasks and deliverables required of the contract.
Task 1:
Evaluation of alternative traffic control systems
A complete report of the review and analysis of the existing system and related
infrastructure, alternative adaptive control systems and their pros and cons
relative to the City's needs, and a financial plan relative to the phasing of the
system implementation will be prepared and will be the product of this first task.
~ 7-/1
ATTACHMENT "B"
Page 5, Item to
Meeting Date 11-14-95
Task 2:
Prepare hardware and software technical specifications
Functional and technical specifications for a new adaptive traffic control system
will be the product of this task.
Task 3:
Communication system recommendation
A technical report on the recommended communication system tailored to the
City's existing signal system architecture will be the product of this task.
Task 4:
Prepare plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for Phase 2
The products of this task will be:
. PS&E plans for the necessary traffic signal, vehicle detection system, and
field/intersection modifications
. Contract documents for bidding of Phase 2 of the adaptive traffic control
system.
Field construction drawings, specifications and cost estimates for vehicle
detection modifications necessary to implement the recommended adaptive traffic
control system.
Task 5:
Communications PS&E (optional)
Depending on the communication system recommended and accepted by staff in
Task 3, DKS will provide PS&E of the selected communication design.
Task 6:
Assist City staff in contractor selection and negotiations for Phase 2
Contractor selection criteria and a list of questions will be the product of. this
task.
Agreement
The agreement with DKS Associates uses the City's standard two-party agreement. Under this
contract, DKS Associates agrees to perform the Scope of Work as outlined in Exhibit A for a
single fixed fee of $169,000. Engineering staff has worked closely with the City Attorney's
office to formulate the proposed agreement. The agreement stipulates that the consultant shall
not proceed with the project until they receive written notification from the City Engineer which
shall occur when the City receives confirmation from the State that the payment service
agreement (State program supplement authorizing reimbursement for services) has been
executed.
The final !legotiated fee of $169,000 is the lowest fee offered by the six consulting firrns
competin;; for the City's contract.
~
7- ~
( ,L
ATTACHMENT "B,j'O
Page 6, Item--L-
Meeting Date 11-14-95
Appropriation:
Since the CMAQ grant will only be available on a reimbursement basis, funds need to be
appropriated from the Traffic Signal Fee Fund to cover the actual expenditures until the
reimbursement is received. As indicated by the existing appropriation of Traffic Signal funds,
this is a legitimate use of those funds. The grant will enable the City to undertake a betterment
project that we would not otherwise be able to do with our limited Traffic Signal funding. The
amount that needs to be appropriated is $200,000.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding in the amount of $200,000. for evaluation and design of a Chu]a Vista Adaptive Traffic
Control System (phase 1) will be provided by Caltrans under the CMAQ Federal Grant program.
Phase 1 is identified in the FY 1995-96 CIP budget as TF237 - Traffic Signal System Upgrade.
The work required of this project will be performed by DKS Associates consulting firm under
the direction of traffic engineering staff. .AI] associated staff time and consultant services will
be charged against the project and reimbursed by the State under the provisions of the CMAQ
federal gr~t.
Since this is a fixed fee contract, there will be no additional costs unless the City determines that
additional work is required. In that case, staff would evaluate the amount of funding available
for the desired additional work and make a recommendation according]y. In the unlikely event
there is a cost over-run, the City would have to pay those costs in excess of the grant. The CIP
budget included $30.,000 in Traffic Signal Funds as a contingency anticipating that staff time
would not be eligib]e for reimbursement and/or the consulting contract amount would not leave
sufficient funds to cover staff time. CalTrans subsequently advised us that staff time is eligible
for reimbursement.
The Traffic Signa] Fund will loose a minor amount of interest based on the difference in time
between when payments are made on the project and reimbursement funds are received. The
actual amount of this Joss is unknown, although minor, since we anticipate reimbursement will
be between two and three months of when payments are made.
File: 0735-10 TF237 BN-003
m: Ihomelengineulagendalcmaq&dks.cls
~ 9~/&
ATTACHMENT "C"
File No. 0735-10-TF237-BN003
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
DKS Associates
for an Adaptive Traffic Signal Upgrade
Technical Design Study
This Agreement, made and entered into this /f/-/.J day of A&J!. 19~
in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, is by and between the
City of Chula Vista (City), a municipal Chartered corporation of the State of California,
through its duly elected or appointed, qualified and acting Deputy Public Works Director/City
Engineer (Administrator), and DKS Associates (Consultant), a Corporation, whose place of
business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A. Paragraph 6.
li{0 /'
This Agreement, dated /I~ '? for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date
last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 is made with
reference to the following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City of Chula Vista has advertised for Request for Proposals for a consultant to
develop Functional and Technical Specifications for upgrading, the City's "Urban Traffic
Control" system to an "Adaptive Traffic" control system. Federal-Aid "Congestion Mitigation
and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program.
Whereas, after having received and reviewed Proposals from six (6) licensed finns, qualified
to provide such services, the City of Chula Vista has chosen, DKS Associates as the most
qualified and desirable firm with which to enter into agreement with to fulfill the requirements
of this contract; and,
Whereas, the Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the products and services required of
Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Administrator and the Consultant do hereby
mutually agree that the Consultant for and in consideration of the covenants, conditions,
agreements, and stipulations of the Administrator herein expressed, does hereby agree to
furnish to the Administrator services and materials, as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
v.'PC F:\Hm..fE\ENGll'lUR\ADMlli\CON1RAC1\DKSC01'i1iR..DH
~
7-/;
/
C?'95-.u,7
.--f J R' ) /; /,
Page 1
ATTACHMENT "C"
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A,
Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames
set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of
this agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of
Work and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "DefIned Services". Failure to complete
the DefIned Services by the times indicated do.es not, except at the option of the City, operate
to terminate this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
DefIned Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so,
City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a
corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the DefIned Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defmed Services
("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services
offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates
set forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph I I (C), unless a separate fIxed fee is
otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as
billed.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defmed Services
or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions
and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and sub consultants employed by it in
connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by
the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified,
policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class
V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City:
\\'PC F:\HO!\!E\ENGn-.'EER\ADMTh;'\CON1RACl\DKSCO~'"HR.DH
~
7-/~
Page 2
ATTACHMENT "C"
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance
coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A; Paragraph 9.
Co=ercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance
coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied
separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, :which names
City and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the
City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City
and Applicant in the same manner as members of the ""general public ("Cross-liability
Coverage").
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9,
unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy.
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the
commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of
Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured.
(2) Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and
Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Co=ercial General Liability Insurance
Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which
shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager.
H. Security for Performance.
(1) Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant
to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space
immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall
provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a form and amount satisfactory to
the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term,
"Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(2) Letter of Credit.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant
to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by
submitting to the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in
~
';7' - / ?
Page 3
\\"PC F:IJi01l.iFEKGDo"EER\ADM]}.'\CQ}';'TRAC1'DKSCO}"'"HR.DH
ATTACHMENT "c"
breach of the temis of this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be
in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is
indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant
to provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check
mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other
Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form
and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
I. Business License
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply
with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of
the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance
to achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities,
files and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City
agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph
10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30
days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the
Consultant's performance of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City
periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than
monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate
Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set
forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated
by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention
set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket
expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the
propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable
thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on
Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment.
",PC F,'HOMEIENGINEER'.ADMIN\CONTRAC1\DKSCO/''HR.DH ~ 7 _ ~
Page 4
ATTACHMENT "C"
( ) Category No.7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if
any:
] 6. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
] 7. Permitted Subconsultants:
MYA~
PBO & D
Vallev Research & Plannin~ Associates
] 8. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time:
( X ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Other:
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( ) First of the Month
( ) 15th Day of each Month
( ) End of the Month
( X ) Other: Paid upon acceptance of deliverables
C. City's Account Number:
] 9. Security for Performance
() Performance Bond, $
() Letter of Credit, $
() Other Security:
Type:
Amount: $
(X ) Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary
requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City shall be entitled
to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or "Retention Amount"
\VPC M:\HOME\ENGlllNEER\TRAmadksagr.hr
Page] ]
C:' .
~ 7~2/
ATTACHMENT "C"
~
( ) Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
, not to exceed $
, not to exceed $
13. Contract Administrators:
City:
Harold Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910, (619) 691-5116.
Consultant:
Leo K. Lee, Senior Vice President, DKS Associates, 2700 North Main Street, Suite 900, Santa Ana,
CA 92705-9601, (714) 543-9601, Fax (714) 648-0402
14. Liquidated Damages Rate:
(x )$_O_perday.
( ) Other:
15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict ofInterest Code:
( X ) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
~-.
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No. I. Investments and sources of income.
( ) Category No.2. Interests in real property.
( ) Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject to the
regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department.
( ) Category No.4. Investments in business entities and sources of income which engage in land
development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property.
( ) Category No.5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within
the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to
provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
( ) Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within
the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services,
supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
WPC M:\HOME\ENGlI ONEER\TR.AFFlC\dkusr.hr
Page 10
~ J---.2c2.
ATTACHMENT "C"
t/
At such time as Consultant shall. have incurred time and materials equal to
("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation without further
authorization issued in writing and approved by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant
from providing additional Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
Category of Employee Hourly Rate Schedule
of Consultant Name Rate
DKS (project Manager) Lee $145
DKS Tighe $145
DKS Smith $110
MY A-ASIA Thompson $130
PBlFaradyne Argobright $120
VRPA Murphy $ 65
( ) Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after [month], 19 ,if delay in providing
services is caused by City.
12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services herein
required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
( ) None, the compensation includes all costs.
Cost or Rate
( ) Reports, not to exceed $
( ) Copies, not to exceed $
( ) Travel, not to exceed $
( ) Printing, not to exceed $
( ) Postage, not to exceed $
( ) Delivery, not to exceed $
( ) Long Distance Telephone Charges, not to exceed $
Page 9
WPC M:\HOME\ENGl9NEER\TRAFFlC\dksagr.hr
~ 7-.2]
ATTACHMENT "C"
/J
'V
Task
1. Evaluate adaptive systems
2. Develop specs.
3. Recommend communication system
4. PS&E for Phase II
5. Optional task
6. Contractor selection
$43,773.00
$41,035.00
$ 7,567.00
$64,936.00
o
$11.689.00
TOTAL
$169,000.00
B. ( ) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each Task or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as are separately
identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in the amounts and at
the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. Consultant shall not commence Services under any Task,
and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed
to Consultant as to said Task.
Task
Fee for Said Task
1.
2.
3.
$
$
$
C. ( ) Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay Consultant for
the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts
set forth in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow according to the following terms and conditions:
(I) ( ) Not-ta-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximum
Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of the Defined Services
herein required of Consultant for $ including all Materials, and other "reimbursable"
("Maximum Compensation").
(2) ( ) Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement
VIPC M:\HOME\ENGI8NEER\TRAFFTC\dksagr.hr
Page 8
~ 7-.21
ATTACHMENT "C"
~
Task 5 - Communications PS&E (optional)
Depending on the communications system recommended in Task 3, DKS will provide PS&E of the selected
communications design. It should be noted that, if leased telephone lines is the preferred communications
option, then the local modifications to the telephone demarcation is included in the PS&E in Task 4. Only
if large scale modifications of the communication system is required, such as extensive interconnect and
land-lines, will this task be required. This task will, therefore, be optional and not included in the current
cost proposal.
Deliverables (optional): PS&E of Communication Design
Task 6 - Assist City staff in contractor selection and negotiation
DKS will provide assistance to the City in selecting the contractor for implementation. Assistance may
include participation in interviews, selection meetings, contract negotiations with contractor, and
presentations to the City Council. Prior to interviewing, DKS will review proposals to enSure conformance
with the City's needs. A list of questions will be prepared for each bidder prior to the interview. DKS will
also assist the City to develop a list of selection criteria for evaluating the proposals. Examples of such
criteria include:
. Cost of central hardware and software
. Cost of local software and detection
. communication costs
. System features
. Upgrade potential
. User-friendliness of graphical interface
. Training and documentation
. Prior implementation experience in the U.s.
. Warranty and on-site support after system turn-on
Deliverables: Contractor Selection Criteria and List of Questions
Upon selection of the successful vendor, DKS will assist the City to negotiate with the contractor prior to
recommendation to City Council. DKS will also make presentation to the City Council together with city
staff prior to beginning of Phase II.
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
() Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( x) Other: Upon written notification by the City Engineer to proceed. (Notice will not
be issued by the City until the City receives written confirmation from the State that
the State has executed a Program Supplement Agreement with the City, authorizing
reimbursement of consultant services provided under this agreement).
C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Page 6
\\'PC M:\HOME\ENGl6NEER\TRAmC\dksagr.hr
~
9-~ ~r
c
Phase I Days from
Notice to Proceed
Deliverables for Task I: 30 Days
Deliverables for Task 2: 120 Days
Deliverables for Task 3: 120 Days
DeJiverables for Task 4: J 80 Days
Deliverables for Task 5: (optional): 180 Days
Deliverables for Task 6: 240 Days
D. Date for completion of all Consultant services:
Phase I shall be completed in 240 days from Notice t Proceed.
9'. Insurance Requirements:
(x) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
(x) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(x) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
( ) Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability
coverage).
(x) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability
coverage).
10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant:
II. Compensation:
A. ,( X) Single Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay a
single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount:
$169.000.00 . payable as follows:
Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
Payable monthly upon presentation of invoices by Consultant based on percentage complete by task.
The following budget breakdown represents the budget by task:
wPC M,\HOMElENGI7NEER\TRAFFlNk..,d" Page 7
k=(1J 9- I /
'" =-"- V
. --:
ATTACHMENT "C"
u
Task 4 - Prepare Plans, Specifications & Estimates for Phase II
The review of existing equipment and the recommendation of an adaptive system for installation in Chula
Vista will provide sufficient information to permit the development of an implementation plan for the new
system. The plan will include the identification of approximately ten intersections which will be
implemented in Phase 2 of the project. The remaining signalized intersections in the City will be
implemented in Phase 3 or additional phases depending on future funding.
The identification of the first section of approximately ten intersections to be implemented on the new
adaptive system will be based on a number of criteria:
. reasonably high visibility such that improvements in operation will be readily apparent to the
driving public
. geographically separate or significantly different in traffic characteristics from nearby signals
that the section can be operated under adaptive control while not negatively impacting nearby
signals
. the communications links should be easy to implement, i.e., the telephone assigrunents to the
intersections should be able to be readily switched to the new system or hardwired interconnect
already exists thereby requiring no major conduit installation.
The implementation of the first section of signals must be able to be accomplished without interrupting the
operation of the rest of the signals under the control of the City's existing system. An important aspect of the
staging/implementation plan will be to ensure that traffic control is not impaired during the transition to the
new system.
The implementation plan will include identifying geographic sections of the system and the order in which
they might best be implemented. The selection of the geographic sections will be coordinated with City staff
and will be based on a set of criteria which responds to alleviating traffic congestion and providing
responsive operation to sections of the City where traffic conditions are not always predictable.
The consultant will conduct a review of the traffic characteristics and field conditions and determine detector
placement and selection requirements.
Deliverables:
. PS&E plans for the necessary traffic signal, vehicle detection system, and field/intersection
modifications.
. Contract documents for bidding of Phase II of the adaptive traffic control system.
. Field construction drawings, specifications and cost estimates for vehicle detection
modification necessary to implement the recommended adaptive traffic control system.
WPC M:\HOME\ENGlSSEER\TRAFFlC\dkslgr.br
Page 5
/' ---d1'. ,9- 7 ')
.~ff .f /
ATTACHMENT "C"
v
Task 2 - Prepare Hardware and Software Technical Specifications
Development of functional and technical specifications for an adaptive traffic signal control system that will
meet the present and future needs of the City. The system shall include all necessary hardware, software and
peripheral equipment.
The specifications will include two elements:
. Functional specifications for hardware and software of the central equipment;
. Functional specifications for modifYing the hardware and software at the local controller level.
The functional specifications will outline the expected operational requirements of the system. Such
operational requirements include:
. Frequency of changes in split, offset, cycle lengths
. Averaging and prognostic requirements
. Split weighting to favor,certain approaches
. Offset weighting to favor certain direction, or traffic movement
. Gating or metering at upstream intersections
. Queue release to prevent queue spillback
. Emergency vehicle preempt
. Public transit priority
. Feedback of controller data to control room
. Fallback mode of operation
. Acceptance testing requirements
Deliverahles:
Functional and technical specifications for an adaptive traffic control system.
Task 3 - Recommend Communication System
IdentifY and evaluate alternative system communication devices for signal control system e.g. leased
telephone lines, microwave, fiber optic, etc. and assist the City in selecting the most efficient communication
devices.
Deliverables:
Technical memorandum on recommendation for a communication system.
\\'PC M:\HOME\ENGINEER\TRAFFlC\dkUIP'.hr
Page 4
;3 -c-28:
C-.~..JL -
ATTACHMENT "C"
File No. 0735-] 0- TF237-BN003
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
DKS Associates
]. Effective Date of Agreement:
2. City-Related Entity:
(x) City ofChula Vista, a.municipal chartered corporation of the State of California
( ). Redevelopment Agency of the City ofChula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of
California
( ) ]ndustrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a
( )
Other:
, a [insert business form]
("City")
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 9]9]0
4. Consultant: DKS Associates
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
( x ) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
2700 North Main Street, Suite 900
Santa Ana, CA 9270]
Voice Phone (714) 543-960]
Fax Phone (7]4) 648-0402
~ 7/,2;
'_- _-_ ~_~~ u~.~ -~~_~ - ~.~.
'::'~j .....t;;,,:.
i~Jv i;= -::::
--ATTACHMENT "C"
Deliverables for Task 3:
Complete
Deliverables for Task 4:
280
Deliverables !or Task 5:
Not Required
Deliverables for Task 6:
320
The number of working days for each tWt may be increased by 'lhe City Engineer prior to ex~
the number of workins days indicated for each task if said increase is authorized in writing.
C. Amend 8D to read as follows:
Date for completion of all consultant sc;mces:
pn~<Q'" I shall be L"'~leted in 320 workina davs from the norice to proceed t1nle!il~ ex'Mndp.d
bv tht Citv Enfjneer in vn-itin, prior to the date of cotn"letion.
D. Amend I1A. Compemation to reed as follows:
Single Fixed Fee: Amount: $193,650.00, payable as follows:
Task
Amount
L Evaluate adeptive systems
2. Develop speeifieatiollS
3. Recommend communication system
4. PS&E for Phase II
5. Optional task
6. Contractor '<election
$43,773.00
$52,285.00
S 7, 567.00
$78,336.00
o
$11.689.00
TOTAL
$193,650.00
E. Except as modified herein, all other provisions of the Agreement approved by Resolution
18106 approved l1ll Novemw 14, 1995, shall remain in full force and effect.
M:IHOMi\ENGlNJlllIl\11V.fFIC\P/(SAJoID96, WAU
race 3
~ 7~_?6
- _.;_-,-'.....'-'~ v"~ ,...-=-~~_ ~. '..-.
.....~:::' rue:
i~J'0 0:J :::''='
ATTACHMENT "C"
'-''>- .
---
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITI OF CHULA VISTA
AND
DKS ASSOCIATES
FOR AN ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPGRADE
TECHNICAL DESIGN STUDY
TIllS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR AN ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC
SIGNAL UPGRADE (AMENDMENT) is entered into as of November , 1996, by and between
the City ofChula Vista (City), amUllicipal Chartered corporation oftbc Slate ofCalifomiA, and DK~
As$""i~ (Consuhant), II Corporation, whose plllce ofbusi~ss and tclepho~ numbers ilI'C set forth
on Exhibit A, Paragraph 6.
Rf:CITALS:
WHEREAs, the City ofChula Yistahas approved an agreement (Agteemem) with DKS Associates
aated November 14,1995 and approved by Resolution 18106; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provided for a Traffic Signal System Upgrade Technical Study (CIP- IF
237), and
WHEREAS, an amount of 5200.000 was appropriated to fund the work indi\:ll.ted in the Agreement,
to pay for adclitiOllal work md to reimburse the City for staff time costs; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement with the Consultant was approved in the amount ofSI69,000; and
WHEREAS, this stUdy is intended to improve the coordination between traffic signals and the use
of video detection in lien of standard traffic signal loops and will provide an ability to adjust the loop
detector location easily to determine the most effective location; and
WHEREAS, both the City and Consultant desire to amend the Agreement approved by Resolution
18106 to inclU4le video detection in the desiill of the adaptive traffic sigxud system.
NOW, TIiEREFORE, Exhibit A of the Agreement is he~by amended to ~ad as follows:
A. Amend SA. Scope of Work and Schedule as folIows:
Add to TASK 2 an evaluation ofvideo detection a:l system detectors with the following
items to be considered:
. systems deployed
M~\TllAI'FJClDKSAMD96.w"U
p...o l
0'- 3/
.~
ATTACHMENT "C"
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work: .
Work to be performed by the consultant in Phase I shall consists of the following tasks.
The scope of the project is to develop functional and technical specifications for upgrading the
City's existing Urban Traffic Control System to an Adaptive Traffic Control System. The task involved
should include.
Task 1. Evaluate adaptive traffic control system.
Review and evaluate the City's existing UTC system and develop a process to upgrade the UTC system with
an adaptive traffic control system. The City will furnish the consultant, to the extent that is available, the
information on the City's existing JHK Series 2000 Traffic Signal System and any other such information
as may be helpful to the consultant in the performance of the services required for this project. The
consultant will evaluate the operational capabilities ofthe different adaptive traffic systems available. An
objective evaluation of the different systems will be made, including SCOOT, SCATS, RT-TRACS AND
SPOT.
After completing the generic evaluation of the functionality of the different adaptive systems, a set of project
specific utility parameters will be developed to rank the different systems. Some of these utility parameters
to be considered may include:
. Flexible signal grouping
. Automatic coordination of groups
. Suitability in grid network
. Adapted for 170 controllers
. Queue spillback prevention
. Friendly graphical user interfaces
. Transit priority treatment
. Split and offset weighting
. Detection requirements
. Gating or metering bottlenecks
. Level of support from vendor
These parameters will be developed in conjunction with city's staff with relative weights established to
reflect the specific and local needs in Chula Vista. Generic level cost estimates of the different systems will
be analyzed to establish the utility/cost ratio of the different systems.
Deliverables:
A complete report of the review and analysis of the existing system and system related infrastructure,
alternative adaptive control systems and their pros and cons relative to the City's needs, and a financial plan
relative to the phasing of the system implementation will be prepared and will be the product of this first
task.
~b
7- J 2.
Page 3
WPC M:\HOME\ENGP.>lEER\TRAFFlC\dksagr.hr
ATTACHMENT "C"
7. General Duties:
TIie consultant shall provide the engineering services necessary to replace and upgrade the City's
existing computerized urban traffic control (UTC) system to an adaptive urban traffic control system.
The City ofChula Vista's overall Adaptive Traffic Signal System project will be implemented in three
(3) phases. Phase I, System Design, is the initial subject of this agreement. Phases II and III of the
project, which include implementation of the selected adaptive system software/hardware and field
construction work, will be implemented at a later time. The City of Chula Vista can, at its option,
extend this contract to cover Phases II and III. The consultant's work task consists of:
Phase I System Design
I. Evaluate adaptive traffic control systems
2. Develop specifications for selected system
3. Recommend communication system
4. PS&E for Phase II
5. PS&E for communication system (optional)
6. Assist City staff in contractor selection and negotiation
Phase IT (optional) System Purchase and Implementation oflO Intersections
7. Oversee contractor implementation of system hardware and software
8. Oversee contractor's field implementation at 10 intersections
9. Develop system set-up parameters
] O. Monitor system's acceptance testings
11. Fine tune and calibrate system parameters in the field
12. Perform before and after studies
13. Provide training for City staff
14. Prepare system documentation
15. PS&E for Phase III
Phase III (optional) Implementation of80 -100 Intersections
16. Oversee contractor implementation at remaining 117 intersections
17. Develop system parameters for remaining 117 intersections
18. Monitor system's acceptance testings
19. Fine tune and calibrate system parameters in the field
20. Complete system documentation
Phase I is the initial subject of this agreement. The remaining phases, Phase II and III will be
performed at a later date depending on the outcome of the results of Phase I. The City has the
option to extend this Consultant contract to cover Phases II and III.
\\"PC M:\JiOME"'E~GrsEER\TRAFF1C\dksagr.hr
~
5'~/? T
~-
Page 2
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit
A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory
provisions hereof.
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided m
Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this
Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in per-
formance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to
compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defmed Services within the allotted time period specified in this
Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess
of the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the
consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated
Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate").
Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control, other than delays caused
by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee,
prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based
upon the effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of
work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant
is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest
and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required
Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15
of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPp~nSUltant shall not
make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence
~ 7~~-?7
Page 5
\VPC F:\HOME\ENGI}."EER\ADMD'J\CO}.. "TR.AC1\DKSCO~rm...DH
ATTACHMENT "C"
c:--
a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a
financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants
and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political
Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this
agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further
warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest
during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited
by the Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further
warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if
Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of
interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated
thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate
family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently
have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject
matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior
boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services,
("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or
Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement.
Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of
this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited
Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this
Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or
for any third' party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this
~
/9-3.r;-
Page 6
\1.."PC F:\HOME\ENGn-."EER\AD~nN\COmRACTlDKSCO!'\1iR.DH
ATTACHMENT "C"
Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Exc'ept as to Consultant's obligation regarding the design of project set forth in the
defmed Services and the Professional Services relating thereto and the indemnification and hold
harmless aspects as set forth below, Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold
harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims
for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees)
arising out of the conduct of the Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or
others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only
for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its
officers, or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses,
attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending
against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its
own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought
against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall
not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. City and Consultant
will apportion any damages according to their respective liability, as determined by law.
With regard to Consultant's design of project and professional services related thereto,
Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents and
employees from and against any and all claims, costs, suits and damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from the negligent acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant associated
with designing of the project.
8. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and
other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of
the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any
work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date
of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages
caused City by Consultant's breach.
9. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator or a court or forum of competent jurisdiction
reasonably determines that the Consultants' negligent acts, errors or omissions in the
performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would
have resulted if there were no such negligent acts, errors or omissions, Consultant shall
reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended
'W'PC F:\H01.t::E\E};Gll\.'EER\.WMIN\COh"1RACT\DKSCONHRDH
'] -=-5?
tP-~
Page 7
ATTACHMENT "C"
to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at
least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished
and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the
City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as
provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to
the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims
for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City. City hereby consents to the
assignment of the portions of the Defmed Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the
sub consultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants".
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures,
systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole
and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part
under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant
in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City
shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the
provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in
whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or
. properties produced under this Agreement.
13. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contractor- with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's
work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are,
for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to
be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City
employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's
compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold
state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall
be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard
thereto.
"W"PC F:\HOM:E\D;G~"EER\AD~m.'\CO}.IRAC1\DKSCO}.1iR..DH
~ 9/17
Page 8
ATTACHMENT "C"
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended,
modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party
against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that
it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement,
and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this
Agreement.
F. Governing LawNenue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought
only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if
applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement,
and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
WPC F,\HOMEIENGINEERIADMIN\CON1RACl\DKSCONHR.DH
~9~_]6
Page 10
ATTACHMENT "C"
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City
unless a claim has rlrst been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the
City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are. incorporated
by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City
in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing' party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the
claim, including costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall
include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and
cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report
or document.
17. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specillcally authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to
act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals
is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker
or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals
are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall
be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the
United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certilled, with return
receipt requested, at the addresses identilled herein as the places of business for each of the
designated parties.
~)
5-?/
Page 9
"'PC F,\HOMElENGlNEERlADMlN\CONTRAC1\DKSCONHR.DH
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and DKS Associates
for an Adaptive Traffic Signal System
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement
thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and
complete consent to its terms:
. Dated: /f~V. p! , 19 93
City of Chula Vista
bY:~
Shirley rton, Mayor
" If
o
Attorney
Dated:
By:
[name of person, title]
Exhibit List to Agreement
() Exhibit A.
() Exhibit B:
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\AD~lIN\CONTR.'=KSCO:-'1iR.DH
J-Uz;
~ I'
Page 11
until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, rt>sTJt'b~~~~~~C;;::red:
( X ) Retention Percentage: 10%
( ) Retention Amount: $
Retention Release Event:
( X ) Completion of All Consultant Services
( ) Other:
\vPC M:\HOME\ENGI12NEER\TRAFFIC\dhagr.hr
Page 12
S'- ;/1
/ ,
~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / &
Meeting Date 11/12/96
IJ. Resolution ) t Lj 7:L. Approving Final Map and Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract 88-3A, Eastlake South Greens,
Unit 3 (South Half).
S. Resolution / g1('7'.J Approving Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Eastlake South Greens Unit 3 (South Half)
Requiring Developer to Comply with Certain Unfulfilled Conditions of
Resolutions No. 15200 and 17618, and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute
Same.
SUBMITrED BY, "U""", of P"bli, wmkpY{
REVIEWED BY: City Manager0_~\ \fiA ~~t( \ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
. \
On July 18,1989, by Resolution 15200, the City Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for
Chula Vista Tract 88-3, Eastlake Greens. On August 16, 1994, by Resolution 17618, the City Council
approved the amended tentative map for Eastlake South Greens, Tentative Map 88-3A, and imposed
additional conditions of approvaL The amendment to the tentative map covers the area south of
Clubhouse Drive which is designated as Eastlake South Greens. The final map for Eastlake South
Greens, Unit 3 (South Half) is now before Council for approvaL
ITEM TITLE:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolutions approving the final map, subdivision
improvement agreement and the supplemental subdivision improvement agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The project is generally located along Silverado Drive between S. Greensview Drive and Clubhouse
Drive and consists of 61 lots for single family residential units and 4 lots for open space.
The final map for Eastlake South Greens, Unit 3 (South Half) of Chula Vista Tract 88-3A, has been
reviewed by the Public Works Department and found to be in substantial conformance with the
approved tentative map. Approval of the final map constitutes acceptance by the City, on behalf of
the public, a portion of Silverado Drive and Oro Court. Approval of the final map also constitutes
acceptance on behalf of the City the following easements: a 5.5 foot tree planting and maintenance
easement along dedicated streets; and a general utility easement over lettered lots A, B, C, and D.
At this time, the City is rejecting the dedication of Lots A, B, C and D for open space and other utility
purposes. However, under Section 66477.2 of the Subdivision Map Act these offers of dedication
remain open and subject to future acceptance by the City. These four open space lots will be
/(l - /
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 11/12/96
maintained by the Eastlake Homeowners' Association (HOA) unless the City determines that the level
of maintenance does not meet City standards. In that event, Council may, by resolution, accept the
offer of dedication on behalf of the City. The City accepts offers of dedication in fee for open space
lots only when City resources will be used to maintain these lots. Since the HOA maintains all open
space within the development, under this procedure the HOA retains fee ownership of the open space
lots until such time as the City decides to assume maintenance responsibilities for these lots. This has
become a standard procedure for all unit development within Eastlake.
The developer has executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SSIA) to satisfy the
following conditions:
1. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200 requires the Developer to enter into an agreement
whereby the developer agrees that the City may withhold building permits for any units in the
subject subdivision if traffic on Otay Lakes Road, Telegraph Canyon Road, Eastlake Parkway,
or East "H" Street exceed the levels of service identified in the City's adopted thresholds.
2. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 15200 requires the developer to enter into an agreement
to guarantee the construction of all improvement work necessary to provide service to the
subdivision.
3. Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the Developer to enter into an agreement
to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any claims, actions or proceedings against the
City to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City with regard to the subject
subdivision.
4. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the Developer to enter into an agreement
to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any liability for erosion, siltation, or increased
flow of drainage resulting from the subject subdivision.
5. Condition No. 34 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the developer to enter into an agreement
with the City relating to the provision of franchise cable television services.
The developer has also executed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for this map and provided
bonds to guarantee construction of the required public improvements (CV drawings 96-91 through 96-
95) within the subdivision. The developer has paid all applicable fees and has provided a bond to
guarantee the subdivision monumentation.
A plat is available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. All Staff costs associated with processing of improvement plans and final
map will be reimbursed from developer deposits.
J#'~
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Plat - Eastlake South Greens Unit 3 (South Halt)
Exhibit B - Disclosure Statement
Exhibit C - Minutes of7/18/89 (Reso 15200) & 8/16/94 (Reso 17618)
SLY
(M:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \ELG03A.SL Y))
File: 0600-80-ELG03A
/j}-- 3
~
'\
\
\
EASTlAKE
PARKWA Y
HIBIT "A"
~
~
~
SILVERA[)() ORM
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE:
SB
&0
EASTLAKE UNIT 3 (SOUTH HALF)
J/J ~ i
52172X04.DWG
EXHIBIT "B"
TIlE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA DISCLOSURE STA1EMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign
contributions, on all mattcJ;'S which will require discretionary action on the part of the Qty Coundl, Planning Commission, and
all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of aU persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier..
EastLake Development Company.
2 H any person" Identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of aU individuals owning
more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Boswell Prouerties. Inc.
The Tulago Company
3. H 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.
N/A
~
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the ary staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No xx Hyes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please Identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the aty in this matter.
Bill Ostrem. EastLake Develoument Co.
Tom Adler. EastLake Development Co.
SB&O Engineering.
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the
cum:nt or preceding election period? Yes_ No_ Hyes, state which Counci1member(s):
· · · (Nom
Attach additional pages as necessaIy) . . .
. ~~ 0:.
Signature of contractor/applicant
Thomas E. Adler. Project Manager
:All<
Date:
j/J;5'
. Print or type name of contractor/applicant
EXHIe.rr "B"
. fs!!!!!! is dqitld as: "Any individu4I, /inn, arpatf1t<1>hip,fr>inJ """"I\; -~ 1<1Ci4/ club,frat<nu1llJl8l11lizadon, C<1IJ'OI'<llWn, """'" Dust, r=iva, syndicau,
"lis "'U/ <lIlJ' otha~, city <lIuI COUIIt7J, city municipality, diSrricr, or otha poIiJica/ mbdivision, or <lIlJ' otha group or combination <lcting tZ$ Q WIlL'
Minutes
August 16, 1994
Page 4
EXHIBIT "C"
parcels of th. Eu'T .~. Greens G....ral Plan Amendmeot whicb Iak. access from the internal cin:u1atioo of th.
EastLak. Greens PiaDoed Commuoity (oortheast of th. SDG&E traosmission lines); (2) Improve \be lp&Iial and
fuoctiooa1 relatioll5hip of residential densitylproduct distribution withio th. EastLake Greens Pianoed Commuoity
area; IIld (3) Update \be Elpl _Ire Greeas SPA PlaD and aupplementary documents 10 reflect CIIrrealllalistics and
techoical reliDemeats based DO aite plan approvals and markel COllSideratioDS. Staff recollUllellds CoulIcil place Ibe
ordioaoces llII first reading and approve \be resolution. (Dinoctor of PiaDoing)
A: ORDINANCE 2600 APPROVING TIlE !'REZONING OF22.7 ACRES OF UNINCORPORATED
LAND TOp.C PLANNED COMMUNITY AND ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ON JS.H-l' AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO {Finl readilll!l
B. ORDINANCE 2601 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE n (EASTLAKE I
EXPANSION) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULA TIONS (LAND USE DISTRICT MAP ONLY)
AND ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON JS.H-l' AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO {finl readiRl!l
C. RESOLtrrlON 17618 . APPROVING AND IMPOSING AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS ON
THE EASTUKE U (EASTLAKE I EXPANSION) GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, EASTLAKE
GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN, EASTLAKE GREENS AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
PLAN, EASTLAKE GREENS WATER CONSERVATION PLAN AND EASTLAKE GREENS MASTER
TENTATIVESUBDJV1SION MAP AND ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OFJS.'4-
19 AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO
Ken Lee, AssislaDt DireclOr of Pl&IIIling, summariZllCl the issues involved with the project. Condilion 8C of the
ordinance referred to th. north sid. of parcel R27 (trail'ystem) and should be corrected to read the oortb side of
Clubho.... Driv..
. · · Councibnember Horton arrived al 6:26 p.m. · · ·
Mayor Neder !!:.ted !he Resource Conservation Commission minutes should have been included ill !be peckel. He
bad read Ibe minutes whicb reflected a S-<l vote for the miti~aled n.&ative declaration.
This bein& the time and place as adv.rtised, the public bearin& was declared open.
. Bruce Sloan, 900 Laoe Avenue, '100, Chula Vista, CA, "'P........tin~ EastLalce o..velopmeot Company,
concurred with the staff recommendations.
There bein& 00 further public testimony. the public bearin& was closed.
ORDINANCES %600 AND 2601 PLACED ON FIRST READING AND RESOLUTION 17618 OFFERED BY
COUNCILMEMBER HORTON, readin& of the texl WIIS waived, passed and approved unanimollSl)'.
13. PUBLIC HEA~ING CONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM CHANGES OF RESIDENTIAL YARD
. WASTE RECYCLING SERVICES FROM AN OPTIONS PROGRAM 10 A UNIVERSAL MANDATORY
RATE STRUCTURE. The City', residential yard waste collection pro&ram be&an 111194 u allllique .optioas'
program which aUowsugle-famil)' residents the choice of bow the)' will participate. hued DO their \JWIl all' ....nt
of their yard waste needs. A review of the participation, cost.s, and 1llVIllI\IIe of.the fint ail _ths of \be voIUDtaty
.optillllS' program Ibow \bat cost.s are far elceedin& revenue and coolinuatiOll of !be proJrUII is ~t upon
a rate 8dj\IIImeDt to oover OOUectiOll and proceasin& cost.s. Letters were received from Uidlaw NqIIeIIiDg
-.ideratiOD of an alllCllClment to the yard waste fee s\nICNre effeclive 911194 which would involve a c:bange to
a UDiYWlal .......t.."'>' rate s\nICNre to be Iprad to all mgle-family _dents. Staff nc:ommeods approval of \be
.-oIlIIillll. (Deputy City M_,er Krempl)
RESOLUTION 1761' APPROVING A UNIVERSAL RESIDENTIAL YARD WASTE
COLLECTION RATE CHANGE TO SI.48 PER SINGLE.FAMILY HOME
EXHIBIT "c:'-
/v-~
"1 nut~S
- 0 -
\J U I Y 10, I :i'O:1
ORDINANCE OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, as amended, the reading of the
text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with
Councilman Malcolm abstaining on the Country Club portion of the
zoning ordinance.
15 PUBLIC HEARING
a. RESOLUTION 15197
PUBLIC HEARING
b. RESOLUTION 15198
c. ORDINANCE 2317
d. RESOLUTION 15199
e. RESOLUTION 15200
f. RESOLUTION 15201
g. RESOLUTION 15202
CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-86-4 - EASTLAKE
GREH1S (Director of Planning)
CERTIFYING FINAL EIR-86-4
GREENS
EASTLAKE
PCM-87-7 - CONSIDERATION OF EASTLAKE II
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PLANNED
COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS( EASTLAKE
GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA SPA) PLAN,
EASTLAKE GREENS PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING PLAN, EASTLAKE. GREENS DESIGN
MANUAL; EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
EASTLAKE
II
GENERAL
APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
ADOPTING AN AI1ENDt1ENT TO THE EASTLAKE I
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO
ADD EASTLAKE II TO SAIO REGULATIONS
FIRST READING
APPROVING THE EASTLAKE GREENS SPA PLAN,
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN, AND
DESIGN MANUAL
MAP
APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
PCS-88-3 FOR EAST LAKE GREENS
ADOPTING CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR EASTLAKE
GREENS
ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
FOR EASTLAKE GREENS, EIR-86-4
This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox declared
the public hearing open.
Planning Consultant Doug Reid explained that a Master EIR for all
the EastLake development (including EastLake Greens/Trails) was
completed in February of 1982. In addition, 392.1 acres of
EastLake Greens were reviewed in an EIR prepared for EastLake I in
January 1985. This presentation contains additional information,
and covers effects on the environment which are not specific to
the EastLake Greens/Trails site and those that were not previously
addressed as significant effects.
/& ~ ?
E)(HIe,I, 'Ic."
~;i nutt=s
- ;I -
oJU IY Il:l, I ;ll:l"
~r. Reid then introduceo Jeanne Munoz, ERC Envirunmental and
Energy Services, who presented conclusions in the final EIR and
also the findings on the CEQA related documents.
Ms. Munoz noted essentially, the one significant unmitigable
impact would be on paper only: air quality. The reason being that
it is in non-conformance. In the San Diego area, a project is
considered to have a significant cumulative air ~uality impact if
the project has not been included in the SANDAG Series 5 and 6
Growth Forecast. EastLake Greens and EastLake Trail s were not
incl uded in those forecasts. At the time at which they become
included the project will be in compl hnce and conformance and it
will no longer be an unmitigable air quality impact.
Councilman Nader noted the unmitigable impact on air quality (on
paper) is a real air quality impact and it is only on paper that
impact will disappear if SANDAG revises it projects and the
implementation plan for meeting quality air standards is revised.
He questioned the existing inadequate implementation plan and the
need to revise it to be stricter and asked how it is that we
anticipate the implementation plan and the SANDAG forecast will be
revised and therefore, on paper, the air quality impacts
unmitigated will go away and somehow remove the same amount of air
pollution that was an unmitigated impact on the EIR.
Ms. Munoz responded that it is confusing, but that what it is, is
that once the SANDAG Series 5 & 6 forecasts are incorporated into
the revised Air Quality Management Plan, this project will be in
compliance with the predictions made in that plan. It will not
change air quality at all, but it will be in compliance and
performance. The point needs to made however, that in large part,
the problems with air quality in San Diego County are a result of
the air quality problems in Los Angeles and there is nothing we
can do about that.
Mr. Bud Gray, City Consultant, noted he would be discussing the
EastLake II General Development Plan and the EastLake Greens SPA
Plan; Tom Bandy from Willdan would be presenting the EastLake
Greens Public Facilities and Financing Plan and Principal Planner
Ken Lee from the Planning Department would be presenting the
Tentative Map.
Tom Bandy reported on the Eastlake Greens Public Facilities
Financing Plan. He noted that the plan has four key features. It
describes the public facilities needed to serve the project,
on-site and off-side, the estimated costs, the method of
financing, and the phasing of facilities.
If} ~ V
Principal Planner .._e presented his report o. the project, noting
the proposed subdivision encompasses 830 acres of land located in
the eastern portion of the City east of I-80S and south of Otay
Lakes Road. He noted the General lotting of the area including;
standard lots, small lots, attached product lots, townhouse
product lots, condominium product lots, high density condominium
lots. Mr. Lee also noted a letter from Kent Aden of EastLake
referring to proposed clarifications to conditions for EastLake
Greens.
Council discussion followed regarding lot sizes, density, family
sizes; affordabilty of the homes; possibly imposing a moratorium
if development came to outstrip pub1 ic facil i ties, water
management plans, and land use patterns.
Bob Santos, President, EastLake Development COQpany, 900 Lane
Avenue, addressed the issues about the General Plan policy as it
relates to achieving density higher than target density shown in
the General Plan. He noted that EastLake, before the Planning
Commission, voluntarily reduced the density of the EastLake
Greens, EastLake I I proposal that was before Council this
evening. They will only request density above that level if the
City's newly adopted policies are revised and situated to provide
for EastLake's ability to do that.
Katie Wright, Project Manager, EastLake Development presented
slides and transparencies on the EastLake Neighborhood and family
characteristics associated with the EastLake Project. She noted
statistics on buyers, families, needs and household sizes. Also
noted were the percentages of first time buyers, move up buyers
and chief reasons why those buyers selected EastLake.
Kent Aden from EastLake noted that there were now over 90
conditions imposed on the SPA Plan and tentative map. He noted
that in the spirit of cooperation EastLake would live up to the
majority those conditions. He requested consideration of
alternative wording and modification to six of those conditions:
1. Tentative Nap f/37: requires equal access to Cable TV
franchi ses. Thi s issue is best deal t on a City-wide basis.
They will be applyi ng for a Cab1 e TV franchise and because of
this they request that Council modify the condition to make
EastLake subject to any new City-wide ordinance or resolution
of this issue. They will be subject to this at the time at
which it is adopted.
2. Tentative Map f/64/SPA #2: in regard to the pedestrian
bridge. They don't know if the bridge is warranted or not, it
will require substantial public money to maintain and EastLake
believes it should be included in the Public Facilities
Financing Plan, not as a Tentative Map condition.
/6J ~ C;
Mi nutes
- 11 -
,1y 18, 1989
3. Tentative Map #38G: Currently states that residential
constructi on tax may be wai ved for excess park improvements.
EastLake is committin9 to excess park improvements, therefore
wou1 d 1 i ke a commi tment from Council to wai ve the RCT
accordingly.
4. Tentative Map 146/SPA 6: Confl icting conditions regarding
church sites. EastLake would like to clarify they are
currently showing a 4.8 acre site in EastLake Greens for
churches. In addition, there are 12.3 acres in EastLake I and
II. In total, 22 acres will eventually be planned for the
EastLake community.
5. Tentative ~'ap f/44/SPA #9: relating to low/moderate income
housing. These items must be deferred at this time if Council
accepts the Planning Commission recommendation. EastLake
cannot meet these guidelines until the effect of the analysis
on the General Plan Policy Section 6.2 and 6.3 as they relate
to the final density of the five high density parcels is
determined.
6. Planning Commission Item SPA Condition 13: regarding the
deferral of the density. EastLake supports this condition but
is aski ng that Council adopt thi s with a 30 day time frame in
mind with the Task Force to come back with recommendations to
be adopted by Counci 1.
With this in mind, EastLake asked that the project be adopted with
the General Plan Policies as they were adopted last week.
Speaking in favor of the EastLake project were:
Richard Essl inger, Postmaster, Chula Vista, 2134 Northshore Drive:
Jackie t~etca1f, 546 Port Harwick: Larry Reh1ander, Victory
Lutheran Church; Peter Watry, speaking for CROSSROADS, 81 Second
Avenue: Fran 0 Meara, 1858 Gamay Terrace: uosepn "ownack, 1891
Gamay Terrace: Scott Ullmann, 2134-C Northshore Drive: Bob
o I Con n e 11: 2072 \i ate r bur y C i r c 1 e ; J 0 s e p h C u mm in g s , 1 848 It hac a
Street: Richard Stahley, 30 Woodlawn Avenue.
Collectively, their remarks included the following: Crossroads
does not intend to concede one additional unit to EastLake Greens
and EastLake Trai 1 s: shou1 d stick to target density and approve
condition #13, which embodies the Planning Commission's
recommendation and EastLake's proposal; Post Office in process of
negotiation budget, if project is put off for any length of time
it may detrimentally affect ability to procure funds necessary to
construct EastLake Project; EastLake is the best community ever
seen; has distinctive neighborhood and lifestyle; courteous
corporation to work with for land site for churches; EastLake has
changed Chula Vista's poor image; increased City revenue and
increased number of businesses; various amenities are offered:
homes are affordable; large yards: many of the neighbors have
grown up in Chula Vista and moved to Cottage because they could
afford them and still are near their families: pleased that
EastLake has voluntarily chosen to reduce the density; insulated
community _ can give back to community in the form of good
neighbors and citizens: EastLake good project "but there is some
concern over private v. fUbl ic parks; woul d 1 ike to gi ve density
transfer to keep from pay ng upkeep of parks. /tJ-/&
........ I J I..... t I,;;IU...
Speaking against \ Joe Garcia, 484 Fifth lenue, Chula Vista.
He stated that he was concerned about the water situation. He
asked if the water situation has been addressed.
Mayor Cox responded that it would be addressed on an incremental
basis because a certification would have to be done by the Otay
Water District that they would be able to provide the water
service for thi s project. The Mayor al so noted that Councilman
Moore has put together a Water Task Force and that all property
owners are working with the water districts; the Task Force meets
on a monthly basis. The Otay Water District is coming out this
week with water allocations so that the developers know that they
have certain restriction and cannot go beyond that with guaranteed
water rights. .
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was
closed.
RESOLUTION A OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved by the follow-ing
vote to wi t:
AYES:
NO:
Cox, Moore, McCandliss
Malcolm, Nader
RESOLUTION B OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent.
Councilwoman r1cCandliss asked if since the bulk of her concerns
were on the Tentative Map, would it be possible to adopt the
General Development Plan then possibly, with removing the actual
targe..t number for the area, conti nue the Tenta ti ve Map until after
the Task Force reviews that section and bring it back within 30
days. Or, if there was a desire to amend the tentative map, would
t~ey have to go back and amend the SPA Plan, Facilities Financing.
Director Kremfl responded that they could consider the General
Development P an and the SPA Plan and reserve decision on the
Tentative Map. He noted that if the Tentative Map changed, as far
as density or location of product types, for the most part the
structure would still be relevant. The Task Force could review
the Land Use Element of the General Plan within a 60 day period of
time.
The Resolution B passed by the following vote:
AYES:
NO:
Cox, Moore, McCandliss
Nader, Malcolm
ORDINANCE C OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved by the following
vote to wit:
AYES:
NO:
Cox, Moore, McCandliss, Nader
Malcolm,
),IJ-//
RESOLUTION D OFFERED 3Y MA' ; COX
MOTION
Nader/ to amend the resol uti on to i ncl ude an agreement that the
development will conform with the Growth Management Element to
eventually be adopted as part of the Chula Vista General Plan.
Mayor Cox asked if this would be more suitable under Item E - the
Tentative Map
Director Krempl responded that it could be placed under whatever
action they felt comfortable with.
MOTION RESTATED
10 amend the resol uti on to state that EastLake woul d agree with
whatever Growth Management Element is added into the General Plan;
it would become part of the agreement that the d.eveloprnent will
conform with the Growth Management Element that will eventually be
adopted as part of the General Plan.
-
Councllmember Moore questionell-the -re;;s used; "a-gree" as opposed
to "con form. " ~ ,_ -'. -./\1-. ~ '"r\.. i:~!J
Councilman Nader clarified that EastLake could decline the
agreement but then the project woul d not go ahead, so in effect,
it is a requirement that EastLake conform.
Discussion ensued regarding the agreement. Mr. Santos noted that
this is the appropriate legal document to make that kind of
commitment, but suggested it be addressed at that point in time.
In answer to Councilman Nader's question, Mr. Santos responded
they did have a problem in that Council is asking them to take a
considerable risk, as they have done in the past.
Councilma'l Nader withdrew his motion as to Item D and noted he
would resubmit it as to Item E, but that it should be make clear
at some point tonight that Council is doing this.
VOTE ~N THE MOTION, Item D
The motion carried with Councilman Malcolm voting no.
RESOLUTION E OFFERED BY MAYOR COX as read.
MOTION
(McCandliss/ Nader) that the resolution be continued and returned
at the Council meeting with the report on the General Plan.
Councilman Nader asked for a clarification of the motion.
/~ ~ /:L.,
- - . '" . - JI
Councilwoman McCa., liss state~ that what Ie would like the
commi ttee to deal with transfers and bonuses and come back to
Council before approval of the tentative map
Mr. Santos stated they were interested in moving ahead, but
concerned about the feelings that EastLake had a lack of
commitment. He suggested that the provision of a tract map
condition that requires the development agreement for the project
make EastLake subject to the Growth Management Policy that will be
adopted by the City in the future. Secondly, that a track map
condition on the project requires that EastLake cannot exceed on a
cumulative basis in the eastern territories 7,426 dwelling units
until such time as the City has updated their Transportation
Phasing Plan, or the Growth Management Plan.
VOTE ON THE MOTION
The motion to continue failed by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
McCandllss, Nader
Cox, Malcolm, Moore
Mayor Cox noted there was one amendment he would like to make.
MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) that before recording of the final map there
would have to be an agreement executed by the City and by EastLake
resolving the outstanding issues on the public v. private parks as
they relate to EastLake I and EastLake II.
MSUC (Nader/McCandl iss) Condition 79 - the development be subject
to the Growth Management Element of the General Plan in the
Transportation Phasing Plan to be adopted by the City.
Councilman Malcolm noted that he had no problem with item 37 where
EastLake is subject to any new City-wide resolutions regarding
cable television and no problem with item 44 - that conditions
related to low and moderate income housing shall be deferred and
evaluated as a factor in the analysis of the General Plan policies
6.2 and 6.3 as they relate to parcels R-24, R-25, R-26, R-27 and
R-28. '
MOTION
(Malcolm/Moore) to amend 37 and 44 as per EastLake's request.
Director of Public Works Lippitt noted that Item 37 was put in
because of Council's concern of equal access - it could be changed
_ he recommended taking out the word .City-wide" because we don't
know what the ultimate solution is going to be and it may be
different from the western portion of the City in EastLake.
/j/-/3
10 IIIU l,.t:~
- I.... -
U '. I J I...., 1-'.....-'
AMENDMENT TO MOTION
Councilman Malcolm amended his motion to delete the word
"C ity-wi de II
The motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Mal col m al so stated he had a problem with the gol f
course. He spoke to EastLake and they agreed" to do something
other than a private golf course; the general public ought to have
a right to use the open spacej EastLake has an obligation to the
public. He asked the City Attorney if Council could leave a
condition where EastLake has to be willing to open up to some type
of public use, to be determined by the City of Chula Vista at a
later date by the Parks & Recreation staff and other golfing
facilities in EastLake to corne back with some type of
recommendation.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, in response to Councilman
Mal colm 's questi on noted that if that conditi on woul d be
consistent with what was already approved in Resolutions B, C, and
D; if that issue is not already addressed in those provisions,
then this condition would be inconsistent.
It was noted by Mr. Gray that this would not be inconsistent with
anythi n9 Counci 1 has acted upon thus far because nothing in the
pl ans really speak to the private v. publ i c nature of the gol f
course.
Mr. Santos noted that EastLake Country C1 ub is envisioned to be a
privately owned and operated Club; it is not a municipal course.
When it is opened in 1991, it will be open for public play for a
period of time which has not yet been determined. The community
has expressed a desire to have this available for a
community-a t-1 arge use. There wi 11 be a CUP for the gol f course
permit and at that time the whole concept of the public v. private
play can be addressed.
MOTI ON
MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to add this as Condition #80 - prior to any
operation of the Golf Course that an a~reement between the City of
Chula Vista and EastLake regarding publlC play be entered into, to
be considered as part of the procedure with the Conditional Use
Permit.
MSUC (Nader/Moore) Condition #81 - to incorporate the Planning
Commission's recommendations.
VOTE ON MAP
RESOLUTION E OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, as amended, the reading of the
text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with
Councilman Nader and Councilwoman McCandliss voting no.
/cJ ~ /(
RESOLUTION F OFFl .0 BY MAYOR COX, the re, 'ng of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, paBed and afproved with Councilman
Malcolm voting no and Councilman Nader vot ng no on the Statement
of Overriding Considerations.
RESOLUTION G OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent passed and approved with Councilman
Malcolm voting no.
Councilman Moore questioned the Council policy on traffic studies
in future developments.
Director of Public Works Lippitt responded that a traffic study
was done for this plan in the EIR and one will be done when ~unbow
and other major developments come in. The City is automatically
following through on its policy.
Mr. Krempl noted that on the Task Force, while indicating that it
may take 60 days, they wou1 d be tryi ng to get the group together
as soon as it was authorized by Council and proceed to do it in
the shortest time possible.
Mayor Cox noted the Council should try to make a commitment to
have this issue resolved in the next 60 days.
16. ORAL COtlHUNICATIONS - Opportunity for the public to speak to
the c,ty Counc, I on any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda. Each
speaker's presentation may not exceed five minutes.
a. Mr. Wade R. Guiliani, s214 J Street, Chula Vista addressed the
issue of the 706 and 706A buses, the Chula Vista Trolley. He
noted that seniors and handicapped individuals that are having
difficulties accessing those buses. He suggested that perhaps
a study be done to correct these buses to be adequately used
by these individuals.
MSUC (Cox/Hoore) to refer this petition to staff for a report and
evaluation to come back to Council.
b. Joseph Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista, suggested City
invest in a 54 or 60 inch television monitor with a VCR to be
installed in the Council Chamber. City Manager Goss noted the
City has that capability and equipment ready' to be used when
neeoed.
c. Paul Green, 141 Lotus Drive, Chula Vista, addressed concerns
regarding an informational item dated February 15, 1989. The
City Manager noted he will send another copy of the response
to his letter that had been sent.
d. Rick Short Tan, 55 Oxford Street, Chula Vista, requested that
Chula Vista Historical Society consider trees as part of Chula
Vista's history. He cannot get information on certain trees
in the area.
.-/
/iJ-/~
RESOLUTION NO.
/5Jf9:Z
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING FINAL MAP OF CHULA VISTA
TRACT 88-3A, EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 3
(SOUTH HALF), ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE
PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID
MAP, REJECTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA THE OPEN SPACE LOTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP,
ACCEPTING THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP
WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID
SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista hereby finds that that certain map survey
entitled CHULA VISTA TRACT 88-3A, EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 3
(SOUTH HALF), and more particularly described as follows:
Being a subdivision of Lot 2 of Chula vista Tract No. 88-
3, South Greens Phase 2 and 3, according to Map thereof
No. 13292, filed in the office of the county Recorder of
San Diego County, January 25, 1996 and Lots 27 through
32, 45 through 50, 52 and D of Chula vista Tract 88-3A,
according to Map thereof No. 13338, filed in the office
of the County Recorder of San Diego county on July 2,
1996.
Area: 14.890 acres
Numbered Lots: 61
No. of Lots: 65
Lettered Lots: 4
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 that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the public the public streets, to-wit: a portion of
Silverado Drive and Oro Court, and said streets are hereby declared
to be public streets and dedicated to the public use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Lots A, B, C and D are hereby
rejected for Open Space.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the city of Chula vista the easements with the right
of ingress and egress for visibility and street tree planting and
/~~- /
maintenance, general utility easement within Open Space Lots A, B,
C and D, all as granted and shown on said map within said
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 said public streets are
accepted on behalf of the public as heretofore stated and that said
lots are dedicated for Open Space and other public uses and are
rejected on behalf of the City of Chula vista and that those
certain easements with the right of ingress and egress for the
construction and maintenance of street tree planting, and general
utility easements within Lots A, B, C and D, as granted thereon and
shown on said map within said subdivision is accepted on behalf of
the City of Chula vista as hereinabove stated.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 that certain Subdivision
Improvement Agreement dated the day of , 1996, for
the completion of improvements in said SUbdivision, a copy of which
is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, the same as
though fully set forth herein be, and the same is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista be, and he 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
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
2
/p/1~2
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 EASTLAKE
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, 900 Lane Avenue, suite 100, Chula Vista,
California 91914, hereinafter called "Subdivider";
h'ITHJ;;~~J;;TH.-,-
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 Eastlake
South Greens unit 3 (South Half) 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--9 -.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. 17618, approved on the 16th day of
August, 1994 ("Tentative Map Resolution") i 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. 96-91 through 96-95, 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 $604,800.
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") i 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-
/0/}-1
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 THREE HUNDRED TWO THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($302,400.00) 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 THREE HUNDRED TWO THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($302,400.00) 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. 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 ELEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($11,000.00) (per private
engineer's estimate) to secure the installation of monuments, which
security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "CO and made a part
hereof.
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
-3- /t!J/J ~
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.
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 security shall not be
required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such
-4- )jJO~~
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,
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
SUBDIVIDER: EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY
* See signature page attached
Mayor of the city of Chula
vista
ATTEST
City Clerk
Approved as to form by
@P:J-Jm Y~J~~;;r;#
ci y Attorney 0
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
/t://9-?
-5-
By: THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, (Formerly known as EastLake Development
Company) a California general partnership
By:
Boswell Properties, Inc.,
a general partner
By:
M~
Its:
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By: ~~-
Sharon Ikemoto
Its: Authorized Representative
By:
The Tulago Company,
a general partner
By:
~~
Its:
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
BY:~~>~'';~
Sharon Ikemoto
Its: Authorized Representative
/Ph,g/
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit "B"
Improvement Security - Faithful Performance
Form: Bond
Amount: $302,400
Improvement Security - Material and Labor:
Form: Bond
Amount: $302,400
Exhibit "A"
Exhibit "c"
Improvement Security - Monuments:
Form:
Bond
Amount:
$11,000
Securities approved as to form and amount by
Improvement Completion Date:
Two (2) years from date of
Council approval of the Subdi-
vision Improvement Agreement.
C:\ag\sia\ELSG3.sh
-6-
/cJ~-c;
BONDI File No.: 141493383
Prem: 61.
Issued in Triplicate
SURVEY MONUMENT INSTALLATION BOND
LET IT BE KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS , that Eastl ake Company
as the subdivider (hereinafter "Principal"), and American Casualty COmDanY
, a corporation of the State of Pennsyl vani a
(hereinafter "Surety"), are held and firmly bound unto the City of Chula Vista, a municipal
corporation, in the County of San Diego, State of California, and to and for the benefit of any
and all persons who may suffer damage by reason of the breach of the conditions hereof, in the
penalsumof Eleven thousand dollars & 00------------------------------------
dollars ($ 11.000.00/00----) lawful money of the United States, to be paid to the said City
of Chula Vista.
WHEREAS, Principal is presently engaged in subdividing certain lands to be
known as Eastlak.e Greens South. Unit 3. Tract 88-3A
subdivision in the City of Chula Vista, in accordance with the Contract for Completion of
Improvements authorized by Council Resolution No. ; and,
WHEREAS, Principal desires not to install durable monuments prior to the
recordation of the final map of the subdivision and desires to install same at a later date,
. NOW, THEREFORE, the condition of the above obligation is that if Principal
shall have installed durable monuments of the survey by
(N.... of Eac"'=l
in accordance with the final map of said subdivision, a copy of which is on me with the City
Engineer of the City of Chula Vista, reference to which said map is hereby made and same is
incorporated herein as though set forth in full, and according to the ordinances of the City of
Chula Vista in force and effect at the time of giving of this bond, on or before the expiration
of thirty (30) consecutive days following completion and a=ptance of public improvements
within said subdivision, then the obligation shall be void. otherwise to be and remain in full
force and effect.
/c:J/-1-10
CALIFORNIA ALL.PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
1f-===.c<'===~==.c<'.c<'Z;{'=~=-.Q:.F<'.c<'=-=.Q:5X;YJCX'.f;{X'<'=.Q!'====-.c<'.c<"C<;x:;<;'.Q;:_"::D'X"';<;X;,:.c,~o':Y.1
r \)
g g
~ State of California ~
~i County of Los Angeles ~
~ On Jul y 8, 1996 before me, Norma A Good, Notary Pub 1 i c g
~ D," ",m, ,cd ""Ie of Off,,,, ,',g" 'J,c, Doe, "",~ Pobl'", ~
"g"",:, personally appeared James E. McInerny ,,~
~i Name(s)o15igner(s) :?)
g ~ personally known to me - OR - C proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) it
g whose name(s) is/ar-E'> subscribed to the within instrument g
g and acknowledged to me that he/srre/they executed the g
g, same in his/ner/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by g
~. l' ~ ~ . ~ . ~ ~ . . . . . O( ~~s;~:r~~~/~gpnoa~u~:~s~lr~ft~hii~~trt~~e;;r~~~;;s:~~~: ~
'" J~""""" NORMAA.GOOD ( (i
/;. _ .i _ '. COMM. # 1047472 Z executed the instrument. X
g: ~ ;";ct... - . ~ Notary Public - California ~ :?)
g ZJ' >~. . LOSANGELESCOUNlY 1- WITNESS h d d ff' 'I I g
~ ~ ~..:. ~es~E~l~'~. my an an 0 ICla sea. ~
~ -L){f/i:~"~~ (1 ~ *
(';: .;' ., Signa\ure of Notary PLJblic :?)
~. OPTIONAL ~
g Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent g
~: fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. g
~. Description of Attached Document ~
g g
? Title or Type of Document: g
~ Document Date: Number of Pages: ~
~ ~
~ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: ~
@ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) ~
~. Signer's Name: Signer's Name: ~
? [J Individual [J Individual g
g ~ Corporate Officer ::::J Corporate Officer g
g Titie(s): Title(s): g
g Partner - [J Limited C General ~ Partner - C Limited [J General g
g, [J Attorney-in-Fact [J Attorney-in-Fact g
g Trustee ::::J Trustee g
B. [J Guardian or Conservator [J Guardian or Conservator. g
~ Other: Top of thumb here Other: Top of thumb here g
g g
g g
g g
~, Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: ~
g g
~ ~
g g
~=="<X;<;<--Q;='G<.====v:.~~-Q;=~=='<iZ'<;.<..='Q;.='<iZ=,<;<.;<x'<x;g<;<;Z"x;<".!(X=="",=~=~'Q;.-=~<<='<Y3
@1995NationalNotaryAsSOClation.8236 Remme! Ave.. P.O. Box 7184. Canoga Park, CA91309-7184 / t::J ~ ... /!Od. No. 5907
Reorder: Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827
IN WITNESs WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the
Principal and Surety above named, on 8th day of July , 19~.
See Signature Page Attached
American Casualty Company
Readlng, Pennsylvania
Principal
In Fact
(Above-signatories must be notarized.)
Approved as to form:
/7 ---;; .
:r~ !fnl '-(1J<-€-";1 MV() ti:r+
v City Attorney
(pW-E-34)
l:J/J ~ / J
By: THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, (Formerly known as EastLake Development
Company) a California general partnership
By:
By:
Its:
By:
Its:
Boswell Properties, Inc.,
a general partner
By:
/~~
By:
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
Its:
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
The Tulago Company,
a general partner
dY~
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By:
( ~/~'
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
Its:
/~/J/IJ
American Casualty Company
of Reading, Pennsylvania
CNA
For All the Commitments You Make'!!
Office/Chicago. Illinois.
POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY-iN-FACT
Know All Men by these Presents, That A~1ERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING. PENNSY!... V/', i'J IA. a corporatisn :Ju!y
organized and eXIstIng under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and having Its pnnclpal office In the City of ChIcago, and State of
Illinois. does hereby make, constitute and appoint Jean L Brown, James E McInerny. Norma Goed, Kathleen Henderson
James T Armitage, Individually
of South Pasadena, California
Its true and lawful Attorney-in-fact with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, seal and execute in Its behalf bonds, undertakings
and other obligatory Instruments of similar nature
- In Unlimited Amounts-
and to bind AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such instruments
were signed by the duly authorized officers of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA and all the acts of said
Attorney, pursuant to the authority hereby given are hereby ratified and confirmed.
This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the following By-Law duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Company
"Article VI--Execution of Obligations and Appointment of Attorney-in-Fact
Section 2. Appointment of Attorney-in-fact. The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any Executive, Senior or Group
Vice President may, from time to'time, appoint by written certificates attorneys-in-fact to act in behalf of the Company in the execution
of policies of insurance, bonds, undertakings and other obligatory instruments of like nature. Such attorneys-in-fact, subject to the
limitations set forth in their respective certificates of authority, shall have full power to bind the Company by their signature and execution
of any such instruments and to attach the seal of the Company thereto. The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any
Executive, Senior or Group Vice President may at any time revoke all power and authority previously given to any attorney-in-fact."
This Power of Attorney is signed and sealed by facsimile under and by the authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board
of Directors of the Company at a meeting duly called and held on the 17th day of February, 1993.
"Resolved, that the signature of the President or any Executive, Senior or Group Vice President and the seal of the Company may
be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted pursuant to Section 2 of Article VI of the By-Laws, and the signature of the
Secretary or an Assistant Secretary and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power
and any power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so
executed and sealed and certified by certificate so executed and sealed shall with respect to any bond or undertaking to which
it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company."
In Witness Whereof, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA has caused these presents to be signed by its
Group Vice President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on this 19th day of June 1995
eo. AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA
~
:"'~t.:a
& NUll. l
7~
~~
State of Illinois, County of Cook, ss: M.C. Vonnahme Group Vice President
On this 19th day of June 1995 ,before me personally came
M. C. Vonnahme , to me known, who, being by me duty sworn, did depose and say: that he resides in the Village of Oarien ,State of Illinois:
that he is a Group Vice President of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, the corporation described in and
which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said Corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate
seal; that it was so affixed pursuant to authority given by the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his name thereto pursuant
to like authority, and acknowledges same to be the act and deed of said corporation.
~~e~
My CommiSSion Expires October 19, 199B Linda C. Dempsey Notary Public
CERTiFiCATE
I, George R. Hobaugh, Assistant Secretary of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, do hereby certify that the
Power of Attorney herein above set forth IS still in force, and further certify that Section 2 of Article VI of the By-Laws of the Company and the
Resolution of the Board of Directors, set forth in said Power of Attorney are still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my
name and affixed the seal of the said Company this Rt h day of JIll Y ~
/P/l11
E8-23142-D
~hP</f./~1 'I'-e
George R, Hobaugh Assistant Secretary
CALIFORNIA ALL.PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
No. 5907
State of California
County of San Diego
On July 15, 1996
DATE
before me, Silvana C. Brazell, notary public
NAME. TITLE OF OFFICER - E_G., "JANE DOE, NOTARY PUBLIC"
personally appeared Paul G. Nieto and Sharon Ikemoto
NAME{S) OF SIGNEA(S)
[] personally known to me - OR - 0 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 ac-
knowledged to me that he/she/they executed
the same in his/her/their authorized
capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I ~ '",^,^c. ""'''~ I
- : "~". COMM. #1011951
l;) , ,,; , ~ NOT ARHUBLlC-CALIFORNIA g
U . . SAN DIEGO COUNlY 0
I" iv1y Commission Expires --
......... FEBRUARY 12, 1998.. .1
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
JJ>>t1 11;;) (. . M~
' SIGNATU F NOTARY
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
o INDIVIDUAL
o CORPORATE OFFICER
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
J!Li~ !Yi1fttuA.,p.;;J7JidltfJIdwr,p &0
ITlE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
TITLE(S)
o PARTNER(S)
o LIMITED
o GENERAL
NUMBER OF PAGES
o ATTORNEY.IN.FACT
o TRUSTEE(S)
o GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
o OTHER:
DATE OF DOCUMENT
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
NAME OF PEASQN(S) OR ENTITY(IES)
Boswell Properties, Inc.
The Tulago Company
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
1~>1~/f
Cl1993 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION. 8236 Aemmet Ave., P.O. Box 7184. Canoga Park, CA 91309.7184
BondFi1e No.:
Prem:
BONDFORF~PERFORMANCE
141493402
1,663.
Issued in triplicate
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego,
Stale of California, and Eastl aka ComDany
(hereinafter "Principal") have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and
complete certain designated public improvements, which saId agreement, dated
,19_,andidentifiedasproject Eilstlilkf' SOllth Grppn, Ilnit <, Tr AA-3A
, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and,
WHEREAS, said ,Principal is required under the terms of said agreement to
furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said agreement.
NOW, TIIEREFORE, we, the Principal and American Casualty Company
Readi no. Pennsvl vani a , a corporation of the State of California
(hereinafter "Surety"), are held and firmly bound unto the City of Chula Vista, a municipal
corporation (hereinafter "City") in the County of San Diego, State of California, and to and for
the benefit of any and all persons who may suffer damages by breach of the conditions hereof,
in the penal sum of Three hundred two thousand four hundred doll ars & 00-- dollars
($ ~n? 400 00/00- n)., lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well
.
and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators,
jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
The condition of this obligation is such that if the above-bound Principal, his or
its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide
by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the said
agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept
and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to
their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, agents
and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise
it shall be and remain in full force and effect.
As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount
specified therefor, there shall 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 shall in anywise affect its obligations on this bond,
and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition w
the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications.
In addition to the acts bonded for pursuant to the agreement incorporated above.
lhe fo]!o\\'ing acts and perform?~~ces are additionally subject !(l the l.cmlS of this agreement:
~zt!;zz.:Zv_-- "
CALlFORNIA ALL.PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
~=~~~=..x.c<'~""'.c<'.c<'.Q!'.c<'.c{'~~~=.c<'.d'.Q!'.c<'.c<'.c<'.Q!'~-<X'.c<'~=cM~.<"<2"C<2=~~..x~~~.<O{'^,^]
~ g
~ State of California g
@ Los Angeles ~
? County of g
@ On July 8, 1996 before me, Norma A. Good, Notary Public ~
~ Date James E M I Name and Tille of Qfficer (e,g.. 'JaneDoe,NotaryPublic") g
~. personally appeared . c nerny g
g X Name(s) ot Signer(s) g
~.: t' personally known to me - OR - C proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person~ ~.
(;' whose name(g) is/are subscribed to the within instrument ""
ii: and acknowledged to me that he/sl're/they executed the is
~ same in his/her/th"eir authorized capacity(ies), and that by g
~,:, . . . . . _ _ _ ..( his/her/their signature~ on the instrument the person(s)'; ~" ,
c' I (or the entity upon behalf of which the person(.s) acted, .'S
g"@il-':' -' NORMAA.GOOD executed the 'Instrument. is
,~ .' .-<. . COMM. # 1047472 ~ n
~ i ~~i- '; N~~:r:~~'iEsg~~~a;: WITNESS my hand and official seal. a
ii: ...'.' Mvcomm.ExI>iresDEC18.1998 g
~ ~ //i,I/} II g
g /;::/laAnA.-/ CL 'X.L&--t',C is
R: Signature of Notary PubliC g
g g
~,. OPTIONAL ~,'
~: Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons refying on the document and could prevent :~
g; fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. g
g g
? Description of Attached Document g
~ Title or Type of Document: ~
~ g
~, Document Date: Number of Pages: ~
@ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: ~
@ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) ~
~ Signer's Name: Signer's Name: ~
~ cc Individuai u Individual ~
?, :J Corporate Officer C Corporate Officer q
g Title(s): Title(s): is
~, U Partner - C Limited = General r Partner - u Limited C General q
g ~. Attorney-in-Fact 0 Attorney-in-Fact g
?: u Trustee Trustee g
~ --' g~ha~~ian or Conservator Top ollhomb he,e ~ g~ha~~ian or Conservator Top :llhomb he,e ~
g - g
g g
g g
g Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: g
~ ~
g g
~ /tY/l-/7 ~
~"X;("<:.~'("<:;g<;'~~'Q<.;<;<:;=xx.''''<:;(~,,'GZ.~=~-g;,~,,,,,<;,x,,<:.=~=~=~=~""'~=-Q..<:%~~'Q.iQ"xx.'GZ.~~==<x:<<x:y1
@1995National Notary Association' 8236 Remmel Ave.. P.O. Box 7184' Canoga Park, CA 91309.7184
Prod. No. 5907
Reorder: Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6627
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the
Principal and Surety above named, on July 8 19~.
See Signature Page Attached
American Casualty Company
Readl ng, Pennsyl van; a
Principal
ey In Fact
(Above-signatories must be notarized.)
Approved as to form:
~..
lY2:;jJJ >>1 '-td~~i'-~i~~
, City AttOrney . II
(PW-E-34)
jtJ/J /) 7
By: THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, (Formerly known as EastLake Development
Company) a California general partnership
By:
By:
Its:
Boswell Properties, Inc.,
a general partner
dP~
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By:
(~~~
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
Its:
By:
By:
The Tulago Company,
a general partner
~~~
Its:
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By:
Its:
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
jc::J4 ~ / /
American Casualty Company
of Reading, Pennsylvania
CNA
For All the Commitments You :vIake~
Office/Chicago, Illinois
POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY-iN-FACT
Know All Men by these Presents. That.A..MERICA,N CA.SUAL TY COMPANY OF RE,A.D\NG. PENNSYLVA~JlA, a corporation duly
organized and eXisting under the laws at the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and having Its principal office In the City of Chicago, and State of
Illinois. does hereby make, constitute and appoint Jean L Brown. James E. Mclnerny, Norma Good, Kathleen Henderson
James T. Armitage, IndivIdually
of South Pasadena, California
its true and la'Wful Attorney-in-fact with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, seal and execute in its behalf bonds, undertakings
and other obligatory instruments of similar nature
- In Unlimited Amounts -
and to bind AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA thereby as fully and to the same extent as jf such instruments
were signed by the duly authorized officers of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA and all the acts of said
Attorney, pursuant to the authority hereby given are hereby ratified and confirmed.
This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the following By-Law duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Company.
"Article Vl-Execution of Obligations and Appointment of Attorney-in-Fact
Section 2. Appointment of Attorney-in-fact. The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any Executive, Senior or Group
Vice President may, from time to time, appoint by written certificates attorneys-in-fact to act in behalf of the Company in the execution
of policies of insurance, bonds, undertakings and other obligatory instruments of like nature. Such attorneys-in-fact, subject to the
limitations set forth in their respective certificates of authority, shall have full power to bind the Company by their signature and execution
of any such instruments and to attach the seal of the Company thereto. The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any
Executive, Senior or Group Vice President may at any time revoke all power and authority previously given to any attorney-in-fact."
This Power of Attorney is signed and sealed by facsimile under and by the authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board
of Directors of the Company at a meeting duly called and held on the 17th day of February, 1993.
"Resolved, that the signature of the President or any Executive, Senior or Group Vice President and the seal of the Company may
be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted pursuant to Section 2 of Article VI of the By-Laws, and the signature of the
Secretary or an Assistant Secretary and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power
and any power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so
executed and sealed and certified by certificate so executed and sealed shall with respect to any bond or undertaking to which
it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company."
In Witness Whereof, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA has caused these presents to be signed by its
Group Vice President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on this 19th day of June 1995
AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA
~~
State of Illinois, County of Cook, 55: M.C. Vonnahme Group Vice President
On this 19th day of June ~, before me personally came
M. C. Vonnahme , to me k.nown, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say: that he resides in the Village of Darian ,State of Illinois:
that he is a Group Vice President of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, the corporation described in and
which executed the above instrument: that he knows the seal of said Corporation: that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate
seal: that it was so affixed pursuant to authority given by the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his name thereto pursuant
to like authority, and acknowledges same to be the act and deed of said corporation.
~~e~
My Commission Expires October 19,1998 Linda C. Dempsey Notary Public
CERTIFICATE
I, George R. Hobaugh, Assistant Secretary of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, do hereby certify that the
Power of Attorney herein above set forth is still in force, and further certify that Section 2 of Article VI of the By-Laws of the Company and the
Resolution of the Board of Directors, set forth in said Power of Attorney are still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my
name and affixed the seal of the said Company this R t h day of Jill Y 1.9....9..6...-
E8-23142-D
X-~p</1./(...1 I'-e
George R. Hobaugh
Assistant Secretary
CALIFORNIA ALL.PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
No. 5907
State of California
County of San Diego
On July 15, 1996
DATE
before me, Silvana C. Brazell, notary public
NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G., -JANE DOE. NOTARY PUBLIC.
personally appeared Paul G. Nieto and Sharon Ikemoto
NAME{S) OF SIGNER(S)
IX.J personally known to me - OR - 0 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 ac-
knowledged to me that he/she/they executed
the same in his/her/their authorized
capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I,~ ~.._:... SILVANAC. BRAZELL I
-. ,'" COMM.#1011951
~ 'I!:~.O;~.'.~'~.;' NOTARY.P.UB.lIC-. CALlFO.RNIA Q
u .."+.~r~~,,:'q1 ,SAN DieGO COUNTY 0
j '::~;/ I,,/__~.?~,~lsslon Expires ~
'.,",.:.:9' f=:.:t:K",ARY 12, 19~8 .--1
~'~.eooe
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
~J1JI1MAJ ( . ~
SIGNATURE OTARY
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
o INDIVIDUAL
o CORPORATE OFFICER
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
f!xw;~ ~~:;~
TITLE OR PE OF DOCUMENT
T1TLE(S)
o PARTNER(S)
o LIMITED
o GENERAL
NUMBER OF PAGES
o ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
o TRUSTEE(S)
o GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
o OTHER:
DATE OF DOCUMENT
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
NAME OF PERSON(5) OR ENTlTY(tE5)
Boswell Properties, Inc.
The Tulago Company
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
/t/~ /~/
Cl1993 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION. 8236 Remmet Ave., P.O. Box 7184. Canoga Park., CA 91309-7184
Bond File No.: 141493402
Prem: I nc' uded 1 n Performance Bond
Issued in triplicate
BOND FOR MATERIAL AND LABOR
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego,
State of California, and Eastl ake Company
(hereinafter "Principal") have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and
complete certain designated public improvements, which said agreement, dated
, 19_, and identified as project Eastl ake South Greens Uni t ~, Tr RR- ~A
, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and,
WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, Principal is required, before
entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the
City of Chula Vista to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing
with Section 3082), Part 4, Division 3, of the Civil Code of the State of California.
NOW, THEREFORE, said Principal and American Casualty Company
R""rli ncJ, P'Jn'l>l" "sRi 3 ,a corporation of the State of
pennsyl Vnni " (hereinafter "Surety"), are held and firmly bound unto the City of Chula
Vista, a municipal corporation in the State of California,(hereinafter "City"}, and all contractors,
subcontractors, laborers, materialmen and other persons employed in the performance of the
aforesaid agreement and referred to in the aforesaid Code of Civil Procedure in the sum of -
Three hundred two thousand fOlJr h,mrlrprl ~ nn dollars ($ 30? 400 gg 100 ), lawful
money of the United States, for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, 'or for amounts
due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that said Surety
will pay the same in an amount not exceeding 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, incurred 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 therein rendered.
It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit
of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15
(commencing 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 hereby 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.
It::Jij /;2~
CALIFORNIA ALL.PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
~,C(',C(',Q',c<'..ft.G<',C('.G<'d~b<',C('.G<'.c<'.c<'.K'.c<'~~,C('h",C('='~,Q'cr.=~lf=,Q,^<X'Q,Q'cr.,{;:{'cr.=~.c<',Q,^=<<<<,Q,^-O~
2 g
~ State of Ca 1 i forni a ~
g, County of Los Angel es ~
g :~
2, On July 8,1996 before me, Norma A. Good, Notary Public is
~ personally appeareD~" James E. Mc Inerny N,m, ,,''''', 0' Off""".g '''" Do' No(" P,b1"') ~
2 _oI_~ 1
~.,.. c!< personally known to me - OR - =:J proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence tD be the person($) ~.'.
'" whose name(s) is/aoe subscribed tD the within instrument ,",
g, and acknowledged to me that he/slW/they executed the g
,;<, J~.................... ~........................... ()
1;, ,L same in his/her/their authDrized capacity(iBs), and that by 6
g@.,.":,::<"NORMAAGOOD(his/her/theirsignature(I'1Dn the instrument the person(s'), g
g :< i :,;'N\ COMM, t> 1047472 Z th t t b h If f h h th ("'" t d g
i; ~ ;'~_ .: NotoryPublic-Colifomlo j; or e en i y upon e a 0 w ic e person.} ac e , ?i
?O' .-" LOS ANGELES COUNlY - executed the instrument. 6
2 ~~~~~-:m:"~r~~'~1~8J g
g S my hand and Dfficial seal. g
g g
g /.' g
g L~~U g
~ 5Ig"'"" of No", P,b1" ~
g OPTIONAL g
g Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent g
~ fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. g
g is
g Description of Attached Document g
g g
g Title or Type of Document: g
g g
g DDcument Date: Number Df Pages: g
g g
~ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: ~
~ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) ~
g, Signer's Name: Signer's Name: g
~, '-' Individual =:J Individual ~
~, :J Corporate Officer c..! Corporate Officer ?i,g
'" Title(s): Title(s):",
j? _ Partner - C Limited = General LJ Partner - :J Limited = General g
g Attorney-in.Fact ' AttDrney-in-Fact g
g Trustee [J Trustee g
g --' Guardian Dr CDnservator ~, Guardian or Conservator. g
g :- Other: Top 01 thumb here 0 Other: Top of thumb here g
g g
g g
g g
g, Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: g
g g
g g
g g
2 g
!'<g;'~===",<;,x;"'''~-<X;9V='g(;Q'====='G<;<;''=-<K~~~~j~-g",<:,x;g(,==~"""~'X.x%'Q;'~'(Y~
@1995NationaINotaryAssociation.8236RemmetAve" P,O. Box 7184. Canoga Park, CA91309-7184
Prod. No. 5907
Reorder: Call Toll-Free '-800-676-6827
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the
Principal and Surety above named, on Jul y 8 J 9~
SPP.. ~;gJ1~t"l1TP P:::Ig"" At-t-o:.,..hoej
American Casualty Compa~y
Readlng, Pennsylvania
" L-
E. McInerny, ~o ey In Fact
1414 Fair Oaks #3
South Pasadena, CA 91030
Surety
Principal
(Above-signatories must be notarized.)
Approved as to form:
/7 () 1 'Y" ~-)..---;-
r 2<fJ1";]> Cd- II U'~^"J l!'"""".-c~' ~j.A ~
J iI (/ City Attorney . (!
(PW-E-34)
/ tJij ~.J-f
By: THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, (Formerly known as EastLake Development
Company) a California general partnership
By:
By:
Its:
Boswell Properties, Inc.,
a general partner
/~A
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By:
~>
C ~ ........-::.
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
Its:
By:
By:
The Tulago Company,
a general partner
Its:
/~~-
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By:
(/~
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
Its:
...--
JiYij r;2-J
American Casualty Company
of Reading, Pennsylvania
CNA
For All the Commitments You Make~
Office/Chicago. Illinois
POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
Know All Men by these Presents, That AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READ'NG PENNSYLVANIA, a corporat'on duly
organized and eXisting under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and having Its principal office In the City of Chicago, and State of
lUinois, does hereby make, constitute and appoint Jean L Brown, James E. Mclnerny, Norma Good, Kathleen Henderson.
James T. Armitage, Individually
of South Pasadena, California
its true and lawful Attorney-in-fact with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, seat and execute in its behalf bonds, undertakings
and other obligatory instruments of similar nature
- In Unlimited Amounts-
and to bind AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such instruments
were signed by the duly authorized officers of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA and all the acts of said
Attorney, pursuant to the authority hereby given are hereby ratified and confirmed.
This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the following By-Law duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Company.
"Article VI--Executton of Obligations and Appointment of Attorney-in-Fact
Section 2. Appointment of Attorney-in-fact The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any Executive, Senior or Group
Vice President may, from time to time, appoint by written certificates attorneys-in-fact to act in behalf of the Company in the execution
of policies of insurance, bonds, undertakings and other obligatory instruments of like nature. Such attorneys-in-fact, subject to the
limitations set forth in their respective certificates of authority, shall have full power to bind the Company by their signature and execution
of any such instruments and to attach the seal of the Company thereto. The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any
Executive, Senior or Group Vice President may at any time revoke all power and authority previously given to any attorney-in-fact."
This Power of Attorney is signed and sealed by facsimile under and by the authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board
of Directors of the Company at a meeting duly called and held on the 17th day of February, 1993.
"Resolved, that the signature of the President or any Executive, Senior or Group Vice President and the seal of the Company may
be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted pursuant to Section 2 of Article VI of the By-Laws, and the signature of the
Secretary or an Assistant Secretary and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power
and any power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so
executed and sealed and certified by certificate so executed and sealed -shall with respect to any bond or undertaking to which
it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company."
In Witness Whereof, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA has caused these presents to be signed by its
Group Vice President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on this 19th day of June 1995
AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA
~~
State of Illinois, County of Cook, ss: M.C. Vonnahme Group Vice President
On this 19th day of June ~, before me personally came
M. C. Vonnahme . to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say: that he resides in the Village of Darien ,State of Illinois;
that he is a Group Vice President of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, the corporation described in and
which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said Corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate
seal; that it was so affixed pursuant to authority given by the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his name thereto pursuant
to like authority, and acknowledges same to be the act and deed of said corporation.
~~e~
My Commission Expires October 19, 1998 Linda C. Dempsey Notary Public
CERTIFICATE
I, George R. Hobaugh, ASSistant Secretary of AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, do hereby certify that the
Power of Attorney herein above set forth is still in force, and further certify that Section 2 of Article VI of the By.Laws of the Company and the
Resolution of the Board of Directors, set forth in said Power of Attomey are still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my
name and affixed the seal of the said Company this fit h day of J \J 1 Y ~
/L/d~?
E8-23142-D
Xh1-'E"f,/~ I ?.e
George R. Hobaugh Assistant Secretary
CALIFORNIA ALL.PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
No. 5907
State of California
County of San Diego
On July 15. 1996
DATE
before me, Silvana C. Brazell, notary public
NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G.. ~JANE DOE, NOTARY PUBLIC"
personally appeared Paul G. Nieto and Sharon Ikemoto
NAME(S} OF SIGNER(S)
IKJ personally known to me .. OR .. 0 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 ac-
knowledged to me that he/she/they executed
the same in his/her/their authorized
capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
t~.... SILVANAC. BRAZELL l
_ .-", COMM.#1011951 0
'. . NOTARY PUBUc.cALIFORNIA V>
; .. SAN DIEGO COUNTY 0
~ I I..,y Commission Expires ~
I . ...... FE8RUAR~. 1998 J
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
J JuIWlV s~;l~~~
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
o INDIVIDUAL
o CORPORATE OFFICER
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
&no ~~kAA~aJ7 IlMd ~tJ'I,.J
TITl OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
TTTLE(S)
o PARTNER(S)
o LIMITED
o GENERAL
NUMBER OF PAGES
o ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
o TRUSTEE(S)
o GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
o OTHER:
DATE OF DOCUMENT
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
NAME OF PERSQN(S) OR ENT1TY(lES)
Boswell Properties, Inc.
The Tulago Company
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
/;J~~;Z/
@1993NATIONALNOTARY ASSOCIATION. 8236 Remmet Ave., P.O. Box 7184. Canoga Pari<., CA 91309-7164
RESOLUTION NO. / 'jV2/93
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE SOUTH
GREENS UNIT 3 (SOUTH HALF) REQUIRING DEVELOPER
TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS
OF RESOLUTIONS NO. 15200 AND 17618, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the developer for Eastlake Greens unit 3 (South
Half) has executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
(SSIA) to satisfy the following conditions:
1. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200 requires the
Developer to enter into an agreement whereby the developer
agrees that the city may withhold building permits for any
units in the subject subdivision if traffic on Otay Lakes
Road, Telegraph Canyon Road, Eastlake Parkway, or East "H"
Street exceed the levels of service identified in the City's
adopted thresholds.
2. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 15200 requires the
developer to enter into an agreement to guarantee the
construction of all improvement work necessary to provide
service to the subdivision.
3. Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the
Developer to enter into an agreement to indemnify and hold
harmless the City from any claims, actions or proceedings
against the City to attack, set aside, void or annul any
approval by the city with regard to the subject subdivision.
4. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the
Developer to enter into an agreement to indemnify and hold
harmless the City from any liability for erosion, siltation,
or increased flow of drainage resulting from the subject
subdivision.
5. Condition No. 34 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the
developer to enter into an agreement with the City relating to
the provision of franchise cable television services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Eastlake South Greens unit 3 (South Half)
requiring Developer to comply with certain unfulfilled conditions
of Resolutions No. 15200 and 17618, a copy of which is on file in
the office of the city Clerk.
1
/(J[5-/
BE
Chula vista
Supplemental
vista.
Presented by
IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\ELSG3.SQU
Approved as to form by
~flI~~~-h
A . Moore, cting ci yiT
Attorney
2
/c!J~ d--
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. )
)
)
)
Developer )
)
)
Above Space for Recorder's Use
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
(Conditions 30 & 33 of Resolution No. 15200, Conditions 32, 33, 34
of Resolution No. 17618)
This Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
("Agreement") is made this day of , 199 , by and
between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California ("City" or "Grantee"
for recording purposes only) and EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a
general partnership ("Developer" or "Grantor"), with reference to
the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute a part of this
Agreemen t:
RECITALS
A. This Agreement concerns and affects certain real
property located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly
described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein
("Property") . The Property is part of a project commonly known
1
/pfJ/~
as EastLake South Greens Unit 3 South Half. 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 approved
a Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as EastLake
Greens, Tract 88-3 ("Tentative Subdivision Map") for the
subdivision of the Property.
D. The city has adopted Resolution No. 15200 and
subsequent Resolution No. 17618 ("Resolutions") pursuant to which
it has approved the Tentative Subdivision Map subject to certain
conditions as more particularly described in the Resolutions. The
description of the conditions in this recital section of this
Agreement is intended only to summarize and paraphrase such
conditions in the Resolutions, and is not intended herein to modify
or explain them, and is not intended as a basis for interpreting
them.
E. Condi tion No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200 requires
Developer to enter into an agreement whereby the developer agrees
that the city may withhold building permits for any units in the
subject subdivision if traffic on Otay Lakes Road, Telegraph Canyon
Road, EastLake Parkway, or East "H" Street exceed the levels of
service identified in the city's adopted thresholds.
F. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 15200
Guarantee of Construction. The resolution requires that prior to
the approval of any final map for any lot or unit, the Developer
shall guarantee the construction of all improvement work (streets,
sewers, drainage, utilities, etc.) deemed necessary to provide
service to such lot or unit in accordance with City standards.
G. Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618 requires
Developer to 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 attach, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City,
including approval by its Planning Commission, City Councilor any
approval by its agents, officers or employees with regard to this
subdivision provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of
any claim, action or proceeding and on the further condition that
the City fully cooperates in the defense.
2
/j!)jJ-~
H. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 requires
the Developer to hold the City harmless from any liability for
erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from this
project.
1. Condition No. 34 of Resolution No. 17618 requires
the Developer to insure that all franchised cable television
companies ("Cable Company") are permitted equal opportunity to
place conduit and provide cable television service to each lot
within the subdivision and as more particularly set forth in
Condition 34. Developer further agrees to restrict access to the
condui t to only those franchised cable television companies who
are, and remain in compliance with, all of the terms and conditions
of the franchise and which are in further compliance 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.
J. 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
and conditions herein contained,
below.
for the mutual covenants,
the parties agree as set
terms
forth
1. 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 land owned by the City adjacent to the Property,
described as EastLake Community Park, more particularly described
as Lot 2 of Map No. 12544, recorded January 26, 1990. The Burden
touches and concerns the Property. It is the intent of the
parties, and the parties agree, that this covenant shall be
binding upon, and run with, the ownership of the land which it
burdens. The Burden of this Agreement shall be released from
title, as to an individual lot or unit within the Property upon
the sale of any lot improved with a residence, provided however,
the City determines that the effect of such release, or in
3
-----
/t!Jg~
conjunction with previous releases, will not jeopardize the
completion of the improvements or other obligations remaining
under this Agreement. If the City determines that the release
will not jeopardize said obligations, the City shall execute a
quitclaim releasing the Burden of this Agreement from the title
to any such lots. As to any lots which have not been released,
the Burden of this Agreement shall continue to encumber such lots
and shall be binding upon, and run with, the ownership of such
lots until such lots are released.
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.
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. 30 of Resolution No. 15200
Building Permits Not to Issue While Thresholds Deficient. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200, the
Developer agrees that the City has the right to withhold building
permits for any dwelling units on the Property at such time as
the traffic volumes on otay Lakes Road, Telegraph Canyon Road,
EastLake Parkway, or East "H" Street exceed the level of service
identified in the City's adopted thresholds.
3.
Guarantee
map for
of
any
Condition No.
Construction.
lot or unit,
33 of Resolution No. 15200
Prior to the approval of any final
the Developer shall guarantee the
4
/tJg~?
construction of all improvement work (streets, sewers, drainage,
utilities, etc.) deemed necessary to provide service to such lot
or unit in accordance with city standards.
4. Condition No. 32 - Subdivision Map Indemnity. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618, 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 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. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 In
satisfaction of Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618, the
Developer agrees to hold the City harmless from any liability for
erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from
this proj ect.
6. Condition No. 34 - Cable Television Easements. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 34 of Resolution No. 17618, 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 proj ect only to those cable television companies franchised
by the CityofChula 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
5
/~g~7
determination by the city of Chula Vista that they have violated
the conditions of the grant.
7.
prepared
party.
Recording. This Agreement, or an abstract hereof
by either or both parties, may be recorded by either
8 .
Miscellaneous.
8.1 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
Developer:
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
900 Lane Avenue
suite #100
Chula Vista, California 91914
Attn: William T. Ostrem
Vice President
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.
8.2 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.
8.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the
entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter
6
/vfJ- r
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.
8.4 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.
8.5 Recitals; Exhibits. Any recitals set forth above
are incorporated by reference into this Agreement.
8.6 Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute
arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party in any action
shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees in addition to
any other costs, damages, or remedies.
7
/oL?-~
IN WITNESS
Agreement to be
forth.
WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
execute the day and year first hereinabove set
By: City of Chula Vista
Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
* EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
Approved as to Form:
~~l}{ L/'---I-e1:&~-')- ,f~
'Cf, e, Acting' ity Atto ney
By:
Name:
Title:
Date:
By:
Name:
Title:
* PLEASE SEE ATTACHED SIGNATURE
PAGE
8
/IJ/J'r /0
By: THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, (Formerly known as EastLake Development
Company) a California general partnership
By:
By:
Boswell Properties, Inc.,
a general partner
C;:::&~
Its:
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By:
C-7~~~
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
Its:
By:
By:
Its:
The Tulago Company,
a general partner
d-e~
Paul G. Nieto
Vice President
By:
~~/~
Sharon Ikemoto
Authorized Representative
Its:
/~.tJ ~ / /
EXHIBIT "N'
Property Description
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 2 OF CIlliLA VISA TRACT NO. 88-
3A, EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS PHASE 2 AND 3, ACCORDING TO
THE MAP THEREOF NO. 13292 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY JANUARY 25, 1996,
AS F/P 1996-0038599, AND LOTS 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49,
50,52, AND "D" OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-3A, EASTLAKE
SOUTH GREENS UNIT 1 ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF NO.
13338 FILED IN TIIE OFFICE OF TIIE RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY JULY 2, 1996, AS F/P 1996-333129 IN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
/?JjJ ~/2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 11/12/96
1/
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution / ~11' 51f Dissolving the Council appointed Interim BECA
Board
community~. ",",moo' D;re~"' L S '
City Manaz:; (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ NoXI
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
This item has been continued to the City Council meeting on November 19, 1996.
I /~tJ
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: / ~
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
ITEM TITLE:
A) RESOLUTION No. 18416: Approving a Resource Conveyance
Agreement for the Otay Ranch SPA One, Tract 96-04. (This is a related item,
but does not require a public hearing.)
B.) RESOLUTION No. 18417: Approving the Indemnification with
Village Development for Tract 96-04. (This is a related item, but does not
require a public hearing.)
C.) PUBLIC HEARING: PCS 96-04: Consideration ofa revised tentative
subdivision map for the Otay Ranch SPA One, Tract 96-04, generally located
south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and the future SR-
125 alignment and excluding 288 acres in Assessor Parcel No. 642-060-11 and
a portion of APN: 642-080-01.
D.) RESOLUTION No. 18398-2: Adopting the Second Addendum to
and recertifying Final Environmental Impact Report FEIR 95-01 (SCH
#95021012) and First Addendum, readopting the Statement of Oveniding
Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the
FEIR and approving a Revised Tentative Subdivision Map for portions of the
Otay Ranch SPA One, Tract 96-04, and making the necessary findings and
denying approval of alternative Tentative Map pro sal.
SUBMITTED BY: Special Planning Projects Manager, Otay Ranch
REVIEWED BY: City Manageh~ 4/5thsVote: es_No X)
The public hearing on this revised Tentative Map application was continued from the August 20 and
September 10, 1996 meetings to September 17, 1996. The Tentative Map was again continued from
September 17 to October 22 in order to give staff the opportunity to review the conditions of approval
and related Development Agreement in light of the new ownership situation. These issues were
addressed in an October 15, 1996 Council Informational Memo. At the applicant's request, the
hearing was continued from the October 22 meeting to November 12, 1996.
Village Development has submitted a revised subdivision map for a portion of Otay Ranch SPA One,
Chula Vista Tract 96-04, to subdivide approximately 819.6 acres into 1,850 single-family residential
lots, approximately 2,023 multi-family residential units, one elementary school site, seven park sites
totaling 28.0 acres, 172.1 acres of open space, 1].5 acres of commercial and 18.2 acres of community
purpose facility land. The application has been modified since the original submittal to delete the
portion ofland on which West Coast Land Fund (WCLF) holds title. Yillage Development proposes
/;J / /
Item: ---' Page 2
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
to delete this approximately 288-acre area from the original Tentative Map and redesign the lots in
Village One and Five adjacent to the WCLF properties.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed revised Tentative Map and the
alternatives and has detennined that, while the revised map is in substantial conformance with the Otay
Ranch SPA One Plan for which Final Environmental Impact Report 95-01 and the First Addendum
were certified by the City Council, the revision to delete approximately 288 acres will require a second
Addendum. After preparation, the Second Addendum did not identifY any adverse environmental
impacts. Removing acres of development and reducing the number of dwelling units will reduce the
severity of the environmental impacts identified in FEIR 95-01. Therefore, staff recommends adoption
of the Second Addendum to and recertification ofFEIR 95-01 and First Addendum and reapproval of
the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring Program related thereto.
ISSUES:
The first two points are policy and design issues, while the second two are not outstanding issues but
are discussed later in this report:
. Implications of deleting 288 acres from the previously proposed Tentative Map (WCLF)
. Gated Neighborhoods (Council requested issue)
. Resource Conveyance Agreement (Resolution 18416)
. Indemnification Agreement (Resolution 18417)
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON:
. Adopt a Second Addendum to and recertify FEIR 95-01 and the First Addendum for the Otay
Ranch SPA One and Tentative Map for Otay Ranch, Chula Vista Tract 96-04.
. Adopt the attached resolution of approval (13898-4) for the Tentative Subdivision Map for Village
One, Phase I-A and part of Phase 2-A of Village Five of the Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista
Tract 96-04, in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the attached
Draft City Council Resolution (Attachment 4).
. Deny the Applicant's request as filed for gates in Villages One and Five. The staff could support
some limited subdivision gating, but the applicant's proposal is too far reaching.
Ifthe City Council supports the Applicant's request for gates in Villages One and Five (Applicant's
Proposal), the Council could adopt the Resolution in Attachment 1 adding gate conditions 141 to
146.
If the Council supports some modified gate concept for Village One and Phase I-A or part of2-A
of Village Five (Attachment 4), the Council should approve the Tentative Map and direct staff to
;). -,J-
Item: _, Page 3
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
return on January 7, 1997 with additional conditions permitting private gates and specifying their
location at that time.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDA nONS:
The Planning Commission met on August 14, 1996 and voted unanimously to recommend to the City
Council approval of the Tentative Map for Village One and Phase I-A of Village Five. Adoption of
the Second Addendum to the SPA One EIR was also included in their recommendation. The
Commission reiterated their opposition to gates. The Commission's recommendation is Attachment 2.
DISCUSSION:
1. BACKGROUND
Development Agreement: A Pre-Annexation Development Agreement for Village Development
was approved by the City Council on July 16, 1996. This agreement provided the developer with
vested rights regarding the entitlements and regulations that will be applicable to the development of
the property consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan/Subregional Plan and SPA One. Any replanning that migbt be initiated by West
Coast Land Fund would have to consider Village Development's Development Agreement and
remain consistent with it unless agreed to and approved by Village Development The original
agreement was subsequently revised and was approved by the Planning Commission on October 9,
1996. The revised agreement further guarantees infrastructure improvements in cases where the
developer wants to create parcels for sale prior to finalizing the typical subdivision map.
Additionally, the revised agreement was strengthened with regard to any debt payment that might
be levied to install public improvements should the development be only partially completed. The
revised development agreement is also on the City Council agenda.
2. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL
The Applicant is proposing to revise the Tentative Map to delete the 288 acres ofWCLF properties in
Village One and Village Five. Neigbborhood R-12 is not proposed to be subdivided at this time
because the property line bisects the area. Neigbborhood R-1O has been relotted to reflect the WCLF
boundary. Village Development's revised subdivision map for their portion of Otay Ranch SPA One,
Chula Vista Tract 96-04, proposed to subdivide approximately 819.6 acres into:
1,850 single-family residential lots
2,023 multi-family residential units
One 10-acre elementary school site
7 park sites (and a portion of another) totaling 28 acres
172.1 acres of open space
11 .5 acres of commercial
18.2 acres of community purpose facility land
f) -' ~1
Item: ---' Page 4
Meeting Date: November] 2. ] 996
Should the City Council wish to approve the applicant's proposal, they could adopt Resolution 13 898-
] and Conditions of Approval in Attachment I.
3. ISSUES
A. Implications of deleting approximately 288 acres from the previously proposed Tentative
Map
Technical Committee: The Technical Committee consisting of representatives from Fire, Police,
Planning and Public Works Departments and the Project Team, met on August 8, ]996 to review the
proposal. Staff concerns are as follows:
]) Staff is concerned that future flexibility to replan Village Five would be lost if the center
portion of SPA One were deleted, i.e., private gates, access, and phasing of development, etc. In
addition, WCLF has previously voiced their concern prior to the adoption of the SPA One Plan
regarding the park, school and Community Purpose Facility (CPF) uses located on their property in the
Village Five Core. They believe the land plan for the village is inequitable because of the amount of
multi-family units on their portion of the village core. They also believe their portion of the Village Five
core has been saddled with a majority of the public land uses and community purpose facilities. It is,
therefore, foreseeable that WCLF will seek a SPA amendment to relocate these uses elsewhere in
Village Five, which would require discussions with City staff and approval of Village Development.
City staff believes that these issues should be addressed between all parties prior to approval of any
Tentative Map for Village Five. The continuance to the January 7, ]997 City Council meeting will
enable staff to facilitate a meeting between Village Development and West Coast Land Fund.
The land uses in the Village Five land plan split between WCLF and Village Development (VD) as
follows:
WCLF VD
SF Units 282 833
MF Unit ],350 348
Total ],632 ],]8]
CPF 8.] ac. 3.9 ac.
Park ]6.] ac. 4.3 ac.
2) Staff sees the eastern part of Village Five as just a large subdivision without the support of
the village core or other amenities that are a key ingredient of a neo-traditional village.
3) Staff is also concerned about the development of the pedestrian paseos if split by the
property holdings. This pedestrian facility will not have a destination until the village core is developed.
/;2 - L/
Item: ~ Page 5
Meeting Date: November] 2. ] 996
4) The Planning Department is concerned with proposed access through non-gated
neighborhoods. There are portions ofWCLF ownership that are accessed only through a gated Village
Development neighborhood. This access would not comply with City ordinances or the proposed
gated issue policies. Staff believes gating Village Five will create access problems until West Coast
Land Fund develops their portion of the village with gates. Flexibility needs to be maintained until
West Coast has committed to a land plan for their portion of Village Five. Continuing the public
hearing on Phases 2-A and 3 of the map until January 7, 1997 will give Village Development, West
Coast Land Fund and City staff an opportunity to negotiate a solution to this land plan problem. Both
Village Development and West Coast Land Fund have indicated a willingness to discuss the issues but
have not done so on their own.
5) Grading adjacent to or on the WCLF properties for Village Development is also a concern.
While the subdivision may be approved, actual development could be held back from the undeveloped
property between 50 to 100 feet to avoid future grading conflicts when the WCLF property does
develop. Any grading on WCLF property will require their approval.
6) Both the Police and Fire Departments continue to express concern regarding the Applicant's
proposal. They want to be ensured that La Media Road and East Palomar Street will be in place no
later than the trigger points which were established for the original Tentative Map proposal. They
reiterated that, if possible, they would strongly prefer that these road segments be installed earlier than
originally approved. While initial analysis indicated the thresholds could be met, the departments remain
concerned with the current proposal and the timing of La Media and East Palomar. Both departments
also indicated their concern with Neighborhood R-33 in Village Five and would like to have a
temporary secondary access into this neighborhood from Telegraph Canyon Road. The existing sewer
road could potentially be used as an emergency access to this neighborhood.
B. Gated Neighborhoods
During the SPA One Plan hearings, the Planning Commission' recommended denial of gates as
proposed by the project Applicant in the SPA One Plan. At the May ]4, 1996 City Council meeting,
the Council took tentative votes on individual SPA issues. On a motion by Councilmember Rindone,
the Council tentatively voted 3-2 with Horton and Alevy opposed, to support the Planning
Commission's recommendation for denial of all gates. At the June 4,1996 meeting, the Council took
final action on all their tentative decisions on the SPA Councihnember Padilla and Mayor Horton
agreed to consider the gated communities issue at the Tentative Map level. Councihnember Alevy
offered the resolution which did not include approval of gates, and the motion passed unanimously.
Eight gates are proposed by the Applicant on the Revised Tentative Map restricting access to all the
single-family neighborhoods in both villages. Under the SPA proposal, only the single-family
neighborhoods north of Palomar Street in Village One were proposed to be gated. The Tentative Map
proposes gates for the neighborhoods south of Palomar Street as well as the others proposed under the
SP A One Plan. For analysis, staff has numbered the gates I through ] 0 on the previous Tentative
Map. On the revised map, Gates 4 and 8 are on WCLF property. Gates I, 2 and 3 now restrict auto
access to the Village One neighborhoods north of Palomar Street. There are 874 single-family homes
J,}-_S
Item: --' Page 6
Meeting Date: November 12 1996
behind these gates on Village Development property. There were 115 lots in Neighborhoods R-9 and
R-ll that are on WCLF collateral on the original Tentative Map.
Gates 5, 6 and 7 restrict vehicular access to the 159 homes proposed south of Palomar Street in Village
One. On the original Tentative Map, there were 199 lots in the WCLF collateral and 185 in Village
Developments property (Neighborhoods R-12, 13 and 14). While a gate is proposed at Neighborhood
12, that neighborhood is not proposed to be subdivided on this map. This neighborhood will be
subdivided sometime in the future when the WCLF access issue has been resolved.
Vehicular access to the VIllage Development's portion of Village Five is now restricted by Gates 9 and
10. Phases I-A and 2-A are behind Gates 9 and 10. There are 1,098 units behind these gates.
All the gates restrict vehicular access orily. Pedestrians, bicyclists and carts will have full access under
the proposed gating plan. Gates having the most amount of traffic are tentatively proposed to be
staffed. Under the proposed phasing plan, it should be noted that the gates will remain open for a
number of years prior to being closed to the general public.
While staff believes the proposal to gate neighborhoods can be functional with appropriate conditions
in limited areas, we believe the City Council should consider the following points which are not
specifically addressed in the table:
Exclusivity vs. Community: There are many arguments for and against gated communities from a
social perspective. Concerns have been raised that separating segments of society behind gates will
orily lead to further economic and racial segregation within our community. There is the fear that those
who live behind gates have a greater apathy for those outside. On the other hand, others argue that
gates create more of a sense of neighborhood and community than a traditional subdivision. The
feeling is that people will work better together to support their 'tlefined" neighborhood rather than
losing that focus in a sprawling subdivision.
Crime: Fear of crime is the most important factor leading to the move toward gated communities.
People see gates and guards and assume an area is inherently more secure. That fact, however, is
debatable and is dependent on the type of crime studied. Some reports on crime in gated communities
show that certain offenses, such as petty theft or voyeurism, are reduced with the presence of gates.
However, . certain violent crimes like murder and rape that involve people who are known to each
other, may not be reduced. Nonetheless, the perception of any affected homeowner is that gated
neighborhoods are safer.
Traffic and Circulation: Reducing traffic flow and making streets safer is one of the main reasons
gates are proposed. Proponents of gated communities argue that diverting traffic from high volume
residential streets makes the streets quieter and safer for children. In addition, if orily residents are
allowed access to the streets, monitoring strangers driving through neighborhoods will be easier,
therefore, making the area safer for the residents.
l2-(;
Item: --' Page 7
Meeting Date: November] 2, 1996
Opponents argue that gating a community may do nothing more than transfer the problem of
residential traffic from one street to another. They believe that these communities may create more
congestion by concentrating traffic on collector streets outside the development. Although if the gated
community is only a feeder to the major arterial (like a street system that is basically a series of cul-de-
sacs), it makes little difference if it is gated or not in terms of the traffic coming into a collector street.
Some literature argues that the gating of communities reduces choice and opportunities for vehicular
travel routes. This could be true depending upon the design of the street system. If it were a grid
system it could be true, but it would not be true if it were a cul-de-sac system.
Emergency Access: Gated communities pose challenges for emergency responses from police, fire and
paramedics. Unless properly controlled, gates can lead to minor delays or can result in major
difficulties in responding to emergencies or acting to evacuate areas. Mechanical access systems to
these communities exist but may not operate effectively at all times. Systems that rely solely on entry
codes face the problem of notifYing emergency services when the code is changed. If these emergency
services are not notified in time, delays may result. Additionally, if gated communities have limited
points of entry and, if one entry is blocked, there is an increased delay in access to the emergency.
Currently, systems like the 'Opticom" Vehicle Strobe Detector Systems, Knox Boxes and Knox Key
Switches are provided to eliminate any difficulty in responding to emergencies that police, fire or
paramedics might have. These systems work effectively and have not led to substantially lower
response times. To ensure that, redundant multiple systems could be required. Even with these
systems, the Police and Fire Departments are still concerned and believe that gates should be staffed 24
hours a day if the gated communities cover the large number of units as proposed by the Applicant.
Multiple Ownerships: The utilization of gates to restrict public access is effective when the
properties behind the gates are under the control of a single property owner. With WCLF ownership
of a portion of SPA One and Five, the design, operation and location of restricted access gates
becomes very difficult to implement to the satisfaction of the residents of those areas and the City
operational departments. As now designed, vehicular access for the residents of WCLF properties in
Village One and Village Five would be restricted to Palomar Street and La Media Road and to La
Media Road and Orange Avenue, respectively. This creates a serious design issue for the residents of
Village Five ofWCLF properties due to the shape ofthose properties and the approved design of the
SPA One Plan.
Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB): MTDB staff is not supportive of gated
communities primarily because they believe gating contributes to a discontinuous street system and
restricts mobility. They believe that discontinuous streets inhibit pedestrian, bicycle and transit
circulation and increase automobile dependence. In addition, they believe gates form artificial barriers
between neighborhoods. MTDB sees this action as contrary to the neo-traditional goals of the Otay
Ranch GDP.
During the SPA One Plan review, staff prepared a gated communities policy paper containing general
and specific guidelines for gating neighborhoods. The general guidelines focused on the following
items:
)J~7
Item: -' Page 8
Meeting Date: November 12, 1996
. Discourage gates in communities where the Growth Management Threshold Standards
could not be met
. Maintain pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, open space and other facilities
. Require that all State and City criteria be met for street design, including access for school
buses, trash pick-up and mail delivery and enforce the traffic and parking regulations of the
Vehicle Code
. Review and approve the number of units behind gates to reduce impacts to surrounding
communities,
The specific guidelines and requirements focused on the following:
. Signs indicating gated street areas and location of trails and parks open to the public
. No public services such as libraries, fire or police stations located behind gates
. Maintain alternative access to public facilities
. Enforcement of the Vehicle Code in gated communities
. Require staffing on some or all of the gates
The Engineering Department criteria for gated communities requires:
. Sufficient stacking for peak flows
. Construct streets to City standards but privately maintained
. Private storm drains
. Private street lights conforming to public standards
In addition, the Chula Vista Elementary School District wants to ensure access for the school buses,
require hold harmless and indemnification agreements and insurance from the homeowners association,
Recommendation: Staff is still concerned about the significant number of single family homes and the
lack of multi-family units proposed behind gates in this project Gated products on a reduced scale
with a variety of densities may be acceptable, The Applicant has not submitted a revised gated proposal
accomplishing this mixture and, therefore, staff recommends denial of the gates as proposed, H the
City Council wishes to support gates on any portion of the Tentative Map other than the
Applicants proposal for Village One and Five, the Council should approve the Tentative Map
and direct staff to return on January 7, 1997 with appropriate conditions on gates.
At the July 10 Planning Commission hearing, the Commission reiterated their previous position which
was not in support of gating the project
/;) - Y
Item: --' Page 9
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
The following table analyzes the] 0 proposed gates in relationship to the above criteria:
Gates Summarv
Village I Village I Village 5 WCLF Total # of
N/O Palomar SlO Palomar Gates
I I 2 1 3 5 I 6 I 7 9 I 10 4 I 8 10
General
Criteria .
GMOC Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Threshold
Standards
Ped access Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
City Ord Yes No Yes Yes YesINo
Other Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Agencies
Number of 874 159 1098 989 11198 4318
Units
Specific
Criteria
Signs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Signs to Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
nuhlic fac
Facilities Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
nrivate
Access to Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
other
attractors
Public Yes yes Yes Yes Yes
enforcmnt
Staffed No I Yes No Yes Yes YesINo
Stacking Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1'.1. Street Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1'.1. Drain Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1'.1. St Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Lil!btin~
School Bus Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
/2-;
Item: ---' Page 10
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
C. Comparison of Otay Ranch to the Paloma Planned Community in San Marcos
At the August 20, 1996 public hearing on the Development Agreement for Bald'W1n Builders, a number
of residents from the Paloma Master Planned Community in the City of San Marcos, as well as a
council member, testified in opposition to the Development Agreement. They testified regarding
problems being experienced in their community which was planned and constructed by the Baldwin
Company. Their concerns centered around three major topics: financing for the project, provision of
public facilities and quality of construction. The first two items are discussed below and compared to
policies in place 'With the City of Chula Vista and the Otay Ranch Project. The third area of concern is
the subject of a related report.
1.) FINANCING
San Marcos Chula Vista Otay Ranch
Utilized Mello-Roos CFD to CV does not utilize Mello-Roos Consistent 'With City policy
finance parks, schools and a fire CFD for any public facilities. CFD for elementary school has
station Only the School District utilizes been formed.
CFDs.
Assessment District to fund To date, the developer has not
infrastructure may be formed at requested the formation of an
the request of developer and Assessment District. City is
must be approved by City under no obligation to authorize
Council. Typically formed prior formation of district.
to any occupancy and used for
backbone streets, sewer and
water facilities.
Subdivision improvement bonds Consistent 'With City policy
required for all public
improvements. Developer has
three years to complete all
improvements and if not, the
bonds can be called in.
CFD and property taxes exceed Council policy that combined Consistent with City policy
2% of assessed value of homes property taxes and Assessment
District fees may not exceed 2%
of original assessed value of
home at time of sale.
Baldwin became delinquent in No CFDs except for schools. Consistent with City policy
payment of their fair share of the
CFD
J~) ) /7
-"- - (/
Item: -' Page I I
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
Lighting and Landscape District Open Space Maintenance Open Space Maintenance
fees were utilized District is formed prior to or District has been requested for
concurrent with approval of final the entire SPA One area.
map. City Council approves Monthly fees approximately
formation of District. $23. HOA fees estimated at
$24-$52 monthlv.
Mello-Roos fees increased Full disclosure of any Mello- Consistent with City policy
yearly Roos fees or Assessment
District fees required at time of
home purchase.
2.) PROVISION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES
San Marcos Chula Vista Otay Ranch
Parks and fire station have not PAD fees collected for parks PAD fees collected for
been completed on schedule which ensures money is in place community park (located off
if park not completed by site) and for the first 500 du for
developer. Neighborhood Parks.
Developer to provide turn-key
neighborhood park(s) after the
first 500 duo Required to never
be in deficit or building permits
may be withheld. (Conditions of
Approval #3,72 and 81). PAD
fees will be reimbursed if turn-
key facility provided.
Fire stations financed through No fire stations proposed with
PFDIF. Fees collected at time of first TM, however, future
building permit issuance. stations will be financed in a
manner consistent with City
policy. Update ofPFDIF
required to be financed by
developer with credit given
toward future fee (Cond. #91).
Major streets financed through Consistent with City policy
TDIF. Fees collected at building
permit issuance or developer
builds facility and receives credit
towards future TDIF fees.
/,:2~/)
Item: --' Page 12
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
In conjunction with the above financing provisions, the following trigger points were established with
approval of the SPA One Plan which ensure that facilities will be provided in a timely fashion.
500 units
1,150 units
2,650 units
3,000 units
3,900 units
Deliver graded first elementary school site \\ith access road & utilities to the site, in 500 units
Vilh12:e One ISO students
First Elementary School opened (Village One) 1,150units
336 students
Deliver graded second elementary school site mth access road & utilities to the site, 2,500 units
in Village Five 750 students
Second Elementary School opened (Village Five) 3,450 units
1,000 students
Deliver graded third elementary school site \\ith access road & utilities to the site, 4,500 units
west of Paseo Ranchero 1,350 students
Third Elementary School opened (West of Paseo Ranchero) 5,300 units
1,668 students
Deliver graded high school site mth access road & utilities to the site 2,650 units
504 students
High School opened 5,300 units
1,007 students
SCHOOLS
TRAFFIC RELATED IMPROVEMENTS
Construct or guarantee the construction of offsite Telegraph 300 units
Can on Road
I-805fTel h Can on Road interchan e 500 units
Either: offsite 4 lane East Palomar St. and 1/2 diamond;
Or: Oran e Ave as a 6 lane rime arterial to Paseo Ranchero 1,414 ivalent dwellin units
Either: offsite E. Palomar St. & Orange Ave. to 4 lane majors with
1/2 diamond at I-805/Palomar;
Or: Palomar St. to a 4 lane major & Orange Ave. to a 6 lane prime 4,009 equivalent dwelling units
arterial to Paseo Ranchero
SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
determined bv flow meterin
u ades & some offsites \\ith first unit
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
wi radin of anv area in canyon
wi construction of La Media
j'I-/')
""- .~
Item: -----' Page 13
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
D. Status of St. Claire (Telegraph Canyon Estates)
At the August 20, 1996 hearing for the Baldwin Builders Development Agreement hearing, a resident
spoke regarding the status of the Telegraph Canyon Estates project. He indicated that many of the
homes were still unfinished or abandoned, cited a lack of maintenance and indicated that the homes
were of poor construction. These issues have been addressed in a Council Informational Memo and
the staff report for the Baldwin Builders Development Agreement which was presented to the City
Council on October IS.
E. Resource Conveyance Agreement
A Resource Conveyance Agreement, which was a condition of approval for SPA One, to be completed
prior to approval of the Tentative Map, has been prepared and is included as Exhibit F in this report
along with a Resolution approving said agreement.
F. Indemnification Agreement
An Indemnification Agreement between Village Development and the City has also been prepared and
is included as Exhibit H along with a Resolution approving said agreement.
4. ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS
Alternative A - Approve Village I and Phase I-A of Village 5 Only
The Planning Commission supports approval of the Tentative Map for only Village Development's
portion of Village One plus Phase I-A of Village 5 which will subdivide 592.7 acres into:
1,253 single-family residential lots
1,675 multi-family residential units
One 10.4 acre elementary school site
5 park sites totaling 23.5 acres
122.7 acres of open space
11.5 acres of commercial
14.6 acres of community purpose facility land.
This alternative would give Village Development additional entitlements for their land sales program.
Staff believes that, because of the limited size of Phase I-A in Village Five (236 units on 52 acres), City
services can easily be e>..1ended and threshold standards can still be maintained while not restricting
future flexibility to reallocate land uses.
Approval of the Tentative Map for all of Village Five, together with the previously approved
development agreement ,substantially restricts the City's flexibility to adjust land uses in the future for
the WCLF properties in Villages One and Five. West Coast Land Fund has previously indicated they
are not satisfied with the SPA One land use plan, and they may desire an amendment to adjust the
"J '7
J,.L ~ /~)
Item: --' Page 14
Meeting Date: November 12. 1996
school and park locations, increase the commercial acreage, delete multi-family areas and add single-
family neighborhoods. Any modification proposed by WCLF to the existing SPA One land use plan
will require a SPA amendment and a new Tentative Map and potentially a GDP amendment.
Attachment 2 is the City Council resolution approving this alternative. The conditions address just
Village One and Phase I-A of Village Five. Additionally, this alternative would allow the balance of
Village Five to be continued to the January 7, 1997 hearing affording the Applicant the opportunity to
continue negotiating with West Coast Land Fund on replanning for the area.
Alternative B - Approve Village One Only
Another alternative is approval of the Tentative Map for only Village Development's portion of Village
One and continuance of the map for Village Five. to the January 7, 1997 hearing.
The recommendation for only Village Development's portion of Village One would subdivide 540.7
acres into:
1,017 single-family residential lots
1,675 multi-family residential units
One 10.4 acre elementary school site
11.5 acres of commercial
14.6 acres of community purpose facility
4 park sites totaling 22.2 acres
117.1 acres of open space
If the City Council wishes to approve the staff alternative for only VIllage One, resolution of approval
(13898-3) with conditions is available for Council consideration (Attachment 3).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative C - Approve Village 1 and Phase lA and a portion of Phase 2A in Village Five.
Another alternative is approval of the Tentative Map for Village Development's portion of VIllage One
plus Phase I-A and a portion of Phase 2-A of Village Five and continuance of the remainder of Village
Five to the January 7, 1997 hearing.
This alternative would subdivide 671 acres into:
1,588 single-family residential lots
1,675 multi-family residential units
One 10.4 acre elementary school site
5 1/2 park sites totaling 24.8 acres
134.9 acres of open space
11 .5 acres of commercial
14.6 acres of community purpose facility land
/-1-/tj
Item _' Page 15
Meeting Date November 12 1996
This scenario would provide the applicant with additional entitlements in Village Five and is solely
single family residential. While this alternative would limit flexibility to replan Village Five it is located
in the area where West Coast Land Fund had little concern with the proposed land use. West Coast
Land Fund's concern was primarily regarding the amount of park, CPF, multi-family and commercial
uses in the Village Five core area. If the City Council w1shes to approve the alternative for Village One
and Phase I-A and a portion of Phase 2-A of Village Five, resolution of approval (13898-4) with
conditions is available for Council consideration (Attachment 4). This resolution would continue the
balance of Village Five to the January 7, 1997 hearing.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact of processing the Tentative Map application on the General Fund because Village
Development is reimbursing the City through a deposit account. At this point in time, Village
Development is one month delinquent. As of October 25, 1996, $44,973.52 was due and payable.
This amount has not yet been submitted to the City. It is staffs recommendation that the project be
continued until Village Development is current on all delinquent accounts. Staff w1l1 present an oral
report to Council on the status of the account.
The fiscal analysis for the Otay Ranch project was completed as part of the FIND Model and was
further evaluated in the context of the Tax Agreement. Any modifications to the phasing plan may
cause a difference in timing of anticipated cash flow, but ultimately will have not fiscal impact on the
overall project.
Attachments:
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D:
Exhibit E:
Exhibit F:
Exhibit G:
Exhibit H:
Exhibit I:
ExhibitJ:
Attachment I
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
Tentative Map Alternatives
Proposed Phasing Plan
Second Addendum to Otay Ranch SPA One EIR 95-0 I
Otay Ranch Tentative Map Data
Otay Ranch Ownership Map
Resource Conveyance Agreement
Resolution # 18416 approving Resource Conveyance Agreement
Indenmification Agreement
Resolution # 18417 approving Indenmification Agreement
Disclosure Statement
Draft City Council Resolution #18398-1 Appro,ing Applicant's Proposal
Draft City Council Resolution #18398-2 Appro,ing Staff Alternative A - Village One and Phase I-A in
Village Five
Draft City Council Resolution #18398-3 Approving Staff Alternative B - Village One
Draft City Council Resolution #18398-4 Appro,ing Staff Alternative C - Village One and Phase I-A
and a portion of Phase 2-A in Village Five
);1 ~/_S
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBKITTED BY:
Item No. /;I
city Council Meeting Date 11/12/96
d. JiRJ; d' .
Or 1nance - Amen 1ng Otay Ranch Pre-Annexat1on
Development Agreement Between otay Ranch, L.P., a
California limited partnership, village
Development, a California general partnership, and
the city of Chula vista
Deputy city M~~
City Manager L9\~~~
4/5 Vote:
Yes
No----X-
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On June 25, 1996, the Planning commission and city council met
jointly and approved a development agreement for the above parties.
There is now a mutual desire (by Village Development and Otay L.P.)
to amend the agreement to further guarantee infrastructure
improvements where the developer wants to create parcels for sale
prior to finalizing the typical final subdivision map. In
addition, on August 20, 1996, the Council asked if the agreement
could be tightened up to head off any problems with regard to any
debt payment that might be levied to make public improvements or
should development be only partially completed on any particular
project. A case in point would be the st. Claire Project on
Telegraph Canyon Road where development was stopped for a time due
to a bankruptcy action.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the city Council place the ordinance on
first reading.
BD/COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
At their October 9, 1996 meeting, the
Commission recommended adoption
ordinance.
Planning
of the
DISCUSSION:
On June 25, 1996, the city approved three development agreements
with United Enterprises, Greg Smith, and Village Development, et
al. On August 20, 1996, three additional agreements were placed on
first reading of the ordinance for the Jewels of Charity, SNMB,
Ltd. and the Foundation (those agreements are awaiting signature by
the applicant prior to second reading). On October 1, 1996, the
Council placed on first reading the ordinance for Baldwin Builders,
the trustee for the bankruptcy. These various entities cover the
Otay Ranch Western Parcel land holdings. West Coast Land was
included in the original Village Development Agreement.
/3 --I
Attached for Council information, Exhibit A is the previous agenda
statement from June 25, 1996 when this Development Agreement was
first considered for Villaqe Development along with other parties.
The basic business terms are explained therein, have not changed,
and will not be readdressed. What is focused on are the changes to
the agreement proposed since City Council/Planning Commission
approval in June. These changes are all in a strikeout/underline
format in the attached agreement text for ease of reading.
1. Overview
with the Baldwin Builders agreement, a number of changes were
added at the request of city Council to help avoid any similar
situations such as st. Claire. The additional language
included the City's ability to withhold action on any of the
applicant's Future Discretionary Approval requests (7.10); a
statement that if development stops on a project and there is
a nuisance, health or safety hazard, the developer agrees to
cure the situation or the City will have the authority to
enter private property as well as public and take correction
action at the developer's expense (7.11); and a requirement
that the developer shall comply with the terms of any
assessment districts and make timely payments thereon or the
City can take any legally authorized action appropriate to
guarantee payment (14). All of these provisions, as well as
other clarifying language the city wanted, have been
incorporated into the village/Otay L.P. agreement amendment in
their entirety. These three sections, 7.10, 7.11 and 14 on
Pages 16 and 23 of the Agreement, are the major substantive
changes, plus 7.1 discussed below (see Page 12 of the
Agreement) .
2. Reauest bv Villaqe Development to Not have to Bond at the
Master Subdivision ("A" Map) Showinq "Super Block" lots for
backbone infrastructure facilities. (Section 7.1)
By way of background, on large scale developments there are
usually two levels of final map approvals. The first level is
referred to as the "A" Map and is used to create large parcels
of land or "Super Block" lots to be conveyed to Builders. At
the next level, "B" Maps are prepared. The "B" Map is the
traditional final map that creates smaller lots for sale to
homebuyers.
Normally, a Master Developer dedicates, bonds or constructs
backbone infrastructure such as major roads, trunk sewer
lines, project serving drainage facilities or unique features
such as pedestrian bridges, etc. with the "A" map,. This
dedication and improvement guarantee is performed in
conjunction with creating the Super Block Map which creates
parcels for sale to merchant builders. Those builders then
assume the typical improvement requirements associated with
the final "B" map which creates building lots for sale to
homeowners.
/ J--,2
In this instance, Village Development requests that the City
allow it to sell off large parcels to Developers in advance of
guaranteeing the backbone facilities. village Development can
then satisfy its debt obligations to Bank of America, the
lienholder for the tentative map land, and remain viable to
construct the balance of the project. Staff is comfortable
with this arrangement as long as: (1) village Development,
otay Ranch L.P., or their successor in interest covenant in
the development agreement that it is their sole and separate
responsibility to provide or finance the cost of backbone
facilities required by any final map including both the "A"
and "B" Maps; and (2) Village Development, otay Ranch L.P., or
their successor in interest will provide adequate funds as
determined by the City Engineer for the implementation and
construction of the first phase backbone facilities prior to
approval of the first final "B" map. These provisions are
contained in the text of section 7.1 on Page 12 of the draft
agreement.
3. Imoact of Bankruotcv or Foreclosure
A final city issue is what a bankruptcy or foreclosure action
might do to the validity of the already granted Nuisance
Easements by Village Development and the legality of the
Development Agreement itself. Sections 7.2.2 and 12.5 address
that possibility. New language has been added stating that
the developer agrees to enter into subordination agreements
with all lenders having a lien on the Property to ensure that
the agreement has a priority position over all other liens.
This will make it clear that the obligations as well as the
rights of the agreement will not be subsequently suspended or
abrogated by a senior lienholder. Subordination agreements
for Property within future SPA plans must be provided to the
City prior to approval of each SPA plan for said Property.
In addition, the
and guarantees
requirements to
approval.
tentative map for
via the Public
be satisfied in
SPA I contains 147
Facility Finance
conjunction with
conditions
Plan and
final map
Fiscal Imoact
It isn't possible to quantify the value of the Agreement to the
city or the other parties. Through annexation and the related
property tax, sales tax, etc., the City will realize significant
benefits. Likewise, the Developers benefit from the vesting and
certainty provided by the Agreement to be able to get loans and
sell and develop the Property in accordance with current and future
approvals.
v1l1age113
/:J/~
ORDINANCE NO. 2691
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN OTAY RANCH, L.P., A
CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, VILLAGE
DEVELOPMENT, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP,
AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
WHEREAS, on June 25, 1996, the city Council approved a
Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Chula vista and Otay
Ranch, L.P., a California partnership, et al pursuant to Ordinance
No. 2679; and
WHEREAS, on June 25, 1996, the Planning Commission and
City Council met jointly and approved a development agreement for
the above parties; and
WHEREAS, there is now a mutual desire by the city and
village Development and otay Ranch L.P. to amend the agreement to
further guarantee infrastructure improvements where the developer
wants to create parcels for sale prior to finalizing the typical
final subdivision map; and
WHEREAS, in addition, on August 20, 1996, the Council
requested and Otay Ranch, L. P. and Village Development agreed that
the agreement 'could be revised to address any potential problems
with regard to any debt payment that might be levied to make public
improvements or should development be only partially completed on
any particular project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the city Council of the City of Chula
vista ordains as follows:
SECTION I: The Otay Ranch Pre-Annexation Development
Agreement between otay Ranch, L.P., a California limited
partnership, Village Development, a California general partnership,
and the city of Chula vista is hereby amended as set forth in the
Amended Agreement on file in the office of the city Clerk as
Document No.
,SECTION II: The Mayor of the City of Chula vista is
hereby authorized and directed to execute said Amended Agreement
for and on behalf of the city of Chula vista.
SECTION III: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the effective date of annexation as set forth in the
attached Pre-Annexation Development Agreement as amended.
SECTION IV: The previously approved Pre-Annexation
Development Agreement only between Otay Ranch L. P. and Village
Development and the City adopted by the city council by Ordinance
No. 2679 shall be null and void with respect to these parties upon
adoption of this ordinance.
George Krempl, Deputy City
Manager
~
Approved as to form by
0.---- 1V\)~ (1
Ann Y. Moore, Acting
city Attorney
/7'/1
Presented by
;;:;::: / J
PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is
made effective on the date hereinafter set forth below by and among
THE OTAY RANCH, L.P., a California limited partnership, 'PICER
DEVELorUEN'r 'r1'l0, a California limited partnerGhip, 13y 'rICEnIIEART,
INC., a California corporation, itG general partner, VILLAGE
DEVELOPMENT, a California general partnership ("Developer") and THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, who agree as follows:
1. RECITALS.
following facts:
This Agreement is made with respect to the
1.1 Owner. The owners of the properties subj ect to this
Agreement (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Owner" or as
"Developer") are as follows:
1.1.1 Otay Ranch, L.P. is the owner of approxi-
mately 3,545 acres of undeveloped real property in the
unincorporated area of the County of San Diego ("county"),
described in Exhibits "A" and ll{;-Il "F", attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference.
1.1.2 'riger Development 'r.:o iG the miner of
approximately 1,031 acreD of undeveloped real property in the
uninoorporated area of the County, deDcribed in EKhibitD "B"
and "C", attached hereto and incorporated herein sy thiG
reference.
1.1.3 Village Development is the owner of
approximately 35 acres of undeveloped real property in the
unincorporated area of the County, described in Exhibits ll{;-Il
"B" and ll{;-Il "F", attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference.
1.2 ci tv. The City of Chula vista is a municipal
corporation and an incorporated city within the County.
1.3 Code Authorization and Acknowledqments.
1. 3.1 city
Government Code sections
development agreements
certainty for both city
development process.
is authorized pursuant to California
65864 through 65869.5 to enter into
for the purpose of establishing
and owners of real property in the
1.3.2 Government Code section 65865 expressly
authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with
any person having a legal or equitable interest in real
property in unincorporated territory within that city's sphere
of influence for the development of property as provided in
the Development Agreement Law; provided that the agreement
shall not become operative unless annexation proceedings
-1-
.--, ~
J~) '.:~S
annexing the property to the city are completed within the
time specified by the agreement.
1.3.3 City enters into this Agreement pursuant
to the provisions of the California Government Code, its home-
rule powers, and applicable City ordinances, rules, regula-
tions and policies.
1.3.4 ci ty and Owner acknowledge:
Owner acknowledge this Agreement will provide:
city and
1.3.4.1 Certainty in the planning process so
that the property can be developed efficiently. This
will avoid unnecessary waste of resources and increases
in housing and other development costs. The Agreement
will allow comprehensive planning of a large property so
as to make maximum efficient utilization of resources at
the least economic cost to the public;
1.3.4.2 To provide and assure to the City the
participation of Developer in the accelerated, coordinat-
ed and more economic construction, funding and dedication
to the public of certain needed public facilities and
benefits, and to provide for anticipated levels of
service to residents and populations of the property, the
City, and adjacent areas;
1.3.4.3 To provide and assure that the City
receive sales tax revenues, increase in the property tax
base, residential housing and other development, sewer,
water and street facilities;
1.3.4.4 To provide and assure that the city
receives public facilities in excess of project generated
impacts and such facilities shall be of supplemental
size, number capacity or length, which shall be provide
earlier than could be provided either by funds from the
city or than would strictly be necessary to mitigate
project related impacts at any development phase;
1.3.4.5 To provide Developer assurances
regarding the entitlements and regulations that will be
applicable to the development of the property consistent
with the Chula vista General Plan and the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan/Subregional Plan;
1.3.4.6 To provide the city the opportunity
to secure immediate annexation of the lands depicted in
Attachment .1l{}ll "c" and secure a related tax revenue
sharing agreement with the County of San Diego to assure
that development of the properties will generate suffi-
cient tax revenues to offset the costs of providing
services to the properties;
y
. -:> /
j) .- f/
1.3.4.7 To enable the city to secure title to
the land with the boundaries of the property necessary to
complete the Chula vista greenbelt system as defined in
the Chula vista General Plan;
1.3.4.8 To enable the city to advance its
stated goal to identify and secure a site for a potential
four year university;
1.3.4.9 To assure the city that the Developer
will dedicate right-of-way for SR-125, a route which when
constructed will substantially alleviate congestion on I-
805 and 1-5, and also will facilitate the economic
development of Chula vista; and
1.3.4.10 To enable the city to prepare and
adopt a Habitat Conservation Plan consistent with the
requirements of the Natural Communities Conservation Act,
including the phased conveyance of open space land to the
otay Ranch Preserve.
1.4 The Annexation. TRe city Rao appliea to the Local
A~ency Formation commiooion ("LhFCO") for anneHation of Sphere of
Influence PlunninEf f.rea 1 "The otuy Parcel", PlanninEf I.rea 2
"Inverted L" and the Hary patric][ E::;tute Purcel (oee Attacfiment
"0") . On Julv 1. 1996. the Local Aqency Formation commission
("LAFCO") approved annexation of Sphere of Influence Planninq Area
1 "The Otay Parcel". Planninq Area 2 "Inverted L" and the Marv
Patrick Estate Parcel (see Attachment "C").
1.5 Sphere of Influence. A city application i::; ~ending
sefore L~FCO to have the otuy Vulley parcel included \.ithin city'e
sphere of influence. On Februury 5, 1996 tRe Local Aqcncy
Formation Commi::;::;ion approved the inelu::;ion of approl1imately 7,600
acre::; into the City Sphere of Influence (SpRere of Influence
Planninq I.rea 2 and the northern t\JO thirde af PlanninEf Area 1),
and de::;iEfnated the otay River Valley un VillaEfe 3 a::; ::;pecial ::;tudy
areae. On February 5. 1996 and July 1. 1996 the Local Aqency
Formation Commission approved the inclusion of Planninq Area 1.
"The Otay Parcel". into the City Sphere of Influence (Sphere of
Influence Planninq Area 1 "The Otay Parcel". Planninq Area 2
"Inverted L" and the Marv Patrick Estate Parcel - see Attachment
liCit) .
1.6 Planninq Documents. On October 28, 1993, city and
County adopted the otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional
Plan ("the GDP") which includes the Otay Ranch Village Phasing
Plan, Facility Implementation Plan, Resource Management Plan and
Service Revenue Plan, for approximately 23,000 acres of the Otay
Ranch, including the Otay Valley Parcel and the SNMB, Jewels and
Foundation Properties. The city amended the GDP on June 4, 1996.
~
/5~)
1.6.1 SPA One Plan. On June 4, 1996, the Chula
vista City Council approved the otay Ranch Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) One Plan including the Planned community District
RegUlations, Overall Design Plan, Village Design Plan, Public
Facilities Plan, Parks, Recreation, open Space and Trails
Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Phase 2 Resource Management
Plan, Non-renewable Energy Conservation Plan, Ranch-wide
Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan, and
Geotechnical Report.
1. 7 Owner Consent. city desires to have the cooperation
and consent of Owner to include the Property in the Annexation in
order to better plan, finance, construct and maintain the infra-
structure for the otay Valley Parcel; and the otay Ranch L.P., a
California limited partnership, TiEj'er Development T\IO, a California
limited partnerShip, by TiEj'erheart, Inc., a California corporation,
its Ej'eneral partner, and Village Development, a California general
partnership desire to give their cooperation and consent, provided
that they obtain certain assurances, as set forth in this
Agreement.
1.8 city Ordinance. July 9, 1996 is the date of
adoption by the City council of Ordinance No. 2679 approving this
Agreement. The ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on
the effective date of Annexation.
2. Definitions.
otherwise requires:
In this Agreement, unless the context
2.1 "Annexation" means the proposed annexation of that
portion of the Otay Ranch into the City as depicted on Exhibit "D".
2.2 "City" means the City of Chula Vista, in the county
of San Diego, State of California.
2.3 "County" means the County of San Diego, State of
California.
2.4 "Development Plan" means the GDP.
2.5 "GDP" means the General Development Plan/ Subregional
Plan for the Otay Ranch, described in Paragraph 1.6, above.
2.6 "Owner" or "Developer" means the person, persons, or
entity having a legal and equitable interest in the Property, or
parts thereof, and includes Owner's successors-in-interest.
2.7 "Project" means the physical development of the
private and public improvements on the property as provided for in
the Existing Project Approvals and as may be authorized by the city
in Future Discretionary Approvals.
2.8 "Property" means the real property described in
Paragraphs 1.1.1, 1.1.2, and 1.1.3.
7/)-Y
2.9 The "Term" of this Agreement means the period
defined in Paragraph 3, below.
2.10 "Builder" means developer to whom Developer has sold
or conveyed property within the Property for purposes of its
improvement for residential, commercial, industrial or other use.
2.11 "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality
Act, california Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq.
2.12 "City Council" means the City of Chula vista City
Council.
2.13 "Commit" or "Committed" means all of the following
requirements have been met with respect to any public facility:
2.13.1 For a public facility within the city's
jurisdictional boundaries and a responsibility of the develop-
er.
2.13.1.1
the Developer have
public facility;
All discretionary permits required of
been obtained for construction of the
2.13.1.2 Plans for the construction of the
public facility have all the necessary governmental
approvals; and
2.13.1.3 Adequate funds (i.e., letters of
credit, cash deposits, performance bonds or land secured
public financing, including facility benefit assessments,
Mello-Roos assessment districts of similar assessment
mechanism) are available such that the City can construct
the public facility if construction has not commenced
within thirty (30) days of issuance of a notice to
proceed by the Director of Public Works, or construction
is not progressing towards completion in a reasonable
manner as reasonably deemed by the Director of Public
Works.
2.13.2 For a public facility within the City's
jurisdictional boundaries, but to be provided by other than
Developer.
2.13.2.1 Developer's proportionate share of
the cost of such public facility as defined in the
existing Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
Approvals has been provided or assured by Developer
through the payment or impositions of development impact
fee or other similar exaction mechanism.
2.13.3 For public facility not within city's
jurisdictional boundaries:
/ /] )J/
the cost
existing
Approvals
Developer
of Public
2.13.3.1 Developer's proportionate share of
of such public facility as defined in the
Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
has been provided for or otherwise assured by
to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director
Works.
2.14 "Development Impact Fee (DIF)" means fees imposed
upon new development pursuant to the city of Chula vista
Development Impact Fee Program, for example, including but not
limited to the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program, the
Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee Program, the Salt Creek Sewer
DIF and the Public Facilities DIF.
2.15 "Existing project Approvals" means all discretionary
approvals affecting the Project which have been approved or
established in conjunction with, or preceding, the effective date
consisting of, but not limited to the GDP, the Chula vista General
Plan, the Otay Ranch Reserve Fund Program adopted pursuant to
Resolution 18288, the SPA One Plan and the Phase II Resource
Management Plan (RMP) , as may be amended from time to time
consistent with this agreement.
2.16 "Final Map(s)" means any final subdivision map for
all or any portion of the Property other than the Superblock Final
Map ("A" Maps).
2.17 "Future Discretionary Approvals" means all permits
and approvals by the City granted after the effective date and
excluding existing Project Approvals, including, but not limited
to: (i) grading permits; (ii) site plan reviews; (iii) design
guidelines and reviews; (i v) precise plan reviews; (v) subdivisions
of the Property or re-subdivisions of the Property previously
subdivided pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; (vi) conditional
use permits; (vii) variances; (viii) encroachment permits;
(ix) sectional Planning Area plans; (x) all other reviews, permits,
and approvals of any type which may be required from time to time
to authorize public or private on- or off-site facilities which are
a part of the Project.
2.18 "Planning commission" means the Planning commission
of the city of Chula vista.
2.19 "Preserve Conveyance Plan" means a plan that sets
forth policies and identifies land to be transferred and/or fees to
be paid to insure the orderly conveyance of the otay Ranch land to
the Preserve Owner Manager. The purpose of the plan is to fulfill
the obligations to convey resource sensitive land, per the criteria
contained in the phase I and II Resource Management Plans and to
mitigate environmental impacts of the otay Ranch Project.
2.20 "Public Facility" or "Public Facilities" means those
public facilities described in the otay Ranch Facility
Implementation Plan.
~
/01'.//)
,---- /L-"
2.20.1 "SPA One Plan" means The otay Ranch
sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan approved by the City of
Chu1a vista on June 4, 1996, including the Planned community
District Regulations, Overall Design Plan, Village Design
Plan, Public Facilities Finance Plan, Parks, Recreation, Open
Space and Trails Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Phase 2
Resource Management Plan, Non-renewable Energy Conservation
Plan, Ranch-wide Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable
Housing Plan, and Geotechnical Report.
2.21 "Subdivision Map Act" means the
Subdivision Map Act, Government Code section 66410,
its amendments as may from time to time be adopted.
California
et seq., and
2.22 "Substantial Compliance" means that the party
charged with the performance of a covenant herein has sufficiently
followed the terms of this Agreement so as to carry out the intent
of the parties in entering into this Agreement.
2.23 "Threshold" means the facility thresholds set forth
in the city's Municipal Code Section 19.19.040.
3. Term. This Agreement shall become effective as a
development agreement upon the effective date of the Annexation
("the Effective Date"); provided, however, that if the Annexation
does not occur on or before January 1, 1997, this Agreement shall
be null and void. Any of the foregoing to the contrary notwith-
standing, from the date of first reading of the ordinance approving
this Agreement, and unless or until this Agreement becomes null and
void, Owner shall be bound by the terms of Paragraph 4. The Term
of this Agreement for purposes other than paragraph 4 shall begin
upon the Effective Date, and shall continue for a period of twenty
(20) years ("the Term") .
The term shall also be extended for any period of time during which
issuance of building permits to Developer is suspended for any
reason other than the default of Developer, and for a period of
time equal to the period of time during which any action by the
City or court action limits the processing of future discretionary
approvals, issuance of building permits or any other development of
the property consistent with this Agreement.
4. Owner Consent to Annexation. Owner hereby consents to
and shall cooperate with the applications of city to declare that
the land depicted in Exhibit B Q is within City's sphere of
influence and to annex the land depicted in Exhibit B Q to the
city; provided, however, that Owner may withdraw such consent and
withhold further cooperation if the city, prior to the Effective
Date, adopts rules, regulations, ordinances, policies, conditions,
environmental regulations, phasing controls, exactions, entitle-
ments, assessments or fees applicable to and governing development
of the Property which are inconsistent with, or render impractical
development of the Property according to, the Development Plan.
~. /_3 ~//
5. Vested Riqhts. Notwi thstanding any future action or
inaction of the city during the term of this Agreement, whether
such action is by ordinance, resolution or policy of the City,
Owner and Developer shall have a vested right, provided however the
developer is not in default of its obliqations under this Aqree-
ment. and except as may be otherwise provided in this section 5, to
construct the project in accordance with:
5.1 Existing Project Approvals.
5.2 Development of Propertv. The development of the
property will be governed by this Agreement and Existing project
Approvals and such development shall comply and be governed by all
rules, regulations, policies, resolutions, ordinances, and
standards in effect as of the Effective Date subject to the
provisions of section 5.2.1 below. The city shall retain its
discretionary authority as to Future Discretionary Approvals,
provided however, such Future Discretionary Approvals shall be
regulated by the Existing project Approvals, this Agreement, and
city rules, regulations, standards, ordinances, resolutions and
policies in effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement and
subject to section 5.2.1.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city may make such changes to
the city's Growth Management Ordinance applicable to the project as
are reasonable and consistent with the purpose and intent of the
existing Growth Management Ordinance and which are generally
applicable to all private projects citywide or east of 1-805 or
within a specific benefit, fee or reimbursement district created
pursuant to the California Government Code.
5.2.1 New or Amended Rules. Requlations.
policies. standards. Ordinances and Resolutions. The city may
apply to the Project, including Future Discretionary Approv-
als, new or amended rules, laws, regulations, policies,
ordinances, resolutions and standards generally applicable to
all private projects east of 1-805 or within a specific
benefit fee or reimbursement district created pursuant to the
California Government Code. The application of such new
rules, or amended laws, regulations, resolutions, policies,
ordinances and standards will not unreasonably prevent or
unreasonably delay development of the Property to the uses,
densities or intensities of development specified herein or as
authorized by the Existing Project Approvals. The city may
also apply changes in City laws, regulations, ordinances,
standards or policies specif ically mandated by changes in
state or federal law in compliance with section 13.3 herein.
5.2.2 Developer may elect with City's consent,
to have applied to the project any rules, regulations,
policies, ordinances or standards enacted after the date of
this Agreement. Such an election has to be made in a manner
consistent with section 5.2 of this Agreement.
7 /)~~?/;:2
5.2.3 Modifications to Existinq proiect Approv-
als. It is contemplated by the parties to this Agreement that
the city and Developer may mutually seek and agree to modifi-
cations to the Existing project Approvals. Such modifications
are contemplated as within the scope of this Agreement, and
shall, upon written acceptance by all parties, constitute for
all purposes an Existing Project Approval. The parties agree
that any such modifications may not constitute an amendment to
this Agreement nor require an amendment to the Agreement.
5.2.4 Future Discretionary Approvals. It is
contemplated by the parties to this Agreement that the City
and Developer may agree to Future Discretionary Approvals. The
parties agree that any such Future Approvals may not consti-
tute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an amendment
to the Agreement. Developer aqrees to reasonablv cooperate
with any amendments to Existinq and Future Discretionary
Approvals as mav be requested bv the citv from time to time.
5.3 Dedication and Reservation of Land for Public
Purposes. Except as expressly required by this Agreement or the
Existing Project Approvals and Future Discretionary Approvals
(excepting dedications required within the boundaries of any parcel
created by the subsequent subdivision of the Property as required
by the Subdivision Map Act), no dedication or reservation of real
property within or outside the Property shall be required by city
or Developer in conjunction with the Project. Any dedications and
reservations of land imposed shall be in accordance with section
7.2 and section 7.8 herein.
5.4 Time for Construction and Completion of Proiect.
Because the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction
Company v. city of Camarillo (1984) 27 Cal.3d 465, that the failure
of the parties to provide for the timing of development resulted in
a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to
prevail over such parties' Agreement, it is the intention of the
parties to this Agreement to cure that deficiency by specifically
acknowledging that timing and phasing of development is completely
and exclusively governed by the Existing Project Approvals,
including the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance. The purpose
of the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance is to "control the
timing and location of development by tying the pace of development
to the provision of public facilities and improvements to conform
to the city's threshold standards." (Municipal Code section
19.09.010A.7) The findings in support of the Growth Management
Ordinance conclude that the ordinance "does not affect the number
of houses which may be built." (Municipal Code section
19.09.010B.3) Therefore, the parties acknowledge that the Chula
vista Growth Management Ordinance completely occupies the topic of
development timing and phasing and expressly precludes the adoption
of housing caps, urban reserves or any other means by which the
rate of development may be controlled or regulated. The city
agrees that the Developer shall be entitled to, apply for and
receive all permits necessary for the development of property,
7/~'7//7
consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance, Existing Project
Approvals, Future Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement.
5.5 Benefit of Vestinq. Nothing in this Agreement will
be construed as limiting or impairing Developer's vested right, if
any, to proceed with the development and use of the Property
pursuant to the Federal and state Constitutions, and pursuant to
statutory and decisional law.
5.6 vestinq of Entitlements. All rights conferred by
this Agreement vest with the Effective Date hereof. The approval
of Future Discretionary approvals shall not be deemed to limit
Developer's rights authorized by this Agreement, and once such
approvals are obtained they shall be vested to the same extent as
the Existing Project Approvals.
6. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
6.1 processinq of Future Discretionarv Approvals. city
will accept and diligently process development applications and
requests for Future Discretionary Approvals, or other entitlements
with respect to the development and use of the property, provided
said applications and requests are in accordance with this
Agreement. city costs for processing work related to the Project,
including hiring of additional city personnel and/or the retaining
of professional consultants, will be reimbursed to City by
Developer.
6.2 Lenqth of Validity of Tentative Subdivision Maps.
Government Code section 66452.6 provides that tentative subdivision
map(s) may remain valid for a length up to the term of a Develop-
ment Agreement. The City agrees that tentative subdivision maps
for the Property shall be for a term of six (6) years and may be
extended by the city Council for a period of time not to exceed a
total of twenty (20) years and in no event beyond the term of this
Agreement.
6.3 Pre-Final Map Development. If Developer desires to
do certain work on the Property after approval of a tentative map
(for example, grading) prior to the recordation of a final map, it
may do so by obtaining a grading and/or other required approvals
from the city which are authorized by the city prior to recordation
of a final map. The permit may be approved or denied bY the city
in accordance with the city's Municipal Code, requlations and
policies and provided Developer is in compliance with this
Aqreement and with the terms of all Existinq and Future Discretion-
ary Approvals. In addition. the Developer shall be required to
Cuch permit shall be iSDued to Developer, or its contractor, upen
Developer'D application, approval, and provided Developer posts a
bond or other reasonably adequate security required by city in an
amount determined by the city to assure the rehabilitation of the
land if the applicable final map does not record.
6.4 Final Maps.
-1~ .". IU
;---- jy/ /
6.4.1 "A" Maps and "B" Maps. H Developer shall
so elects, the City shall accept and process a master subdivi-
sion or parcel map ("A" Map) for each Villaqe showing "Super
Block" lots and backbone street dedications. "super Block"
lots shall be consistent with the GDP and subsequent Sectional
Plan Area plans, and shall not subdivide land into individual
single-family lots. All "super Blocks" created shall have
access to dedicated public streets. The City shall not
require improvement plans in order to record a final map for
any "A" Map lots, but the city shall require boneiing for tho
completion of bac],bonc facilities prior to recordiHg in aH
amouHt to be determined by the City. Following the approval
by city of any final map for an "A" Map lot and its recorda-
tion, Developer may convey the "Super Block" lot. The buyer
of a "Super Block" lot shall then process final improvement
plans and grading plans and a final map ("B" Map) for each
"Super Block" lot which the city shall process if such
documents are in compliance with the City's Municipal Code,
standard policies. and the applicable tentative map. The "B"
Maps shall be in substantial conformance with the related
approved "A" Map. In the instance of the mUlti-family
dwelling unit areas, a separate tentative subdivision map may
be submitted to the City and the "B" Map(s) for these areas
may be submitted to the City after the city Planning
commission approves said tentative subdivision map.
6.4.2 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in
Name of Builder or Third Partv. Developer may, if it so
elects, convey to a Builder or third party any "super block"
lot(s) shown on the recorded Superblock Final Map. In such
case, the Builder or third party will (i) process any neces-
sary final improvement and grading plans and a final map for
each such "super block" lot ("B" map), which map City shall
accept and process if such map is in compliance with the
City's Municipal Code. standard policies, the applicable
tentative map, and the provisions of 7.1 of this Aqreement if
applicable as subsequent phases in a multi-phase project, (ii)
enter into a subdivision improvement agreement with City with
respect to the subdivision improvements which are required for
such super block lot, and (iii) provide security and insurance
satisfactory to city for the completion of the subdivision
improvements, (iv) aqree. in such case. with the City'S
consent to comply with the obliqations set forth in 7.1.
6.4.3 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in
Developer's Name; Transfer of Obliqations Under Subdivision
Improvement Aqreement (s) . If Developer so elects, it may
defer the conveyance of any super block lot to a Builder or
third party until after the final map of such super block lot
has been recorded. If Developer elects to proceed in this
manner, it will enter into city's standard subdivision
improvement agreement(s) with City for the improvements
required as a condition to the approval of such map(s). upon
sale to a Builder or third party, if such Builder or third
party assumes Developer's obligations with the City's consent
7 ,/3 .-/----~----
under the improvement agreement and provides its own security
and insurance for the completion of the subdivision improve-
ments satisfactory to the City and as approyed by the City,
Developer shall be released from liability under the SUbdivi-
sion improvement agreement(s) and Developer'S security shall
be released.
6.4.4 Transfer of Riqhts and Obliqations of
Development. Whenever Developer conveys a portion of the
Property, the rights and obligations of this Agreement shall
transfer in accordance with Section 15 herein.
7. DEVELOPER'S OBLIGATIONS.
7.1 Condition to Developer's Obliqations to Dedicate. Fund or
Construct PUblic Facilities. Developer agrees to develop or
provide the pUblic improvements, facilities, dedications, or
reservations of land and satisfy other exactions conditioning the
development of the Property which are set forth hereinbelow. In
addition to anv other obliqations the Developer may have,
Developer as its sole and separate responsibility, covenants and
aqrees to provide or finance the cost of backbone facilities as
identified on the appropriate Tentative Map and required by any
final map (includinq "B" Maps). This requirement may be satisfied
throuqh the construction or financinq of said facilities or with
the City'S approval of any of the followinq: the establishment of
a reimbursement mechanism. a development impact fee proqram, an
assessment mechanism, or other equitable facility financinq proqram
within the City's discretion. This requirement shall be deemed
satisfied in the event that the Builder(s) of a "B" Map expressly
assume the obliqations with the consent of the city to provide said
backbone facilities. For purposes of Tentative Map No.
Developer shall provide, prior to the approval of the first final
"B" map, adequate security as determined by the city Enqineer for
the construction of those certain backbone facilities set forth in
the conditions of approval for said tentative map. Developer
acknowledqes that as to any future tentative maps, Developer may be
required by city to provide such security at various times durinq
the development process includinq prior to the first final "A" map
in accordance with City's ordinances, policies or requlations. For
purposes of this Section. backbone facilities mean those facilities
such as water. sewer, storm drain and public streets necessary to
serve demands qenerated for the backbone facility beyond that of
anv sinqle "B" map. but are not included within a wider area City
development improvement fee proqram.
The obliqations of the Developer. pursuant to this Aqreement, are
conditioned upon: (i) the city not beinq in default of its
obliqations under this aqreement; and (ii) the city not unreason-
ably preventinq or unreasonably delayinq the development of the
property; and (iii) if the Aqreement has been suspended in response
to chanqes in state or federal law or due to said obliqations beinq
suspended pursuant to Section 13.2, said obliqations of Developer
shall be suspended for the same period of time.
~
/5'..//
"--- /y
7.2 Dedications and Reservations of Land for PublicPurpos-
es. The policies by which property will be required to be
reserved, dedicated or improved for public purposes are identified
in the Existing Project Approvals. A more precise delineation of
the property to be preserved, dedicated or improved for public
purposes shall occur as part of Future Discretionary Approvals,
consistent with development of propertv as set forth in section 5.2
herein.
7.2.1 Dedication of Land for SR 125. Developer
agrees to dedicate land for right-of-way purposes and property
owned by the Developer that is reasonably necessary for the
SR-125 configuration that is generally depicted in the SR-125
draft Environmental Impact Report/statement and as revised in
the Final Environmental Impact Report/statement to respond to
engineering, design, environmental and similar constraints.
The dedications shall be to the city or by an alternate method
acceptable to the City at such time as requested by the City.
City agrees that in the event city shall negotiate with
California Transportation Ventures (CTV) or other toll road
builder any participation or advantages to City that City
shall share such rights with subsequent owner/resident of the
property.
7.2.2 Landfill Nuisance Easements. Developer shall
grant to the County by July 1, 1996 "Landfill Nuisance
Easements" substantially in the form attached as Exhibit E.
The Easement shall cover all land which is within the Otay
Landfill Buffer Area of Villages 2, 3 and Planning Area 18B of
the Otay Ranch GDPP as shown on Exhibit E hereto.
In addition. Developer aorees to enter into subordination
aqreements. acceptable to the Countv. with all lienholders
havinq an interest in the Propertv to ensure that this
Aqreement has a priority position over all other liens. The
subordination aqreements shall be delivered to the city prior
to the second readinq of the Ordinance approvinq the Aqree-
ment. If there is no second readinq of this Aqreement. the
city shall return said subordination aqreements to the
Developer. If the County Board of Supervisors does not accept
or approve said easements, this Aqreement shall be automati-
cally terminated with neither party bearinq any liability
hereunder.
7.2.3 Preserve Convevance Plan. The Developer
shall comply with any existing or yet to be adopted Preserve
Conveyance Plan and convey property as set forth in such Plan.
7.3 Growth Manaqement Ordinance. Developer shall commit the
public facilities and City shall issue building permits as provided
in this section and in accordance with Existinq proiect Approvals
and Future Discretionary Approvals. The City shall have the right
to withhold the issuance of building permits any time after the
City reasonably determines a Threshold has been exceeded, unless
~. /")-- /7
and until the Developer has mitigated the deficiency in accordance
with the City's Growth Management Ordinance.
Developer agrees that building permits may be withheld where the
public facilities described in the Existing Project Approvals/
Future Discretionary Approvals required for a particular Threshold
have not been committed.
In the event a Threshold is not met and future building permit
issuance may be withheld, the notice provisions and procedures
contained in section 19.09 .100e of the Municipal Code will be
followed. In the event the issuance of building permits is
suspended pursuant to the provisions herein, such suspension shall
not constitute a breach of the terms of this Agreement by Develop-
er. Furthermore, any such suspension which is not caused by the
actions or omissions of the Developer, shall toll the term of this
Agreement as provided for in section 16.12 of this Agreement, and
suspend the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
7.3.1 Required Condemnation. The City and Developer
recognize that certain portions of the Resource Preserve and
of the public facilities identified in the Existing Project
Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals and required to
comply with a threshold are located on properties which
neither the Developer nor the City has, or will have, title to
or control of. The City shall identify such property or
properties and at the time of filing of the final map commence
timely negotiations or, where the property is wi thin the
City's jurisdiction, commence timely proceedings pursuant to
Title 7 (commencing with ~ 1230.010) of Part 3 of the Code of
civil Procedure to acquire an interest in the property or
properties. Developer's share of the cost involved in any
such acquisition shall be based on its proportionate share of
the public facility as defined in the Existing Project
Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals . Notwithstanding the
foregoing, Nnothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to
preclude the eity from requiring the Developer to pay the cost
of acquiring such off-site land. For that portion of the cost
beyond the Developer's fair share responsibility, the city
shall take all reasonable steps to establish a procedure
whereby the developer is reimbursed for such costs beyond its
fair share.
7.3.2 Information Reqardinq Thresholds. Upon
Developer's written requests of the City Manager, the City
will provide Developer with information regarding the current
status of a Threshold. Developer shall be responsible for any
staff costs incurred in providing said written response.
7.4 Improvements Required bv a Tentative Subdivi-
sion Map. As may be required pursuant to the terms of a tentative
subdivision map approval, it shall be the responsibility of
Developer to construct the improvements required by the a subdivi-
sion map. Where Developer is required to construct a pUblic
~ /7-/Y
improvement which has been identified as the responsibility of
another party or to provide public improvements of supplemental
size, capacity, number or length benefiting property not within the
tentative subdivision map, City shall process for consideration to
approve or denv in its sole discretion a reimbursement agreement to
the Developer in accordance with the City's Municipal Code and
Article 6 of Chapter 4 of the Subdivision Map Act, commencing with
Government Code section 66485, and Section 7.5, below. This does
not preclude the Developer or the citv from considerinq alternative
financinq mechanisms.
7.5 Facilities Which Are the Obliqations of Another
Party. or Are of Excessive Size. Capacity. Lenqth or Number.
Developer may offer to advance monies and/or construct public
improvements which are the responsibility of another land owner, or
outside the City's jurisdictional boundaries, or which are of
supplemental size, capacity, number or length for the benefit of
land not within the Property. City, where requesting such funding
or construction of oversized public improvements, shall consider
after a public hearing, contemporaneous with the imposition of the
obligation, the formation of a reimbursement district, assessment
district, facility benefit assessment, or reimbursement agreement
or other reimbursement mechanism.
7.6 Pioneerinq of Facilities. To the extent Developer
itself constructs (i.e., "Pioneers") any pUblic facilities or
public improvements which are covered by a DIF Program, Developer
shall be given a credit against DIFs otherwise payable, subject to
the City's Director of Public Works reasonable determination that
such costs are allowable under the applicable DIF Program. It is
specifically intended that Developer be given DIF credit for the
DIF Program improvements it makes. The fact that such improvements
may be financed by an assessment district or other financing
mechanism, shall not prevent DIF credit from being given to the
extent that such costs are allowed under the applicable DIF Program
7.7 Insurance.
insured for all insurance
Project as pertains to the
the Project.
Developer shall name City as additional
policies obtained by Developer for the
Developer's activities and operation on
7.8 Other Land Owners. Developer hereby agrees to
dedicate adequate rights-of-way within the boundaries of the
Property for other land owners to "Pioneer" public facilities on
the Property; provided, however, as follows: (i) dedications shall
be restricted to those reasonably necessary for the construction of
facilities identified in the City's adopted public facility plans;
(ii) this provision shall not be binding on the successors-in-
interest or assignees of Developer following recordation of the
final "Super Block" or "A" Map; and (iii) the City shall use its
reasonable best efforts to obtain agreements similar to this
subsection from other developers and to obtain equitable reimburse-
ment for Developer for any excess dedications.
~ /3"-i}
7.9 Construction of East-West Access. Pursuant to
city's requirements, Developer is required to pay Transportation
Development Fees (TDIF) for a variety of purposes including
construction of east-west arterial access through the Property
connecting to 1-805. Alternatively, the Developer may be required
to actually construct all or portions of such access if, at the
time of need, the TDIF fund does not contain sufficient revenues to
finance the construction of the needed facilities. Such east-west
arterial access from SPA One to 1-805 could occur on either East
Orange Avenue or on East Palomar Street. It is not now possible to
determine with certainty when it will be necessary to actually
construct the arterials in order to comply with the threshold
requirements because the rate and location of future development is
unknown. The total cost and length of the arterial, which might be
constructed by the Developer, are unknown at this time because it
cannot be determined if and when development west of the property
(Sunbow) will construct the Western portion of the arterials. Such
uncertainty makes it difficult to plan and finance the orderly
development of the property and needed on-site and off-site
facili ties. To provide greater certainty as to the timing and
construction of east-west arterial access, the City agrees to
reasonably consider in good faith a traffic capacity agreement with
Developer which would reserve traffic capacity for all or part of
SPA One in exchange for Developer's agreement to pioneer all or
part of planned east-west access to SPA One.
7.10 Assurances of Compliance. Owner acknowledqes that
the citv is not reGuired to and will not take anv action on anv of
Owner's applications for Future Discretionary Approvals under this
AGreement. or any modifications or amendments thereof. until and
unless the city ManaGer determines that the Owner is not in default
of its obliGations under this AGreement includinG but not limited
to those set forth in section 7.11 and 14.
7.11 Complete Construction. Developer/Builder or any
third party aGree to diliGently complete construction once a
buildinG permit has been issued for Property which is covered by
this AGreement. Should construction stop once the buildinG permits
have been issued by the city. which the city in its sole discretion
determines has created a nuisance or fire or safety hazard. the
Developer aGrees to take such steps necessary to cure the nuisance
or hazard. Should Developer fail to do so to the City's satisfac-
tion. the city may take what steps it deems necessary to cure the
nuisance or hazard at Developer's sole cost and expense.
8. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
8.1 ExistinG Development Impact Fee ProGram Payments.
Developer shall pay to the City a DIF, or construct improvements in
lieu of payment, for improvements which are conditions of a
tentative subdivision map upon the issuance of building permits(s),
or at a later time as specified by City ordinance, the Subdivision
Map Act, or Public Facility Financing Plan (PFFP). The DIF will be
in the amount in effect at the time payment is made and may only be
increased pursuant to section 8.6 herein.
~ /~J-:~'
8.2 Other Undeveloped Properties. The City will use its
reasonable best efforts to impose and collect, or cause the
imposition and collection of, the same DIF program on all the
undeveloped real properties which benefit from the provision of the
public facility through the DIF program, or provided as a condition
of Project Approvals.
8.3 Use of Development Impact Fee Proqram. The DIF
amounts paid to the City by Developer and others with respect to
the Area of Benefit shall be placed by the city in a capital
facility fund account established pursuant to California Government
Code sections 66000-66009. The City shall expend such funds only
for the Projects described in the adopted fee program as may be
modified from time to time. The city will use its reasonable best
efforts to cause such Projects to be completed as soon as practica-
ble; however, the City shall not be Obligated to use its general
funds for such Projects.
8.4 withholdinq of Permits. Developer agrees that City
shall have the right to withhold issuance of the building permit
for any structure or improvement on the Property unless and until
the DIF is paid for such structure or improvement.
8.5 Development Impact Fee Credit. Upon the completion
and acceptance by the City of any public facility, the city shall
immediately credit Developer with the appropriate amount of cash
credits (IEDUs") as determined by Developer and city. However, if
the improvements are paid for through an Assessment District, the
City shall credit the Developer with the appropriate number of
Equivalent Dwelling unit Credits (EDU's). Developer shall be
entitled to apply any and all credits accrued pursuant to this
subsection toward the required payment of future DIF for any phase,
stage or increment of development of the Project.
8.6 Modification of Development Impact Fees. The
parties recognize that from time to time during the duration of the
Agreement it will be necessary for the City to update and modify
its DIF fees. Such reasonable modifications are contemplated by
the city and the Developer and shall not constitute a modification
to the Agreement so long as: (i) the modification incorporates the
reasonable costs of providing facilities identified in the Existing
or Future Project Approvals; (ii) are based upon methodologies in
substantial compliance with the methodology contained in the
existing DIF programs; or other methodology approved by the city
council following a public hearing; (iii) complies with the
provisions of Government Code sections 66000-66009.
8.7 Standards for Financinq Obliqations of Owner. In
connection with the development of the Property, the following
standards regarding the financing of public improvements shall
apply:
8.7.1 Owner shall participate in the DIF Program
for the Otay Valley Parcel with other owners in proportion to
the total dwelling units or equivalent dwelling units allowed
7 J3.~;2/
on the Property as compared with the total of such units
allowed on properties in that particular DIF or by some other
equitable methodology decided by the City Council.
8.7.2 The city shall diligently pursue the
requirements that the Eastern Territories' DIF requires
offsite third parties and adjacent jurisdictions to bear their
fair share of all Otay River Valley crossings.
9. CITY OBLIGATIONS.
9.1 Urban Infrastructure. To the extent it is within
the authority and ability of the City to provide, city shall
accommodate urban infrastructure to the project, consistent with
Existing Project Approvals. Where it is necessary to utilize City
property to provide urban infrastructure consistent with the
Existing proj ect Approvals, the City agrees to make such land
available for such uses, provided that the City if it so chooses is
compensated at fair market value for the property. To the extent
that the provision of urban infrastructure is within the authority
of another public or quasi-public agency or utility, the City
agrees to fully cooperate with such agency or agencies to accommo-
date the urban infrastructure, consistent with Existing Project
Approvals. Urban infrastructure shall include, but not be limited
to gas, electricity, telephone, cable and facilities identified in
the Otay Ranch Facility Implementation Plan.
9.2 Sewer Capacitv. The City agrees to provide adequate
sewer capacity for the project, upon the payment of ordinary and
necessary sewer connection, capacity and/or service fees.
9.3 Nuisance Easement. The City shall reasonably
consider with proper environmental review a request to amend the
Otay Ranch GDP to relocate, wi thin the property, the land uses
affected by the execution of a "nuisance easement" pursuant to the
Otay Ranch Landfill Agreement, (dated May 15, 1996). This GDP
amendment shall be processed prior to or concurrent with the GDP
amendment covering the landfill buffer area required by the
Landfill Agreement. The amendment shall be deemed vested to the
same extent as Existing Project Approvals and shall not require or
constitute an amendment to this Agreement. The Developer agrees to
pay the reasonable City cost for processing the amendments.
10. ANNUAL REVIEW.
10.1 city and Owner Responsibilities. City will, at
least every twelve (12) months during the Term of this Agreement,
pursuant to California Government Code ~65865.1, review the extent
of good faith substantial compliance by Owner with the terms of
this Agreement. Pursuant to California Government Code section
65865.1, as amended, Owner shall have the duty to demonstrate by
substantial evidence its good faith compliance with the terms of
this Agreement at the periodic review. Either City or Owner may
address any requirement of the Agreement during the review.
T
/0__ J-)
/ ".,) (7- oL-,
10.2 Evidence. The parties recognize that this Agreement
and the documents incorporated herein could be deemed to contain
hundreds of requirements and that evidence of each and every
requirement would be a wasteful exercise of the parties' resources.
Accordingly, Developer shall be deemed to have satisfied its good
faith compliance when it presents evidence of substantial com-
pliance with the major provisions of this Agreement. Generalized
evidence or statements shall be accepted in the absence of any
evidence that such evidence is untrue.
10.3 Review Letter. If Owner is found to be in com-
pliance with this Agreement after the annual review, city shall,
within forty-five (45) days after Owner's written request, issue a
review letter in recordable form to Owner ("Letter") stating that
based upon information known or made known to the Council, the city
Planning commission and/or the city Planning Director, this
Agreement remains in effect and Owner is not in default. Owner may
record the Letter in the Official Records of the County of San
Diego.
review at
conditions
by city or
10.4 Failure of Periodic Review. City's failure to
least annually Owner's compliance with the terms and
of this Agreement shall not constitute, or be asserted
Owner as, a breach of the Agreement.
11.
DEFAULT.
11.1 Events of Default. A default under this Agreement
shall be deemed to have occurred upon the happening of one or more
of the following events or conditions:
made
been
11. 1. 1
or furnished
false in any
A warranty, representation or statement
by Owner to City is false or proves to have
material respect when it was made.
11.1.2 A finding and determination by City made
following a periodic review under the procedure provided for
in California Government Code section 65865.1 that upon the
basis of substantial evidence Owner has not complied in good
faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this
Agreement.
consider
submitted
11.1.3 City does not accept,
requested development permits
in accordance with the provisions
timely review, or
or entitlements
of this Agreement.
11.1.4 .'\ny other net or omiDDion by City or O",mer
"hich materially interfereD 'lith the termo of thiD .'\greement.
All remedies at law or in equity which are consistent with the
provisions of this Aqreement are available to city and Owner
to pursue in the event there is a breach provided. however.
neither partv shall have the remedy of monetary damaqes
aqainst the other except for an award of litiqation costs and
attornevs fees.
7 /..) -:.~.7
11.2 Procedure Upon Default.
11.2.1 Upon the occurrence of default by the
other party, City or Owner may terminate this Agreement after
providing the other party thirty (30) days written notice
specifying the nature of the alleged default and, when
appropriate, the manner in which said default may be satis-
factorily cured. After proper notice and expiration of said
thirty (30) day cure period without cure, this Agreement may
be terminated. In the event that city's or Owner's default is
not subject to cure within the thirty (30) day period, City or
Owner shall be deemed not to remain in default in the event
that City or Owner commences to cure within such thirty (30)
day period and diligently prosecutes such cure to completion.
Failure or delay in giving notice of any default shall not
constitute a waiver of any default, nor shall it change the
time of default. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, City reserves the right to formulate and propose to
Owner options for curing any defaults under this Agreement for
which a cure is not specified in this Agreement.
11.2.2 ci ty does not waive any claim of defect in
performance by Owner if, on periodic review, City does not
propose to modify or terminate this Agreement.
11.2.3 Subject to Paragraph 16.12 of this
Agreement, the failure of a third person shall not excuse a
party's nonperformance under this agreement.
11.2.4 All other remedies at law or in equity
which are consistent with the provisions of this Agreement are
available to City and Owner to pursue in the event there is a
breach.
12. ENCUMBRANCES AND RELEASES ON PROPERTY.
12.1 Discretion to Encumber. This Agreement shall not
prevent or limit Owner in any manner at Owner's sole discretion,
from encumbering the Property, or any portion of the Property, or
any improvement on the Property, by any mortgage, deed of trust, or
other security device securing financing with respect to the
Property or its improvement.
12.2 Mortqaqee Riqhts and Obliqations. The mortgagee of
a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust encumbering the
Property, or any part thereof, and their successors and assigns
shall, upon written request to City, be entitled to receive from
City written notification of any default by Owner of the
performance of Owner's obligations under the Agreement which has
not been cured within thirty (30) days following the date of
default.
12.3 Releases. City agrees that upon written request of
Owner and payment of all fees and performance of the requirements
and conditions required of Owner by this Agreement with respect to
7/]..;;Y
the Property, or any portion thereof, City may execute and deliver
to Owner appropriate release(s) of further obligations imposed by
this Agreement in form and substance acceptable to the San Diego
County Recorder and title insurance company, if any, or as may
otherwise be necessary to effect the release. city Manager shall
not unreasonably withhold approval of such release(s) .
12.4 Obliqation to Modifv. City acknowledges that the
lenders providing financing for the Project may require certain
modifications to this Agreement and city agrees, upon request from
time to time, to meet with Owner and/or representatives of such
lenders to negotiate in good faith any such requirement for
modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to
any such requested modification.
12.5 Subordination. Developer aqrees to enter into
subordination aqreements with all lenders havinq a lien on the
Propertv to ensure that the provisions of this Aqreement bind such
lienholders should they take title to all or part of the property
throuqh quit claim deed, sale, foreclosure or anv other means of
transfer of property. As a condition precedent to obtaininq the
benefits that accrue to the Deyeloper or the Property under this
Aqreement, this Aqreement by and throuqh said subordination
aqreements shall be prior and superior to such liens on said
Property. Deyeloper shall deliver to the city the fully executed
subordination agreements for the Property within SPA One, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney and suitable for recording, prior
to approval of the first final map ("A" Map) for SPA One.
Developer shall deliyer to the city a fully executed subordination
aqreement for Property within subsequentlY approved SPA plans in a
form acceptable to the city attorney on or before approval of each
SPA Plan for said Property.
13. MODIFICATION OR SUSPENSION.
13.1 Modification to Aqreement by Mutual Consent. This
Agreement may be modified, from time to time, by the mutual consent
of the parties only in the same manner as its adoption by an
ordinance as set forth in California Government Code sections
65867, 65867.5 and 65868. The term, "this Agreement" as used in
this Agreement, will include any such modification properly
approved and executed.
13.2 Unforeseen Health or Safety Circumstances. If, as
a result of facts, events, or circumstances presently unknown,
unforeseeable, and which could not have been known to the parties
prior to the commencement of this Agreement, city finds that
failure to suspend this Agreement would pose an place the residents
of City in a Devere nnd immedinte emergency to their immediate
threat to the health or safety of the city's residents or the city.
The followinq shall occur:
13.2.1 Notification of Unforeseen Circumstances.
Notify Developer of (i) city's determination; and (ii) the
y )] --.~ t;~
reasons for City's determination, and all facts upon which
such reasons are based;
13.2.2 Notice of Hearinq. Notify Developer in
writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date, of the
date, time and place of the hearing and forward to Developer
a minimum of ten (10) days prior to the hearings described in
Section 13.2.3, all documents related to such determination
and reasons therefor; and
13.2.3 Hearinq. Hold a hearing on the deter-
mination, at which hearing Developer will have the right to
address the City Council. At the conclusion of said hearing,
city may take action to suspend this Agreement as provided
herein. The City may suspend this Agreement if, at the
conclusion of said hearing, based upon the evidence presented
by the parties, the City finds failure to suspend would place
the reDidento of the city in a Devere and immediate emergency
to their health or safety. pose an immediate threat to the
health or safety of the citv's residents or the citv.
13.3 Chanqe in state or Federal Law or Requlations. If
any state or federal law or regulation enacted during the Term of
this Agreement, or the action or inaction of any other affected
governmental jurisdiction, precludes compliance with one or more
provisions of this Agreement, or requires changes in plans, maps,
or permits approved by City, the parties will act pursuant to
Sections 13.3.1 and 13.3.2, below.
13.3.1 Notice; Meetinq. The party first becoming
aware of such enactment or action or inaction will provide the
other party(ies) with written notice of such state or federal
law or regulation and provide a copy of such law or regulation
and a statement regarding its conflict with the provisions of
this Agreement. The parties will promptly meet and confer in
a good faith and reasonable attempt to modify or suspend this
Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regula-
tion.
13.3.2 Hearinq. If an agreed upon modification
or suspension would not require an amendment to this Agree-
ment, no hearing shall be held. Otherwise, the matter of such
federal or state law or regulation will be scheduled for
hearing before the City. Fifteen (15) days' written notice of
such hearing shall be provided to Developer, and the city, at
such hearing, will determine and issue findings on the
modification or suspension which is required by such federal
or state law or regulation. Developer, at the hearing, shall
have the right to offer testimony and other evidence. If the
parties fail to agree after said hearing, the matter may be
submitted to mediation pursuant to subsection 13.3.3, below.
Any modification or suspension shall be taken by the affirma-
tive vote of not less than a majority of the authorized voting
members of the city. Any suspension or modification may be
subject to judicial review in conformance with subsection
16.19 of this Agreement.
7 /7-:2?
13.3.3 Mediation of Disputes. In the event the
dispute between the parties with respect to the provisions of
this paragraph has not been resolved to the satisfaction of
both parties following the City hearing required by subsection
13.3.2, the matter shall be submitted to mediation prior to
the filing of any legal action by any party. The mediation
will be conducted by the San Diego Mediation Center; if San
Diego Mediation Center is unable to conduct the mediation, the
parties shall submit the dispute for mediation to the Judicial
Arbitration and Mediation Service or similar organization and
make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute. The cost of
any such mediation shall be divided equally between the
Developer and City.
13.4 Natural Communities Conservation Act (NCCP1. The
parties recognize that Developer and the City are individually
negotiating agreements with the United states Fish and wildlife
Service ("USF&W") and the California Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to the ongoing regional effort to implement the Natural
Communities Conservation Act ("NCCP"), locally proposed to be
implemented through the Multi-Species Conservation Program
("MSCP"). The parties further recognize that implementation of the
agreements may necessitate modification to the Existing Project
Approvals. The City agrees to utilize its best efforts to
implement these agreements, once executed, through the timely
processing of modifications to the Existing Project Approvals as
such modifications apply to Developer's property. The Developer
agrees to pay the reasonable City cost for processing work related
to the modifications. Once such modifications are obtained they
shall be vested to the same extent as Existing Project Approvals.
Such modifications shall be substantially similar to the provisions
contained in Exhibit "F", the May 17, 1996 Administrative draft of
the City of Chula vista SubArea Plan for the Multi-species
Conservation Program, except for the proposed deletion of the
Maritime Succulent Scrub restoration requirement [Section 3(b) of
the SubArea Plan (page 27)).
14. DISTRICTS. PUBLIC FINANCING MECHANISMS.
This Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals recognize
that assessment districts, community facility districts, or other
public financing mechanisms, may be necessary to finance the cost
of public improvements borne by this Project. If Developer,
pursuant to the Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary
Approvals, is required by the city to install improvements through
the use of assessment districts, community facility di3tricto, or
other public financing mechanisms, the City shall initiate and take
final action to approve or deny conclude appropriate proceedings
for the formation of such financing district or funding mechanism,
under applicable lawsL er ordinances. or policies. Developer may
request that the City. but the citv is not obliqated to. utilize
any other financing methods which may become available under City
laws or ordinances. All costs associated with the consideration
and formation of such financing districts or funding mechanisms
shall be paid by Developer subject to reimbursement, as may be
~ )/') --02 }
legally authorized out of the proceeds of any financing district or
funding mechanism.
Developer shall complv with the terms of any assessment
districts or other financinq mechanisms so approved by the city for
Property covered bY this Aqreement and shall make timely payments
as required by said financinq mechanism. The city retains its
riqhts to take any action it deems reasonably appropriate to
quarantee payment.
15. ASSIGNMENT AND DELEGATION.
15.1 Assiqnment. Owner shall have the right to transfer
or assign its interest in the Property, in whole or in part, to any
persons, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any
time during the Term of this Agreement without the consent of city.
Owner also shall have the right to assign or transfer all or any
portion of its interest or rights under this Agreement to third
parties acquiring an interest or estate in the Property at any time
during the Term of this Agreement without the consent of city.
15.2 Deleqation. In addition, Owner shall have the
right to delegate or transfer its obligations under this Agreement
to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in the Property
provided the owner is in compliance with the terms of this
Aqreement and after receiving the prior written consent of the city
Manager, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, or
delayed, or conditioned. Provided. however. the city may deny such
release if the city determines that the performance of such
obliqation would be ieopardized by such transfer. Once the city
Manager has consented to a transfer, delivery to and acceptance by
the City Manager of an unqualified written assumption of Owner's
obligations under this Agreement by such transferee shall relieve
Owner of the obligations under this Agreement to the extent the
obligations have been expressly assumed by the transferee and as
approved bY the city. Such transferee shall not be entitled to
amend this Agreement without the written consent of the entity
that, as of the Effective Date, is Owner, which consent shall not
be unreasonably withheld, delayed, or conditioned. The entity that
is Owner as of the Effective Date, however, shall be entitled to
amend this Agreement without the written consent of such transfer-
ee.
16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
16.1 Bindinq Effect of Aqreement. Except to the extent
otherwise provided in this Agreement, the burdens of this Agreement
bind, and the benefits of this Agreement inure, to City's and
Owner's successors-in-interest and shall run with the land.
16.2 Relationship of city and Owner. The contractual
relationship between City and Owner arising out of this Agreement
~ /7-,;26
is one of independent contractor and not agency. This Agreement
does not create any third-party beneficiary rights.
16.3 Notices. All notices, demands, and correspondence
required or permitted by this Agreement shall be in writing and
delivered in person, or mailed by first-class or certified mail,
postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
If to City, to:
city of Chu1a Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attention: City Manager
If to Owner, to:
Jim Baldwin
Otay Ranch, L.P.
Newport Center Dr.,
Newport Beach, CA
suite 700
92660
with a Copy to:
Kim John Kilkenny
otay Ranch, L.P.
11975 EI Camino Real, suite 104
San Diego, CA 92130
City or Owner may change its address by giving notice in writing to
the other. Thereafter, notices, demands, and correspondence shall
be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notice shall be
deemed given upon personal delivery, or, if mailed, two (2)
business days following deposit in the united states mail.
16.4 Rules of Construction. In this Agreement, the use
of the singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes
the feminine; "shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive.
16.5 Entire Aqreement. waivers. and Recorded Statement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement
of City and Owner with respect to the matters set forth in this
Agreement. This Agreement supersedes all negotiations or previous
agreements between city and Owner respecting this Agreement. All
waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and
signed by the appropriate authorities of City and Owner. Upon the
completion of performance of this Agreement, or its revocation or
termination, a statement evidencing completion, revocation, or
termination signed by the appropriate agents of city shall be
recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California.
16.6 proiect as a Private Undertakinq. It is
specifically understood by city and Owner that (i) the Project is
a private development; (ii) city has no interest in or
responsibili ties for or duty to third parties concerning any
improvements to the Property until city accepts the improvements
pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement or in connection with
subdivision map approvals; and (iii) Owner shall have the full
power and exclusive control of the Property subject to the
obligations of Owner set forth in this Agreement.
-?~ ).' / ) <,'
/ > J ~ /
16.7 Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth
in Paragraph 1 of this Agreement are part of this Agreement.
16.8 Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for
convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain,
modify, construe, limit, amplify, or aid in the interpretation,
construction, or meaning of any of the provisions of this
Agreement.
Owner is
approval
ditioned.
16.9 Consent. Where the consent or approval of City or
required or necessary under this Agreement, the consent or
shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, or con-
16.10 Covenant of Cooperation.
cooperate and deal with each other in good
other in the performance of the provisions
City and Owner shall
faith, and assist each
of this Agreement.
16.11 Recordinq. The City Clerk shall cause a copy of
this Agreement to be recorded with the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, California, within ten (10) days
following the Effective Date.
16.12 Delay, Extension of Time for Performance. In
addition to any specific provision of this Agreement, performance
by either city or Owner of its obligations hereunder shall be
excused, and the Term of this Agreement and the Development Plan
extended, during any period of delay caused at any time by reason
of any event beyond the control of City or Owner which prevents or
delays and impacts city's or Owner's ability to perform obligations
under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, acts of God,
enactment of new conflicting federal or state laws or regulations
(example: listing of a species as threatened or endangered),
judicial actions such as the issuance of restraining orders and
injunctions, riots, strikes, or damage to work in process by reason
of fire, floods, earthquake, or other such casualties. If city or
Owner seeks excuse from performance, it shall provide written
notice of such delay to the other within thirty (30) days of the
commencement of such delay. If the delay or default is beyond the
control of city or Owner, and is excused, an extension of time for
such cause will be granted in writing for the period of the
enforced delay, or longer as may be mutually agreed upon.
16.13 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealinqs. No party
shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or
injuring the right of the other parties to receive the benefits of
this Agreement; each party shall refrain from doing anything which
would render its performance under this Agreement impossible; and
each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates
that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and
purposes of this Agreement.
16.14 Operatinq
the provisions of this
cooperation between City
Memorandum. The parties acknowledge that
Agreement require a close degree of
and Developer, and that the refinements
-210.,....---- /--, - -; //
~ _) _ C--
and further development of the Project may demonstrate that minor
changes are appropriate with respect to the details of performance
of the parties. The parties, therefore, retain a certain degree of
flexibility with respect to those items covered in general under
this Agreement. When and if the parties mutually find that minor
changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate, they may
effectuate changes or adjustments through operating memoranda
approved by the parties. For purposes of this section 16.14, the
City Manager, or his designee, shall have the authority to approve
the operating memoranda on behalf of City. No operating memoranda
shall require notice or hearing or constitute an amendment to this
Agreement.
16.15 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the
performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is
an element.
16.16 Amendment or Cancellation of Aqreement. This
Agreement may be amended from time to time or canceled by the
mutual consent of city and Owner only in the same manner as its
adoption, by an ordinance as set forth in California Government
Code section 65868, and shall be in a form suitable for recording
in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. The term
"Agreement" shall include any such amendment properly approved and
executed. City and Owner acknowledge that the provisions of this
Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between them, and
that minor or insubstantial changes to the Project and the
Development Plan may be required from time to time to accommodate
design changes, engineering changes, and other refinements.
Accordingly, changes to the Project and the Development Plan that
do not result in a change in use, an increase in density or
intensity of use, cause new or increased environmental impacts, or
violate any applicable health and safety regulations, may be
considered minor or insubstantial by the City Manager and made
without amending this Agreement.
16.17 Estoppel certif icate. wi thin 30 calendar days
following a written request by any of the parties, the other
parties to this Agreement shall execute and deliver to the
requesting party a statement certifying that (i) this Agreement is
unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been
modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and
effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such
modifications; (ii) there are no known current uncured defaults
under this Agreement, or specifying the dates and nature of any
such default; and (iii) any other reasonable information requested.
The failure to deliver such a statement within such time shall
constitute a conclusive presumption against the party which fails
to deliver such statement that this Agreement is in full force and
effect without modification, except as may be represented by the
requesting party, and that there are no uncured defaults in the
performance of the requesting party, except as may be represented
by the requesting party.
7'/ /]3/
16.18 Severabilitv. If any material provision of this
Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically
terminated unless within 15 days after such provision is held invalid
the party holding rights under the invalidated provision affirms the
balance of this Agreement in writing. This provision will not affect
the right of the parties to modify or suspend this Agreement by
mutual consent pursuant to Paragraph 12.4.
16.19 Institution of Leqal Proceedinq. In addition to any
other rights or remedies, any party may institute legal action to
cure, correct, or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or
agreements herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation
thereof; to recover damages for any default or to obtain any remedies
consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal actions
must be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of San Diego,
State of California.
16.20 Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If any party commences
litigation or other proceedings (including, without limitation,
arbitration) for the interpretation, reformation, enforcement, or
rescission of this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by
the court, will be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and
costs.
16.21 Hold Harmless. Developer agrees to and shall hold
City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives harmless
from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury,
including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from
the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of its
contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons
acting on Developer'S behalf which relate to the Project. Developer
agrees to and shall defend City and its officers, agents, employees
and representatives from actions for damage caused or alleged to have
been caused by reason of Developer'S activities in connection with
the Project. Developer agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, pay all
costs and provide a defense for city in any legal action filed in a
court of competent jurisdiction by a third party challenging the
validity of this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 16.21
shall not apply to the extent such damage, liability or claim is
caused by the intentional or negligent act or omission of City, its
officers, agents, employees or representatives.
~
"7 '7
/:;- j ,-L-
/
Dated this
day of
SIGNATURE PAGE TO PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
, 1996.
"CITY"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
Its:
Mavor
"OWNERlI
THE OTAY RANCH, L.P.
a California limited partnership,
by Sky Communities, Inc.
a California corporation,
its general partner
By:
James P. Baldwin, President
VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT
a California general partnership
By:
James P. Baldwin, President
I hereby approve the form and legality
Annexation Development Agreement this
1996.
of the foregoing Pre-
day of
Ann Moore
Interim City Attorney
City of Chula Vista
By:
/
......., '7.--;7
) j-<)
l'IO'v' 12 "35 0:::: 01PI'1 l,jESTBAY CAPITAL
F'.2/2
Village
DEVELOPMENT
Quality mc.,\'ftJr planm:a CfJm".umitic5 :;irw: 1974
November 12, 1996
The Honorable Shirley Horton
Council Members
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 4th Avenue
Chura Vista, CA 91910
RE: Otay Ranch SPA One, Tract 96-04
Dear Mayor Horton and Councilmembers:
Village Development requests that the Council continue the agenda items relating to Otay Ranch
SPA One, Tract 96-04 for one week. The additional time is needed to resolve a few remaining
outstanding issues with City staff, specifically the impact of Proposition 108 (if any), project,
phasing, and auto restricted areas and conditions,
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT
cQd
Vice President
KJKJash
cc John Goss
Ann Moore
Jerry Jarnriska
City Clerk
c:\ Windows\Kim\Tract964.Doe
lUKJASH lllI2I96
J L9751:.1C;>,rnlnt"JR~;).J, S\J.i(~ 1(!'1. S;lon Dil.:~c.', CA 9J.I:!O
Td. 6'9-1.~9-29H'. f),};. 6J9_~S?~36+
lJ J7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Itemq
Meeting Date 11/12/96
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: On Assessment District #93-01 for alley improvements east
of Second Avenue and south of "J" Street.
/J. Resolution J % 7"9~onfirming the Engineer's Report by
Engineer on the cost of construction and spread of assessments.
the City
SUBMITTED BY:
jJ Resolution /lfrCJ& adopting a Notice
assessments. ^,"J
Direot~ ofPubti, WOd"A\ r
City Manage~Cl b~. t~~
I
of Lien to levy and collect
REVIEWED BY:
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
The City Council accepted a petition signed by a majority of the property owners adjacent to the
alley east of Second A venue between "J" and Kearney Streets to form a special assessment district
for the construction of improvements to the alley. The City Council subsequently awarded the
contract to Fox Construction Company which completed the alley improvement project on October
30,1995. The City Council adopted Resolution # 18458 on October 15,1996 to accept filing of the
Engineer's report on the cost of construction and set the public hearing on the assessments for
November 12, 1996 at 6:00 P.M. The hearing allows Council to take testimony on the assessments.
After considering all testimony, Council may set the assessments to be levied on each parcel.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1) Open the hearing, take testimony, and close the hearing;
2) Adopt a resolution confirming the Engineer's Report by the City Engineer on the cost
of construction of the alley improvements and spead of assessments;
3) Adopt a resolution for Notice of Lien to levy and collect assessments.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
/1//
)L-/
Page 2, Item_I
Meeting Date 11/12/96
DISCUSSION:
On November 23, 1993 the City Council accepted a petition signed by the majority of the affected
property owners to form a special assessment district (1911 Block Act) for the construction of
improvements to the alley just to the east of Second Avenue and located between J Street and
Kearney Street. On May 16, 1995 Council held a public hearing and approved the formation of
Assessment District 93-01, (AD 93-01).
On July 25, 1995 Council awarded the contract for the alley improvements to Fox Construction. Fox
Construction Company completed the construction of alley improvements on October 30, 1995. A
fmal inspection was made, all work was found to be completed in accordance with the contract plans
and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The improvements have been
accepted by the City Manager.
On October 15, 1996, the City Council adopted Resolution 18458 which accepted the filing ofthe
Engineer's Report by the City Engineer on the cost of construction and setting November 12, 1996
at 6:00 P.M. as the date and time for a public hearing on the assessment district for the alley
improvements.
Staff has received, and the City has paid, all the contractual invoices for this project and completed
the accounting of the expenditures. If the assessments are approved by Council, the City will be
reimbursed $52,172 of the construction cost by the various property owners over a 10-year period.
Funds for this project, STL-220, were included in the FY95/96 budget.
The improvements were financed by the City and AD 93-01 was formed pursuant to the 1911 Block
Act to obtain reimbursement for the improvement and other miscellaneous costs in accordance with
Council Policy Number 505-01. The Act is a financing mechanism which authorizes local agencies
to impose assessments on benefiting properties to fund the construction of public improvements.
The property owners have an option of paying local assessments during the 30 day pay-off period
following confirmation of assessments. If the assessments are not paid during that time or are
deferred, the City will collect the unpaid balance in semiannual installments over a period often (10)
years at an interest rate of 7% per annum. Property owners may pay the balance of their assessments
at any time during the ten year repayment period without penalty. Although the original cost
estimate was approximately $60.86 per lineal foot of frontage, the final assessment is about $44.09
per lineal foot of frontage. Thus, the assessment is $2,204.90 for the six property owners with a 50'
frontage; $2,645.88 for six property owners with 60' frontage; up to the largest assessment of
$5,139.22 for 116.54' offrontage. The otherfour properties have frontages of91.55', 100', 100' &
115'. The Engineer's report includes a table with the proposed assessments for each property.
In response to property owner's concerns, the City Council approved Resolution # 17980 (attached),
establishing the criteria to qualify for deferral of the payment of their assessments to lessen the
financial impact and other financing options. Qualifying property owners who request deferred
//'2
Page 3, HemE
Meeting Date 11/12/96
payment and meet the criteria established by Council Resolution 17980 must enter into a deferral
agreement with the City. Staff will review deferral applications between the period of November
13 through December 12, 1996. Should any property owner within the district meet one of the
criteria provided in Resolution 17980, a deferral agreement will be prepared and brought before City
Council for approval. One ofthe following criteria must be meet in order to qualify for a deferral:
. Have an income of less than or equal to the HUD Very Low Income standards as contained
in the City's Master Fee Schedule.
. A demonstrated financial hardship approved by Council.
In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13 of the Improvement Act of 1911 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California any deferral of assessments shall be approved by a Council
Resolution.
NOTICING & FUTURE ACTIONS
ACTION
DATE
1.
Notice of Public Hearing to Property Owners mailed out
10/11/96
2. Council Meeting (tonight's agenda)
11/ 12/96
a). Public Hearing on Engineer's Report
b). Adopt Resolution Confirming Engineer's Report
c). Adopt Resolution for Notice of Lien
3.
File Assessment Diagram
a). City Clerk
b). County Recorder
11/13/96
4.
Deferral period for qualifying property owners begins
11/13/96
5.
Notice of Assessment & Begin 30 day pre-payment period
11/14/96
6.
End deferral period for qualifying property owners
12/12/96
7.
End 30 day Pre-payment period
12/13/96
8.
Council Meeting (for property owners qualifying for deferrals, if any)
a). Adopt Resolution approving deferral agreements
0l107fJ7
9.
Due Date of First Billing
CMOI97
) '/ -;3
Page 4, HemE
Meeting Date 11/12/96
All property owners within this assessment district of 17 parcels have been sent a copy of tonight's
City Council Agenda Statement, the Engineer's Report and attachments.
FISCAL IMP ACT:
The following table contains a breakdown of all costs associated with the project:
Costs for Alley
CIP # 600-6001-STL-220
Budgeted Contract Actual Funded
Amount Award Cost By
Construction $73,800 $53,108 $51,099 Assessment
District
*Miscellaneous $8,200 $5,392 $1,073 Assessment
(10% contingency) District
PROPERTY OWNERS' SHARE OF PROJECT $52,172 Assessment
COSTS District
**Staff $24,000 $24,000 $15,212 General Fund
Project Total $106,000 $82,500 $67,384 AD & GF
* Cost includes postage, advertising, blueprinting etc.
** Staff costs (A Y-091) includes engineering design and inspection costs. The property
owners share of the improvements excludes the contribution by the City for staff costs as
authorized by Council Policy #505-01.
As approved by the City Council, the City's General Fund has financed the up front cost of
constructing the improvements by appropriating $82,000 under CIP Project #STL-220 and budgeting
another $24,000 in in-kind staff contribution. . Through the assessment district formation process,
the City will be reimbursed the $52,172 construction costs encumbered with 7% interest per armum
over a period of ten (10) years through AD 93-01. City staff costs including engineering design,
inspection and district formation was approved as a $24,000 in kind contribution. Only $15,212 of
that amount was actually spent. Although $106,000 was budgeted for this project, the final cost was
only $67,384 (63.6%) of the fund total ($52,172 + $15,212). This was accomplished due to the
excellent construction bids received and reduced staff time needed to complete this project. There
J;j-t(
Page 5, Hemd
Meeting Date 11/12/96
is a savings of38,616 (36.4%) ($106,000 - $67,384) in unused appropriated funds for this project.
$29,828 was returned to the General Fund last Fiscal Year and the remaining $8,788 set aside for
staff time will not be spent.
In addition to the cost summarized above, the City will maintain the concrete alley improvements.
These maintenance costs will be minimal.
Attachments:
A. Engineer's Report
B. Map for AD 93-01
C. Resolution 18458
D. Resolution 17980
E. Resolution 17979
F. Resolution 17894
G. C1P Detail STL-220
M:\HOME\ENGTNEER\AGENDA \AD93-01.FXR
/tj~~
ATTACHMENT "A"
October 3, 1996
File No. 0725-10-AD93-01
AGENCY: City of Chula Vista
PROJECT: 1911 Block Act - Alley Improvements from "J" Street to Kearney Street between
Elm Avenue and Second Avenue
.TO: City Council, City of Chula Vista
SUBJECT: ENGINEER'S REPORT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER
27 OF THE "IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1911" AND SPECIFICALLY
SECTION 5882
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista, State of California, had initiated proceedings
pursuant to the provisions of Division 14, Part 2, Chapter 1 of the "Improvement Act of 1911",
and Chula Vista Municipal Code, Section 17.07 to pave an alley from J and Kearney Streets and
between Elm and Second Avenue. At the Council meeting of July 25, 1995, by Resolution
17919, a contract was awarded in the amount of $53,108.00 to the Fox Construction Company.
Said alley improvements have now been completed and the proposed assessments are stated
herein.
CHRONOLOGY:
November 23, 1993, Resolution 17316 accepted petition signed by majority of affected
property owners to form special assessment district.
March 28, 1995, Resolution 17849 approved boundary map for proposed boundaries of
AD 93-01.
March 28, 1995, Resolution 17850 ordering installation of improvements.
May 9 & 16, 1995, Public Hearings, Resolution 17894, on Resolution of Intention to
form special assessment district.
May 25, 1995, Resolution 17980 approved deferral of payments, established criteria for
deferrals and delegating authority to defer.
June 14, 1995, received eight bids for improvements.
July 25, 1995, Resolution 17979 accepting bids and awarding contract to Fox
Construction Co.
October 24, 1995, construction started.
November 10, 1995, construction completed.
December 6, 1995, Notice of Completion recorded.
February 7, 1996, City Manager accepted improvements.
/'1/;;
-1-
At"TI\CH-MEA)T A.
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Total Contract Cost
Incidental Expenses
Staff Cost
Construction Total
$51,099.00
$ 1,073.00(1)
$15,212.00(2)
$67,384.00
(1) Postage, advertising and blueprinting costs.
(2) Staff cost (A Y -091) from point of inception to 9/12/96 ($9,507.46 x 1. 6).
Total cost of project is $67,384.00.
Costs assigned to AD 93-01 is $52,172.00 (Contract cost + Incidental expenses).
ASSESSMENTS
Assessments = Total construction cost ($)/total frontage (ft) x frontage on alley (ft)
TABLE 1 - PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR AD 93-01
No. APN Name Frontage Proposed Estimated
(ft) Assessment(') Annual
payment(b)
1 573-351-03 Marrufo 115.00 $5,071.30 $722.16
2 573-351-04 Hirtzel 60.00 $2,645.88 $376.78
3 573-351-05 Huggins 60.00 $2,645.88 $376.78
4 573-351-06 Miller 60.00 $2,645.88 $376.78
5 573-351-07 Monge 60.00 $2,645.88 $376.78
6 573-351-08 Gilman 60.00 $2,645.88 $376.78
7 573-351-09 Iwashita 60.00 $2,645.88 $376.78
8 573-351-11 Vega 116.54 $5,139.22 $731. 82
9 573-351-13 Marrufo 100.00 $4,409.80 $627.96
10 573-351-16 Unger 50.00 $2,204.90 $313.98
11 573-351-17 Murphy 50.00 $2,204.90 $313.98
12 573-351-18 Hall 50.00 $2,204.90 $313.98
13 573-351-19 Norton 50.00 $2,204.90 $313.98
14 573-351-20 Artische 50.00 $2,204.90 $313.98
15 573-351-21 Janiec 50.00 $2,204.90 $313.98
16 573-351-22 King 100.00 $4,409.80 $627.96
17 573-351-23 Ochoa 91.55 $4,037.20 $574.90
TOTALS 1,183.09 $52,172.00
(a) Per City Council Report dated 3/28/95.
(b) First year's installment is due on April 10, 1997 (full amount shown). Annual payments
will be made in 2 installments each year (half the amount shown) collected via tax bills
on December 10th & April 10th each year for the next 9 years (includes 7% interest).
/1/- ?
-2-
ATTACHMENT "A"
The proposed assessments are lower than those originally projected in March 1995 because of
h1e lower bid received for the construction of improvements.
FUTURE COUNCIL ACTIONS
On the same date that the public hearing is held to review assessments, then pursuant to the 1911
Block Act, the assessments will be confirmed by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City will finance the construction of improvements ($52,172) and will be reimbursed by the
property owners over a period of ten (10) years. City staff cost including engineering design,
inspection and district formation ($15,212) will be absorbed by the City.
(m:\home\eIlf: ineer\agenda \.ad930 1 cr. bob)
/'1- If -3-
j
~
,
-v r. I
I_I
~ I
, ..
, 1 WD:n mTll'f ft.I.T 1'Zr nT'IClllW' IB':nIl; .~_ ~
1 or m'" ~ ZI':!':TJ:'T. en 07' arvlol T:!'"'..... covrn c:r IIJf ~.
ftJ.n or CI.lmlLln4. au UI'r.>= rr na CllT CD\IlIClI. Cll' !Zl an
i CIr ~ nr~ I.T .. D::lJ'..... lI:rn>lC -=:>r. a:u> III ~ au
.10 or .a"',"'~Mn
r
l
I
I-
r
.
r
I
1
!~
'~ .
! ~!
i ~ I
iL1
!
i
,
1
(
&
!'"l
i a
.
i _
,I
)
,
.
I
,
~
,
.
r
ATTACHMENT "B"
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 93-01
. .
1 9 1 1 ACT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
. .cm OF CHULA VISTA. COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
~
"'1 .
I
,
.
I
.,
. .. .---...
ELM
. A VENUE
-
---
.. . i.. .--
t
NAP. I ~~ I m~ ! ~~ I m~ m$ m;
lll-- ~'I~' ~, L e. e,
, i ~"~~::::L~+J.,...l, . d-~' ~ , . .7. .., ".'. "... . ".~,
- _f>.......-~ ................~.. _.~," .~..,.~
i~':rii;l . .-r.....,..:.:..i~~J~'... .;. ". ~......:;. ......:::.;.. ..
t..
~
l~
L1
~~J~'~~J.
I
IEH_\5f_O.J.
II' 1'".
...
. I5"U-'51_f'I.'
,u~rn.
>-..
~
~
~
- -
~ ~ i ~ t! .t! t! ~
Ui Ii Ii Ii Ii Ii
i 0: 0: E ! a !
! or 'or
._-,
,
-
NAP.
NAP.
or
-
-
--
I
I
or
,
SECOND
AVENUE
I
LEG!:~
. .-
r .. I
--
~. '"""
"I r~I'"1'
trn' ~ em' W ~ !1nI.
.~~~l'..,"'.':!!J.J':;f "w__. -
.0 .." . I""." '... .
-.
.- ~
~
t
~
~ ~.!II Im:IW!II 1m ClZrClrtIJan.. ~ftftlta
.. talT Ilr . 'M1..
trn' ~ =r lIP ~ 'rInI.
,
NAP. Not A Part
-._~ !ll:J DiY or 'M. . JOOr U P=
. 1:'.. or-L..~ ~~:."':') -' !EI Ofn:l cif"1!!IZrCDt'm' ......,~
: 1W CIlUI!T1' .. Iol.II ==0. nLn II ~
. -- -... . IDDT IW:lI " m ~ .. ILX IDOO.
r.<Tt or CI.ID'OlXl.I __l Pu:I. IloLPf rga =
~-Dr~p~
~
~
~
,
,
CO'oJ'W":'T ..............D
CCQl<T't or Iol.II _
) 1/-- 9
0'725-1 CJ.D83-0 1
"1'.0. NO. AYOU
ATTACHMENT "C"
::, . r
~.
RESOLUTION NO. 18458 .
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ACCEPTING FILING OF ENGINEER'S REPORT BY THE
CITY ENGINEER ON THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AND
SETTING NOVEMBER 12, 1996 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATE
AND TIME FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT FOR ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS EAST OF SECOND
AVENUE
WHEREAS, on July 25, 1995, pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911, also known
as the 1911 Block Act, the City Council by Resolution No. 17979 awarded a contract in the
amount of $53,108 (including contingencies) for the alley improvements on the alley east of
Second Avenue from J Street to Kearney Street to Fox Construction Company; and
WHEREAS, the work is now completed and improvements have been accepted by the
City Manager; and
WHEREAS, a resolution must now be approved to accept filing of the Engineer's report
on the cost of construction and to set the public hearing on the assessments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does
hereby accept the filing of Engineer's Report by the City Engineer on the cost of construction
of the alley improvements on the alley east of Second Avenue from J Street to Kearney
Street.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby set November 12, 1996
at 6:00 p.m. as the date and time for public hearing on the proposed assessments for the
alley improvements on the alley east of Second Avenue from J Street to Kearney Street.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
>
"
./
,
John
Publi
AnY. M60r~ (
,\t:Jorney
.'
/t/---/o
ATTACHMENT "C"
Resolution 18458
Page 2
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 15th day of October, 1996, by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
Alevy, Moot, Rindone, Horton
NAYES:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Padilla
ABSTAIN:
Council members:
None
~~j~
Shi y Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
'!::!;A~"~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 18458 was duly passed. approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 15th day of October,
1996.
Executed this 15th day of October, 1996.
~(l ~_
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
/'/-/ /
A ;rIIe"M~T
, I
&J
~I
RESOLUTION NO. 17980
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING THE DEFERRAL OF THE PAYMENT OF
ASSESSMENTS. ESTABLISHING THE CRITERIA TO QUALIFY
FOR DEFERRAL. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE
DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-
01
WHEREAS. the proposed improvements for the construction of alley
improvements from J Street to Kearney Street between Elm Avenue and Second Avenue are
being financed through the formation of Assessment District No. 93-01 (AD 93-01) pursuant
to the 1911 Block Act; and
WHEREAS. the Act is a financing mechanism which authorizes local agencies
to impose assessments on benefited property to fund the construction of public
improvements; and
WHEREAS. at a public hearing held on May 25. 1995. Council directed staff to
bring to Council a resolution allowing the property owners to defer the payment of their
assessments; and
WHEREAS. the property owners have the option of paying the total assessment
during the 30-day pay-c~f period following the confirmation of assessments. planned for the
end of 1995; and
WHEREAS. if the assessment is not paid at that time. the City shall collect the
unpaid balance in semiannual Installments in conjunction with the collection of City taxes and
in accordance with the Resolution of Intention. the balance shall be paid over a period of ten
(10) years at an interest of 7% per annum; and
WHEREAS. in response to property owners concerns. Council directed staff to
identify additional alternatives that may allow the deferral of the payment of the assessments
and lessen the financial impact of the proposed assessments; and
WHEREAS. according to the provisions of Chapter 13 of the "Improvement Act
of 1911" of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California any deferral of
assessments shall be approved by a Council Resolution; and
WHEREAS. staff recommends that the following alternatives be approved by
Council:
. Semi-annual payments (interest only) and payment of the principal at the end
of a 1 O-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.
)'1 ~-j 2-
R%olution No. 17980
Page 2
ATTAcJlMAJT
D
. One payment (principal and accumulated interest) at the end of a 1 a-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.
WHEREAS, staff also recommends that Council require that property owners
shall meet one of the following Criteria ("Criteria") to qualify for deferral:
1. Have an income less than or equal to the HUD Very Low Income standards as
contained in the City's Master Fee Schedule.
2. A demonstrated financial hardship approved by Council. (For example, a senior citizen.
retired, and unable to pay the assessment.)
WHEREAS, qualifying property owners that elect a deferred payment plan shall
enter into a deferral agreement with the City upon confirmation of assessments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby approve the Criteria for granting a deferral of the payment of assessments, and
al:thorizing the Mayor or City Manager in his/her discretion, to sign the deferral agreements
for Assessment District No. 93-01 upon application and proof of satisfaction of the required
Criteria.
t'resented by
by
o(~ I ~
J6hn P. Lippitt
/Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
)1/-/;3
Resolution No. 17980
A~~~i'D~lge3
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
Alevy, Moot, Padilla, Rindone, Horton
NAYES:
Councilmembers:
None
'.
ABSENT:
Council members:
None
ABST AIN:
Council members:
None
M/.b//~
ShirleY#1orton, Mayor
if
ATTEST:
,~
, / ' ~ /~, !~' ,
"--'f; ,..f / . J -I' (I}:
'/..j)A,","/." ,II, I.; "
Beverly iA. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 17980 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 25th day of July,
1995.
Executed this 25th day of July, 1995.
~ '
/ ~ - j J 1
n <e! ~ t/ U7i/r1
Beverly At. Authelet, City Clerk
) Lj- J t/
,
ATTACHMENT "E"
RESOLUTION NO. 17979
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR
"CONSTRUCTION OF ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS FROM J STREET
TO KEARNEY STREET BETWEEN ELM AVENUE AND SECOND
AVENUE IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (STL-
220)"
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on June 14, 1995, in Conference Room 3 in the Publ
Services Building, the Director of Public Works received the following eight bids f(
"Construction of Alley Improvements from J Street to Kearney Street between Elm Aven~
and Second Avenue in the City of Chula Vista, California (STL-220)":
Contractor
Bid Amount
1. Fox Construction - San Diego
2. Marquez Constructors, Inc. - Spring Valley
3. Basile Construction, Inc. - San Diego
4. Carolyn E. Scheidle - Contractor - La Mesa
5. Frank & Son Paving, Inc. - Chula vista
6. Interwest Pacific, LTD. - San Diego
7. Eammer Construction Company - Chula vista
8. ortiz corporation - Cbula Vista
$53,108.00
59,430.50
66,915.50
69,436.00
72,512.05
73,127.60
73,414.80
77,365.00
WHEREAS, the low bid by Fox Construction - San Diego is below the Engineer
Estimate of $77,150 by $24,042 or 31.2% and staff has reviewed the low bidder:
qualifications and references to do the work and found them to be satisfactory ar
recommends that the contract be awarded to Fox Construction; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the wor
involved in this project and has determined the project is a Class I exemption under Sectic
15301 from California Environmental Quality Act requirements; and
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is general funds ar
contractors bidding this project were not required to pay prevailing wages to persor
employed by them for the work under this contract; and
WHEREAS, no special minority or women business owned requirements we
necessary as part of the bid documents, however, disadvantaged businesses were encourage
to bid through the sending of the Notice of Contractors to various minority trade publication:
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOE
HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Council concurs in the determination that this proje
is categorically exempt under Class 1, Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quali'
Act, and directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to file, or ratifies the filing of, a notir
of exemption for this project.
Jtj-/~
.
,
I ........;I'-"UlIVII j\,jU. I l::::l J;:;l
Page 3
ATTACHMENT "E"
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California. this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
Alevy, Moot, Padilla, Rindone, Horton
NAYES:
Council members:
None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
None
ABST AIN:
Councilmembers:
None
dbAlu : 36r&'h
Shirle&Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
.~
I , . /" l ,.. _
\ ," I " ,. ---.' ( !
'-r....~;.....,.;. J/. /I!.:~.J..:.....:~
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No.1 7979 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 25th day of July,
1995.
Executed this 25th day of July, 1995.
Ii-I?
ATTACHMENT "F"
RESOLUTION NO. 17894
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"
REGARDING THE FORMATION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 93-
01
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA DOE~
HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOllOWS:
SECTION 1. Findinos:
The City Council does hereby find as follows:
A. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, has institutec
proceedings pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 27 of thE
"Improvement Act of 1911 being Division 7 of the Streets and Highwa\
Code of the State of California for the construction of certain authorizer
improvements in a special assessment district known and designated a
Assessment District No. 93-01.
B. Notice has been given in the manner and form as required by law ani
specifically Article II, Part 3, of Division 7 of the Streets and Highwa'
Code, and a Certificate of Compliance is on file in the office of the Cit,
Clerk.
C. A public hearing has been held and all testimony and evidence hear
relating to the work of improvement as proposed for the Assessmer
District, and the legislative body is desirous at this time to proceed.
SECTION 2. That all protests of every nature are hereby overruled and denied.
SECTION 3. The Superintendent of Streets is hereby directed to proceed and cause th
construction of the works and improvement in said Assessment District if sai
construction is not commenced within sixty (60) days after notice is given t
the property owner (by 5/27/95) to so cause the work to be done.
SECTION 4. That the works of improvement shall be done and carried through and finance
pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act of 191 l'
and for all particulars a!; to these proceedings, reference is made to tt
Resolution ordering the ins:~lIation of the public improvements and instructir
the Superintendent of Streets to give notice.
(
/L/~ /?
Resolution No.1 78
Pag,
ATTACHMENT "F"
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vis
California, this 16th day of May, 1995, by the following vote:
YES:
Councilmembers:
Alevy, Moot, Padilla, Rindone, Horton
NOES:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers:
None
Shirley Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do here
certify that the foregoing Resolution No.1 7894 was duly passed, approved, and adopted
the City Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 16th da\
May, 1995.
Executed this 16th day of May, 1995.
1,.' ....
. '
~
,
Vicki C. Soderquist, Deptlty City Clerk
(
/ t/- / [5
..J
~
tu
Q
:E
<t
<to:
f-Cl
CIlo
50:
:5~
::If-
J:Z
UUJ
u..:E
Og:
~O
_0:
ua.
:E
_--..-.-......--
'"
.E
C
.
c
0,
c
'"
..~
-" .
~"C
0;:
~'"
_oc
'" - c
(7) :E c
in ~ 0
o>o.c
c:
'" UJ
...J Cl
'" 00:
o.:.:z
w.--<.
:::a1::
u::;:....
"'....u
...JC:UJ
~C:::::~
....0.0
~~~
..J
<t
i:
a.
<t
U
>-
.
c
;;
.
'"
2
;.
!! c
;]
E>
. "
~:;
~.c
o.u
~.E'ii
'" >- ~
.j 0 C
1-=0
"'OO:U
<i
'"
c:
00:
Z
:s
0.
~
" z
, '"
0..::;:
z~::
E:!::o
u....u
"'....
Zz
Q~
. .... c:
-<c:c:
00:_ 00:
....c:"'UJ
oc..u>
....0'"
c:c:
0.J:
~....
<>
<>
'"
'"
'"
~
>-
u.
'"
'"
.;
0>
0>
~
~
"
0>
,:.
0>
C>
~
~
'"'
C>
..
C>
C>
~
~
'"
C>
,;
C>
0>
~
>-
u..
....
U...J
UJOO:
...,....
00
c:....
0.
in
'"
....
00:
~
....
'"
UJ
....
'"
o
u
o
...
o
...
o
...
'"
c
'c
c
.
c:
~
o
;;
.
D.
.
Ii:
-'
o
o
o
c
g
'.
's
CT
o
00:
"0
C
.
...J
o
o
o
'"
'"
8
'"
ci
c
C>
;;;
.
Q
~
o
8
'"
J::
8
'"
....
'"
c
.2
U
~
...
o
C
o
U
;::
o
o
8
ci
8
o
ci
c
.Q
~
;;
'i:
'E
"0
<
Il
0;
c
.
Cl
:>
..
o
...
o
...
o
...
o
8
o
;:;;
o
8
'"
0>
...
8
o
8
;:;;
r/)
..J
;:;
o
....
/'-/-1;
in
UJ
u
c:
'"
o
'"
"
z
U
Z
00:
Z
ii:
o
8
o
;:;;
o
8,
N
....
...
o
~
N
'"
...
....
5
0.
<
U
u..
Cl
o
8
..;
N
~
'"
N
z
'0
f=
::>
III
ii:
~
o
U
Q
Z
!2
~
~
u
u
...
o
...
o
...
o
...
o
8
o
...
"
c
"
"
"
!!!
v.;
~
c
<;
"
'"
"
c
"
:->
c
~
~
"
.0
Ol
c
'5
c
"
X
"
>.
2
c;
'"
::
.!::
Ol
c
.:;
"
a.
'"
~
u
c vi
o '"
u "
o fii
c >
0<
'.;:.c
u-
2 :;
1ft 0
cu..
0"
t) E
~E
c_
OUJ
::: c
';: ~
~~
~1;
o
8
'"
0>
...
8
o
8
;:;;
r/)
...J
;:;
o
....
Cl
Z
(3
Z
<
Z
;;:
ATTACHMENT "G"
, :;;
l A.lPIN[.
1--:-"-r-'T1~J >
! : I :: ~
I '!:r::T1:
EL~ LilllJ
EEtB,'I::1
. -.. .
. . , 'I
: : ~E~~6 :- : ";
'AyE I
t;;
,
I
I
I
1~
I. 'llll I
i,ll I. 1'-
lJIN~ I Q,A~S'
oE=..s!.?:-9:!
- Q);:).--
cUJ~.cU-
.2 c: U) 0 11l.s;!
tti Q.l al' "0 .c >
E~cct-~
.....c..Q ctS cti Q)
..<2~u"'....c::
o_2~~?;
-Q)Vi-.;:;~o
c:ecgo>.
~v.;8c.~'5
m ~"O Vi Q.I g-
o. C c: ttl c......
0"" ttla.E a.
c:tl3c: Q.aJ
;~.!?= ",.c
a...... "'"- _
Q) 0 Q) :::; >..
g:~co..o
C3~O~~t)
to .... U) Ul ._ Q)
..... U5""'"U; = ....
~L~c:9.E:!
..... ~ u 8 ~.f:
oE~.!Q8.=
Z E >'..c Kl Of
c - ro 0 ....
o O)c..:.c. Q)"O
';.;:::.!: .c ~ ..c Q)
:J >.- _ CI)
o.,Uo",5
"'0."'8.0.0
&:~:; .=.S
"O=a;~~~
~~=iftoG)
e~-g;;~.o
~.Q"Oi ~,g
raoai-~~
'1;2EEo3
c1ftE"-"1ft-
::I c 0 CI) 0-
88d{~~~
OJ'" ... c
,j';.c ::: ,Q.Q "
U::!!=t)Cl
S.2(/)ES~
.!:2octi.e~-
>:S~ooE
!!:!.~ 41';:: 0 e
:J"O >u; 41-
6c~'5~08 '
"'E"c~. r;
.c 0'" _ ..x
t-U'JuG,lui~~
/,/) Cl.I Eo ffl'-
c5:CI)U'JU') "0
oU'J"O~>.~'E
;: CD C Ul !.! c G,l
CQ: - ca ell:.... m E
(J.!! CD ctI 0 >
:::al"",a."::l
=Q.c..cgctlG,l
G'l G,l- -Ul
::I CI) > U).!!! ~ UI
"'-)ctI<(ctI>>m
~.
~
...
-~":':""
z
"
-'
"'i
E
I
.j_l."
: I
I
III ~tii
I II 1/111
z
o
"
<
~
-
~
~
o
f
~..,
'"
<6
0>
rh
0>
it
.S
c
.Q
U
2
1ft
c
o
u
"
c
.,
It)
0>
...
0>
it
"
E
'c
~
!
;;
i
[
~
2
i
.
o
.
r
i
.
.
u
~
w
.!::
c
Ol
'iii
'"
Cl
Cl>
;;;
:!.
j
o
RESOLUTION NO. ~~711~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA CONFIRMING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT
BY THE CITY ENGINEER ON THE COST OF
CONSTRUCTION AND SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS ON
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT #93-01 FOR ALLEY
IMPROVEMENTS EAST OF SECOND AVENUE AND SOUTH
OF "J" STREET
WHEREAS, the City Council accepted a petition signed by
a majority of the property owners adjacent to the alley east of
Second Avenue between "J" and Kearney Streets to form a special
assessment district for the construction of improvements to the
alley; and
WHEREAS, the City Council subsequently awarded the
contract to Fox Construction Company which completed the alley
improvement project on October 30, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 18458 on
October 15, 1996 to accept filing of the Engineer's report on the
cost of construction and set the public hearing on the assessments
for November 12, 1996 at 6:00 P.M.; and
WHEREAS, the hearing allows Council to take testimony on
the assessments; and
WHEREAS, after considering all testimony, Council may set
the assessments to be levied on each parcel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula Vista does hereby confirm the Engineer's Report by
the City Engineer on the cost of construction and spread of
assessments.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
G:~ ~ wlA9-1 ()A. 9.
Ann Y. More, Actlng City
Attorney
~J//J -/
RESOLUTION NO. /<617 ~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING A NOTICE OF LIEN TO LEVY
AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT NO. 93-01 FOR ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS EAST
OF SECOND AVENUE AND SOUTH OF "J" STREET
WHEREAS, the improvements were financed by the City and
AD 93-01 was formed pursuant to the 1911 Block Act to obtain
reimbursement for the improvement and other miscellaneous costs in
accordance with Council Policy Number 505-01; and
WHEREAS,
authorizes local
properties to fund
the Act is a financing mechanism which
agencies to impose assessments on benefiting
the construction of public improvements; and
WHEREAS, the property owners have an option of paying
local assessments during the 30 day pay-off period following
confirmation of assessments; and
WHEREAS, if the assessments are not paid during that time
or are deferred, the City will collect the unpaid balance in
semiannual installments over a period of ten (10) years at an
interest rate of 7% per annum; and
WHEREAS, property owners may pay the balance of their
assessments at any time during the ten year repayment period
without penalty; and
WHEREAS, although the original cost estimate was
approximately $60.86 per lineal foot of frontage, the final
assessment is about $44.09 per lineal foot of frontage for a
revised total assessment of $52,172.00 as shown in Attachment "A".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby adopt a Notice of Lien to levy and
collect assessments for Assessment District No. 93-01 for alley
improvements east of Second Avenue and south of "J" Street in the
amount as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part
hereof by this reference.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
(~y ~9---9--
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\AD9301
)tJD- /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /~
Meeting Date 11/12/96
/ srL/9?
Resolution Approving Council Policy Regarding
Requests for Payment for outside Legal Assistance
Obtained by Employees Appointed by City Council
SUBMITTED BY: city Manage~
ITEM TITLE:
(4/sths Vote: NO)
At its June 11, 1996 meeting, the City Council directed staff to
prepare separate policies for council's consideration regarding
legal representation in special circumstances such as requests for
reimbursement for outside legal assistance obtained by employees
appointed by the City Council. The minutes of the June 11 Council
meeting discussion are attached.
The bulk of material for this report was prepared by Deputy city
Manager Thomson. with his departure from the City of Chula vista,
the report lay dormant and just recently was reviewed and finalized
by the city Manager with the advice of the interim City Attorney.
For your information, Deputy city Manager Thomson also worked on
another issue raised by the city Council, a policy involving legal
advice to Council members regarding performance concerns related to
the City Attorney. On that issue, after reviewing the material
which was prepared, it was decided that a different approach was
needed and required more than just minor revision and finalization
of the report. Also, the interim City Attorney felt that the
issues were separate and unrelated. That proposed policy,
therefore, will be returned at a subsequent date.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council consider for possible adoption the
resolution approving Council policy regarding requests for payment
for outside legal assistance obtained by employees appointed by
City Council.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
The proposed policy addresses the issue of requests for payment for
outside legal assistance obtained by employees appointed by the
City Council (the city Manager, City Attorney, and city Clerk). If
one or more members of the City Council are pursuing concerns that
the Councilmember may have about a Council Appointed City Officer,
that officer may desire legal advice that the city Attorney (who
would normally provide such advice) is unable to provide because of
conflict of interest. In such a situation, the affected city
officer may choose to obtain independent legal advice regarding the
/5/
Page 2
situation. In such a case, the proposed Council policy provides
that the affected city officer may submit a request to the City
Council for payment or reimbursement of such outside legal
expenses. The following guidelines are included in the proposed
policy to be considered by the City Council in reviewing such
requests, but the City Council would retain complete discretion to
determine if exceptions to these guidelines should be made for a
specific case.
The proposed policy provides the following general guidelines for
the City Council to consider in reviewing such requests:
1. A request may be for the payment of legal costs, at the
discretion of the Council.
2. Such legal expenses should be limited to issues regarding
acts or omissions of the Council Appointed city Officer
acting within the course and scope of his or her
employment as an officer of the City.
3. The Council will generally not approve more than $1,500
per incident nor more than $1,500 per fiscal year for
payment or reimbursement of legal expenses for an
individual council Appointed city Officer.
4. Legal costs incurred by a Council Appointed City Officer
after he or she has resigned or been terminated from City
employment will generally not be approved for
reimbursement.
5. The approval of payment or reimbursement for independent
legal services obtained by a Council Appointed City
Officer under this policy shall be made only at an
appropriate City Council meeting by majority vote of the
City Council.
6. The intent of this policy is to provide the Council
Appointed City Officer with legal advice when the City
Attorney cannot provide such advice because of a conflict
of interest.
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed council Policy provides guidelines for
obtaining legal assistance in special circumstances that are
unlikely to occur very often, but could result in expenditures of
up to $1,500 per circumstance.
LEGAlFEE.A13
/y;Z
RESOLUTION NO. /81/97
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING
REQUESTS FOR PAYMENT FOR OUTSIDE LEGAL
ASSISTANCE OBTAINED BY EMPLOYEES APPOINTED BY
CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the proposed policy addresses the issue of
requests for payment for outside legal assistance obtained by
employees appointed by the city Council (the city Manager, city
Attorney and City Clerk); and
WHEREAS, if one or more members of the City Council are
pursuing concerns that the Councilmember may have about a Council
Appointed city Officer, that officer may desire legal advice that
the city Attorney (who would normally provide such advice) is
unable to provide because of conflict of interest; and
WHEREAS, in such a situation, the affected city officer
may choose to obtain independent legal advice regarding the
situation; and
WHEREAS, in such a case, the proposed Council policy
provides that the affected city officer may submit a request to the
city Council for payment or reimbursement of such outside legal
expenses; and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy sets forth guidelines for
the City Council to consider in reviewing such requests.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve the Council Policy attached
as Exhibit "A" regarding requests for payment for outside legal
assistance obtained by employees appointed by City Council.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John D. Goss, city Manager
(~~ 'dr 1V~
Ann Y. Moo e, Acting city
Attorney
C: \ rs\ policy .leg
/y3
COUNCIL POLICY
CI1Y OF CHUIA VISTA
SUBJECT: REQUESTS FOR PAYMENT FOR OUTSIDE
LEGAL ASSISTANCE OBTAINED BY
EMPLOYEES APPOINTED BY CITY
COUNCIL
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
1 of 2
ADOPTED BY:
I DATED:
BACKGROUND
Section 503 of the City Charter indicates that the City Attorney shall have power and be required to:
(a) Represent and advise the City Council and all city officers in all matters of law pertaining to their
offices;
(b) Represent and appear for the City and any city officer or employee, or former city officer or
employee, in any or all actions and proceedings in which the City or any such officer or employee in
or by reasons of his or her official capacity, is concerned or is a party.
When the City Council or some of its members have concerns about the performance of a city officer appointed by
the City Council or about whether the city officer is serving at the pleasure of the Council, the City Attorney cannot
appropriately provide legal advice to both the City Council (or the members of the City Council having concerns) and
also to the city officer appointed by the City Council who is the subject of the concerns.
In this situation, there has been confusion and concern about how the affected city officer should obtain any legal
advice he or she feels is appropriate, if any, as well as who should pay for such legal advice and what procedure
should be used to consider any requests for providing or paying for such legal advice. The California Government
Code makes it discretionary whether the public agency will pay for the legal advice in situations of this type. The
purpose of this Council Policy is to provide guidelines for how this type of situation should be handled in the future.
POLICY
This policy shall apply to the following city officers appointed by the City Council: City Manager, City Attorney,
and City Clerk ("Council Appointed City Officers").
If one or more members of the City Council are pursuing concerns that said Councilmember(s) may have about a
Council Appointed City Officer, that officer may desire preliminary legal advice that the City Attorney is unable to
provide because of conflict of interest. In such a situation, the affected city officer may choose to obtain independent
legal advice regarding the situation.
In such a case, the affected Council Appointed City Officer may submit a request to the City Council for payment or
reimbursement of such outside legal expenses. The following guidelines shall be considered by the City Council in
reviewing such requests, but the City Council retains complete discretion to determine if exceptions to these guidelines
should be made for a specific case.
/y'/
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: REQUESTS FOR PAYMENT FOR OUTSIDE
LEGAL ASSISTANCE OBTAINED BY
EMPLOYEES APPOINTED BY CITY
COUNCIL
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
2of2
ADOPTED BY:
I DATED:
The following are the general guidelines the City Council should consider in reviewing such requests:
1. The intent of this policy is to provide the City Council Appointed City Officer with legal advice
when the City Attorney cannot provide such advice because of a conflict of interest.
2. Such legal expenses should be limited to issues regarding acts or omissions of the Council Appointed
City Officer acting within the course and scope of his or her employment as an officer of the City.
3. A request may be for the payment of legal costs, at the discretion of City Council.
4. The Council will generally not approve more than $1,500 per incident nor more than $1,500 per
fiscal year for payment or reimbursement of legal expenses for an individual Council Appointed City
Officer.
5. Legal costs incurred by a Council Appointed City Officer after he or she has resigned or been
terminated from City employment will generally not be approved for reimbursement.
6. The approval of payment or reimbursement for independent legal services obtained by a Council
Appointed City Officer under this policy shall be made only at an appropriate City Council meeting
by majority vote of the City Council.
M: \HOME\DONNA 1\MISC\LEGAll'EE.POL
/s~ S-
Coun ember Rindone statod the city neodod funds for the operation of library services. Council did nol wanl
to sacrifi e quality of lif~ for the library services.
M inules
June I\, 1996
Page to
t questioned Ihe guarantee the cities would receive the funds.
David Palmer, Library D. tor. respondod that the Board of Equaliution would pass the money directly 10 the
cities.
Council member Moot statod the letter m the County Board of Supervisors statod the money could nol be Ulled
to supplant existing services and projects a
Mr. Palmer replied that a base year would be dete 'ned, i.e. Ihe year Ihatlhe tax was approved, FY 1996/97,
The cily would be askod 10 maintain the general fund su rt of Ihe libraries at the base year level and the addilional
funds could be used to enhance hours should they be cut,
RESOLUTION 18335 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON,
approved 4-1 wilh Mool opposed.
b. RESOLUTION 18336 OPPOSING AB 3116 (CURRENTLY INACTIVE) GARDING STATE PRISON
CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING FACILITIES IN THE SOUTH BAY, ND AMENDING THE
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM ACCORDINGLY - These ilems are not addressed in I gislative program or
otherwise require direct Council a~tion.
. ng of the text was waived, passed and
RESOLUTION 18336 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived.
Mayor Horton respondod Ihat she wantod Council to take a position reflecting Ihat Ihe city's slrong opposili
Ihe facilily.
18. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council member Rindone
. Concerns regarding attorney fees paid for the City Manager, Council member Rindone slaled there bad been
inquiries about attorney fees Ihat had been paid by the city for the city manager which he was not aware of. He
did not remember discussing in closod session approval of hiring an attorney for the city manager and he was
concerned Ihal il would set a precedent which Council had not addressed. He was also concerned thaI the city
manager had discussed Ihe issue with the city attorney at the time regarding represenling his interests. He
recommended Ihat the city manager cover the fees incurred.
Mayor Horton slated il was her understanding Ihatthe cily manager was willing 10 pay the fees. In a situalion when
an employee could nol be represented hy Ihe city attorney, she fdlthere should be some plan whereby the person
would have legal counsel. She felt there should be a policy wilh a cap for such services required by Council
appoinlees.
Mr. Goss slated if Ihe Council felt they neoded 10 take aclion 10 approve or disapprove the paymenl, and if Council
wanled him to pay Ihe cosl he would do Ihat. It was approximately 3 hours of review of his response 10 make sure
that there was nothing included lhat could create a liability for Ihe cily or himself as an officer of the city. It was
a minimal amounl of assistance. Normally, the cily attorney would have been his advisor, but he bad made il clear
thaI his responsibilily was 10 Ihe Council. The governmenl code made il discrelionary 10 the Council as 10 whether
they supported such a paymenl.
Council member MooI felt there were extenualing circumstances that crealed confusion as 10 what was appropriate.
He was one of those people under the impression Ihal under the circumstances it was appropriate for Mr. Goss 10
seek preliminary advice. He had been lold hy the city attorney that he could nOI, and would nOI, provide Mr. Goss
legal advice. He fell Mr. Goss should pay the $700 so a precedent would not be set with Council developing a
policy for the future.
/~/?
t
Minutes
June II, 1996
Page 11
Councilmember Padilla stated he wanted to make it clear that he was one member that was extensively involved in
dealing with Mr. Goss on the concerns he had raised. He had dealt with him privately and directly before bringing
the item to Council. He felt it impol1antto note that he had no problem in the city paying low preliminary fees for
any of the Council'sappointees that they put under scrutiny, especially if they could not rely on the city's attorney.
But, the law was clear that expending funds for retaining an attorney under those circumstances bad to come from
the Council. There was some confusion and be did not feel tbat sbould ever happen again. Council needed to
communicate heller with each other. If tbe situation arose wbere a Council appointee needed preliminary legal
advice it should be brought to Council in closed session or appropriate meeting for authorization. He felt that would
avoid confusion for the employee, public, and Council. He did not have a problem wilh Mr. Goss submitting the
invoice for payment from the city.
MS (RindonelPadilla) to direct the city manager to pay $702 for legal expenses and return with a policy for
ColUlcil consideration.
Councilmember Padilla questioned if a policy was put in place if the city manager could resubmit the invoice for
payment.
Councilmember Rindone responded that it would be up to the Council at thaI time whether or not to reconsider
payment.
Mayor Horton stated that Councilmember Padilla had brought up accusalions regarding advice from outside legal
counsel. Sbe cbuld not go to the city attorney, therefore, she went to the city manager and under his authority he
had directed her to contact Mr. Levy 10 obtain proper legal advice before moving forward regarding the city
attorney. Sbe questioned if Council felt there should be a policy regarding outside legal advice for the
Mayor/Council also.
Councilmember Padilla stated all Council members needed to work harder at communicating better. The acting cily
attorney could research tbe issue, but the Charter was clear that the Council directed the legal husiness of the city.
The city manager'~ office could not authorize the retention of outside legal counsel for personnel matters. It could
only be authorized by the Council. He felt it likely that if the Mayor bad requested authorization from the Council
that they would bave supported ber request.
Mayor Horton stated that she was uncertain how to bring it forward to Council and a decision had to be made by
herself and the city manager. Therefore, they needed outside counsel regarding the procedure to be followed 10
hring the issue to Council. Sbe did not want 10 put the city or anyone involved in jeopardy.
Councilmember Mool felt the situation was extremely unusual and he would be shocked if such a situation ever
occurred again. He felt a potential policy would be to allow the assistant city attorney to advise the person in
confidence without consulting witb the city attorney, if involved. He felt there were a number of solutions that did
not involve the hiring of outside legal counsel.
Mr. Goss stated that staff could return with a recommendation when the previous refell'lll was brought back 10
Council for review.
Mayor Horton and Councilmember Rindone agreed with Mr. Goss' recommendation, but felttbey should be two
aeparate policies.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously.
u
v
. Councilmember Alevy referred to the vigilante ac I 'h Field regarding illegal aliens. He noted
that409li of the population was Hispanic, Latino, and Asian and there was no p . e of harassment.
He commended the Port for obtaining a restraining order and passing a resolution making that type of actIon
/~/ ')
COUNCil AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
)j,-
Item 11/:-/
J~f~3 Meeting Date 1 J~j7j
Resolution Approving Terms and Conditions for the Sale of
Marina View Park to the San Diego Unified Port District and Authorizing
Staff to Prepare and Execute a Purchase and Sales Agreement and Escrow
Instructions
SUBMITTED BY:
Community Development Director
CS,
REVIEWED BY: City Managerif (4/5ths Vote: Y~ No_l
BACKGROUND: The City of Chula Vista has negotiated with the Unified Port District for the Port's
acquisition of certain City and Redevelopment Agency properties on the Bayfront, including Marina
View Park on Marina Parkway and three properties on Lagoon Drive (the former Marina Motor
Hotel, Shangri-la and Cappos propertiesl. City staff has been negotiating the sale of these
properties which has been delayed for a variety of reasons including legal incumbrance and
contaminated soils which are now close to resolution. Staff has recently received amended terms
of sale for the Marina View Park property which are acceptable and are being forwarded to the
Council for review and authorization to proceed.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution authorizing staff to prepare and execute
a purchase and sale agreement for sale of Marina View Park consistent with the terms and
conditions as proposed by the Unified Port District and attached as Exhibit A with such minor
modifications and additional minor terms and conditions that are necessary or appropriate to
implement such terms and conditions as may be approved by the City Attorney and the City
Manager.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
City staff began negotiating the sale of Marina View Park and certain other properties owned by
the Redevelopment Agency early in 1995. However, legal and environmental problems have
delayed the sale of these properties. At this time, issues delaying sale of Marina View Park have
been resolved and the transaction is ready to move forward subject to authorization from the
Council.
In 1993, the Redevelopment Agency and City issued $3.1 million in Certificates of Participation
(COPS) in order to finance the Agency's share of costs related to the construction of the parking
garage at the Chula Vista Center. For the purpose of issuing the bonds, certain City properties
were quit claimed to the Agency and leased back to the City in order to provide collateral for the
bonds and guarantee an income stream to cover debt service. Marina View Park was one of the
properties obligated in this manner. In order to clear title and sell this property, the City had to
provide a property of equal or greater value to substitute as security for the bonds. In August
1995, the City Council and Redevelopment Agency authorized the substitution of a portion of
Memorial Park for Marina View Park in the bond documents thereby clearing title on the latter
yr /b-j
Page 2, Item J d--
Meeting Date 10108196
property. Prior to being transferred to the Port District, the Marina View Park property will be quit
claimed back to the City as provided for in the bond documents.
Terms of sale were originally prepared by Port District staff which contained provisions considered
to be disadvantageous to the City. These provisions included the following:
. The property was appraised at its highest and best use (office/retail); and, since the
proposed acquisition amount reflects the potential commercial development value,
the City is not guaranteed that the property will continue in park use.
. No provision was made for the recovery of park equipment in the event the
property was converted to another use.
. Responsibility for continued maintenance of the facility was not clarified.
. Extensive environmental testing was required with indemnification for future
liabilities associated with City ownership and use of the property.
After further discussion and negotiations, the terms and conditions of sale were modified and
restated in acceptable form to staff. These terms and conditions are contained in a letter from the
Port dated September 19, 1996. Major conditions are summarized below.
1 . The property to be transferred to the Port District contains 2.71 acres of improved parkland
and equipment. The City shall retain a reversionary interest in the playground equipment
until July 31, 2001. In the event the park is converted to non-park use, the City will have
a 30 day period to enter and remove all reusable equipment until that date.
2. The purchase price is $762,000 cash with no escrow deposit required. This purchase
price is based upon the value of the developable portion of the property for office/retail
use. This value is based upon a May 1995 appraisal by Lipman, Stevens, Marshall &
Thene, Inc. (Summary attached as Exhibit S.)
3. Escrow is conditioned on the results of an environmental investigation of the property
provided by the City. If initial testing indicates the need for further testing and/or
remediation, the City and Port District shall meet and confer whether or not to keep the
escrow open. If the estimated cost of remediation work exceeds $100,000, either party
may terminate the escrow.
4. The City shall indemnify the Port District against any legal or administrative proceedings
brought against the Port District which relate to environmental claims, liabilities, fines,
penalties or other costs occasioned by the neglect or intentional activities of the City or its
lessees which arose during the City's ownership of the property. Although this provision
provides for the future liability of the City in regards to this property, it is no less than the
City has or would require from the owners of property it acquired.
5. Prior to close of escrow, the City and Port District shall enter into an amendment to the
agreement between the two entities concerning park maintenance of the Port District
property at the J Street Marina. The amendment shall provide that the Port District will
~ /6',;2
Page 3, Item /)..
Meeting Date 10/08/96
pay the City or its designee to continue to maintain Marina View Park as well as the Port
District property at the J Street Marina.
As Council was previously advised, it should be noted that the Port District has not agreed upfront
to keep the property a public park for any period of time. Furthermore, since the Port District will
acquire substantial land use authority over properties it acquires, the City will not have the
authority to prevent the conversion of the park to a non-park use if that is what the Port desires.
The City has been advised by its Port Commissioner, David Malcolm, that the Port will meet and
confer with the City concerning any future proposal to change the land use. Furthermore, in
consideration of the amount of vacant land in prime locations on the tidelands currently available
for development and the absence of a strong market demand, it is highly unlikely that there will
be any pressure to redevelop this property for many years.
Finally, the City is currently in discussions with the Port District and Rohr concerning the change
in land use in various locations on the tidelands from industrial to visitor commercial. These
changes will require amenities such as Marina View Park. Any attempt to change the land use on
the park will require processing through the Coastal Commission which would give the City the
opportunity to register a protest.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Port District proposes to pay $762,000 for Marina View Park, based upon
a 1995 appraisal commissioned by the Port. This appraisal is based upon the value of the property
of $9.25 per square foot as office/retail times the usable area (82,375 square feet). There is an
additional 35,673 square feet of property which provide drainage through the site and cannot be
developed.
The proceeds from the sale of the property, less escrow costs, will be split by the City and Agency
with each receiving approximately $350,000 (50% to the City for the land value and 50% to the
Agency for the improvements).
IIkl M:\HOME\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\ lo-0&-96\marina. 113 IOctober 3, 1996 11 :33pm\]
~/~
7
-)
RESOLUTION NO.
IYJ/S5'
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE OF
MARINA VIEW PARK TO THE UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT AND
AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PREPARE AND EXECUTE A PURCHASE
AND SALES AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista ("Council") desires to sell
certain property owned by the City of Chula Vista known as Marina View Park ("Property"), fully
described on Exhibit A attached hereto, to the San Diego Unified Port District ("District"); and
WHEREAS, terms and conditions for sale of the Property have been negotiated with
the District and have been presented to the Council with a recommendation for approval; and
WHEREAS, in order to effect the sale of the Property to the District, a Purchase and
Sales Agreement and Escrow Instructions must be prepared for submission to and approval by the
District, said Agreement and Instructions including the terms and conditions of sale in substantially
the same form as presented to the Council; and
WHEREAS, in order to expedite the sale of the Property, the Council is requested
to authorize staff to prepare and execute the Purchase and Sales Agreement and Escrow
Instructions on behalf of the City, pursuant to review and approval by the City Anorney's office.
NOW. THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve
as follows:
1. The terms and conditions of sale of Marina View Park to the San Diego Unified Port
District, anached hereto as though fully set forth herein, are hereby approved.
2. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to prepare and execute a Purchase
and Sales Agreement and Escrow Instructions consistent with such terms and conditions with
such minor modifications and additional minor terms and conditions that may be necessary or
appropriate to implement such terms and conditions as may be required or approved by the City
Attorney.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
Il'ltl M;\HOME\COMMDEv\RESOS\m.';"..I..\Oetob-r 2,1996 11:26pmll
~ /?-1
EXHIBIT A
COMMUNITY DfVELOPMlI/f
DEPARTMENT
i:r~\;';i'1~.'O'.~o
Go 'I.r. rl.',~~ 0
r '.- ~~'1
c. - ',...
~~~~- .....--~"'~~
PoRi O~
Port of San Diego
and Lindbergh Field Air Terminal
L
(6191686-6200 . P.O. Box 488, San Diego, California 92112-0488
SEP 2 3 GOO
I
I
,
I
September 19, 1996
Fred Kassman
Redevelopment Coordinator
Community Development Departme~t
city of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Kassman:
Re: Portion of Marina View Park Owned by the City of Chula Vista,
Consisting of 2.71 Acres of Land on "J" Street in Chula vista
The City of Chula vista (City) has requested that the San Diego
Unified Port District (District) purchase the above-referenced
property. As you are aware, property purchases can only be
authorized by the Board of Port Commissioners. Following are the
terms and conditions that District staff would recommend to the Board
for its consideration: .
1. Property: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 4950, 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, July 28, 1976, as
File No. 76-239746 of Official Records and bearing County Assessor
Parcel No. 571~160-06 (property). The Property transferred shall
include all improvements thereon. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
until July 31, 2001, city shall retain a reversionary interest in the
playground equipment, and, in the event the Property is converted to
a nonpublic use, District shall grant city, in writing, a thirty-
(30) day period during which city may enter the Property for purposes
of removing any or all of the playground equipment. After the
earlier of (i) the notice period expiring or (ii) July 31, 2001, City
will no longer have any rights to said playground equipment.
2. Purchase Price: $762,000 cash at close of Escrow. An Escrow
deposit is not required.
3. Other Terms and Conditions:
a. The District, as Purchaser, and the City, as Seller, shall
establish an Escrow at Stewart Title Company of
San Diego with Escrow Officer Loretta Granger,
7676 Hazard Center Drive, suite 700, San Diego, California.
. ---/ / tf. -_S-
Fred Kassman
Page 2
September 19, 1996
b. As a condition to close of Escrow, Stewart Title shall be
committed to issue a title insurance policy (i) in a form
approved by District, (ii) with such endorsements as may be
required by District, (iii) in a coverage amount of
$762,000, and (iv) subject to items 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12A in
Schedule B of the Preliminary Title Report for the Property
issued by Stewart Title Company dated January 24, 1996
(order No. 01-147708), or as may otherwise be approved by
District in its discretion.
c. city shall pay ALTA Owners title insurance premium,
reconveyance fees, recording fees, document preparation
fees, Documentary Transfer Tax (if required), and 50% of
the Escrow fee. District shall pay 50% of the Escrow fee.
d. District is not to pay for any proration of property taxes.
city is to pay any property taxes due and seek a refund
f~om the county of San Diego Tax Collector after the close
of Escrow.
e. The cash purchase price shall be made through Escrow, and
District hereby agrees to deposit such funds required to
close Escrow within five (5) days of written request by
Escrow, provided: (1) all contingencies enumerated in this
Paragraph 3 and Paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 7 below have been
either satisfied, waived, or provided for, including,
without limitation, environmental investigation and
remediation; (2) city has provided Escrow with all
documentation necessary for close of Escrow; and
(3) District ,has provided Escrow with the Certificate of
Acceptance of Grant Deed.
4. Close of Escrow: The close of Escrow shall take place within
ninety (90) days of opening of Escrow. The opening of Escrow is the
date on which Escrow holder first has executed Escrow instructions
from both City and District. The close of Escrow is conditioned upon
District's approval of the following:
a. The title policy described in Section 3(b) above.
b. Results of investigation of the environmental condition of
the Property in accordance with Paragraph 5 below.
c. The physical condition of the Property.
District and City shall have the right, each in its respective sole
discretion, to extend the period of Escrow for two (2) thirty- (30)
day periods for the purpose of satisfying the environmental
~ /?--It
Fred Kassman
Page 3
September 19, 1996
contingency identified above and in Paragraph 5 below.
shall have the right to waive, at its sole discretion,
requirements placed on city.
District also
any
5. Hazardous Waste Provisions:
a. In accordance with process set forth hereinbelow, city
shall provide District with the results of an environmental
investigation of the condition of the Property and any
equipment and structures thereon. Both Phase I and Phase
II Environmental site Assessments may be required by
District. The testing and other obligations contained
herein for City and District are intended to be undertaken
in accordance with practices that are reasonable and
commonly accepted, and approvals are not to be unreasonably
withheld. The general purposes of the environmental
investigation shall be as follows:
(1) Determine in relation to the activities of City and
its prior lessees and/or sublessees, if any, if there
are hazardous substances, wastes, or asbestos on or in
the Property, whether contained in barrels, tanks,
equipment (moveable or fixed), or other containers;
deposited or located in land, water, sumps, or in any
other part of the site; incorporated into any
structure on the site, or otherwise existing thereon.
(2) Determine if there were/are spills, discharges,
releases, deposits, or emplacements of any hazardous
substance, waste, or asbestos that have occurred on
and originated from the Property.
(3) Determine if asbestos-containing materials have been
installed in or affixed to the structures on the
Property and determine if such materials have been
stored or disposed of anywhere on the Property.
(4) Determine if electrical transformers, fluorescent
light fixtures, or other electrical equipment
containing PCBs are or have been installed in, affixed
to, or were located on the Property, and if there have
been any releases therefrom.
~ /t- 7
Fred Kassman
Page 4
September 19, 1996
(5) Determine if there were/are storage tanks for gasoline
or any other substance located on the Property,
whether aboveground, underground, or within a
structure, and if such tanks have leaked.
b. Hazardous Materials Testing and Remediation:
(1) During the contingency period, city, at its sole cost,
will select and hire, subject to District's reasonable
approval, an environmental consultant to perform a
Phase I analysis of the Property and any improvements
thereon. The specific scope of work will be
reasonably approved by both parties.
(2) If the Phase I report indicates the need for Phase II
testing, City and District shall meet and confer to
determine (a) whether or not to conduct such tests
and, if both parties reasonably agree to proceed,
(b) the appropriate scope of work. The scope of work
shall include an estimate of the cost of necessary
remediation work, if any. City agrees to pay for all
costs of Phase I and Phase II analysis and testing.
(3) If the Phase II report indicates the need for
remediation, city and District shall meet and confer
to determine (a) whether or not to keep the Escrow
open and proceed with such work and, if both parties
reasonably agree to proceed, (b) the appropriate scope
of work and cleanup standard to apply. If the
estimated cost of the remediation work exceeds One
Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000), either party
shall have the right to terminate the Escrow.
(4) Any remediation work performed by City shall be
performed in accordance with all applicable laws to
the satisfaction of the appropriate regulatory
agencies and to the reasonable satisfaction of
District.
(5) If Phase II testing is needed, either party may cancel
this purchase agreement without penalty up to sixty
(60) days after the.receipt of the Phase II report.
c. All activities described in this section shall be performed
by third-party experts and consultants approved by District
and City. All tests shall be performed to the satisfaction
of appropriate regulatory agencies. District may
participate in the investigation directly or through one or
~ /l-f/
Fred Kassman
Page 5
September 19, 1996
more designated agents, employees, consultants, or
contractors.
d. City shall permit District and/or such agents or experts,
as District shall designate, full access to the Property
and all records (not including any documents to which the
attorney/client or other legal privileges apply) concerning
said Property during reasonable business hours for purposes
of such independent investigation as District shall desire
to conduct. At District's sole option, such investigation
may include such testing of the soil, groundwater, building
components, tanks, containers, and equipment on said
Property, as District or District's agents or experts shall
deem necessary to determine or confirm the condition of the
Property. Such tests, as required herein by District,'
shall be at District's sole cost and expense.
city shall have the right to reasonably approve the scope
of such inspections and the actual party performing tests.
All such tests shall be conducted 50 as to minimize
interruptions to park use. District agrees to indemnify
and hold city harmless for any liabilities or damages
arising from such testing.
6. Indemnities:
a. City shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless District
from and against any legal or administrative proceeding
brought against District, insofar as they relate to
environmental demands, claims, liabilities, fines,
penalties, or costs occasioned by the negligent or
intentional activities of City, its lessees, and/or
sublessee on the Property, which arose during City's
ownership of the Property, including, without limitation,
any loss to District occasioned by the existence of
hazardous substances on or in the Property caused as a
result of City's use and/or occupancy of the Property,
breaches of the warranties contained herein, and any
inaccurate representations made by City; provided, however,
any such damages caused by District's negligence or willful
misconduct shall be excluded from city's indemnity
obligations hereunder.
b. The indemnities described above specifically include, but
are not limited to, the direct obligation of City, the
indemnitor, to perform promptly any remedial or other
activities required or ordered by any auministrative agency
~
/<~ -9
Fred Kassman
Page 6
September 19, 1996
or governmental official, or otherwise necessary to avoid
injury or liability to any person or property originating
from the Property, to prevent the spread of pollution, or
to permit continued safe operation of the Property, to the
extent such is required.
7. Warranties: City warrants, to its best actual knowledge, there
are no leases/subleases, and that the Property, all operations
thereon, and all improvements are free from all liens, claims,
encumbrances, and rights of third parties. city agrees not to enter
into any new leases, subleases, or contracts for the Property, prior
to the close of Escrow, without first obtaining written consent from
the District. District reserves the right to withhold such consent
for any reason during the course of Escrow.
City warrants, to its best actual knowledge, that the Property and
all operations thereon are not in violation of applicable
environmental law, and no governmental entity has served upon City
any notice claiming any violation of any statute., ordinance, or
regulation, or noting the need for any repair, remedy, construction,
alteration, or installation with respect to the Property, or any
change in the means or methods of those conducting operations
thereon. Both District and City preserve their rights under
California Health and Safety Code section 25242 concerning reporting
and compliance cost recovery provisions, as set out in that section,
and all other rights applicable to cost recovery stemming from
environmental or property damage. Except as expressly provided
herein, City makes no representations or warranties with respect to
the condition of the Property.
8. Title: city agrees, upon close of Escrow, that all rights,
title, and interest in any buildings, fixtures, installations,
equipment, machinery, improvements, and appurtenances located on the
Property shall vest in District.
9. Maintenance Obliqations: Prior to close of Escrow, District and
city shall enter into an amendment ("Park Maintenance Amendment") to
that certain agreement for maintenance of District property at the
IIJII Street Marina dated September 28, 1977 ("0riginal Park
Maintenance Agreement"). The Park Maintenance Amendment will
generally provide that District shall pay city, or its designee, to
continue to maintain as a public park the Property being sold
hereunder to District. The Park Maintenance Amendment would be on
terms substantially similar to the items contained in that certain
Nineteenth Amendment to the original Park Maintenance Agreement dated
September 5, 1995, except as otherwise reasonably agreed by the
ym /I-/{I
Fred Kassman
Page 7
September 19, 1996
parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, District is under no
obligation to renew the Park Maintenance Agreement after expiration
of its initial. term.
If the City concurs with the proposed terms and conditions of
purchase, please so indicate by signing and returning a copy of this
letter. Following receipt of the City's concurrence, the Board of
Port Commissioners will be requested to authorize the purchase of the
subject Property. If Board authorization is obtained, Stewart Title
will be requested to prepare a purchase agreement and Escrow
Instructions.
If you have any questions, please call me at 686-6291.
Sincerely,
~~\
DAVID A. SANDOVAL
Assistant Manager
Real Estate Operations
DASjlks
Enclosure
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONCURS
WITH PROPOSED TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
By
Title:
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form
Acting City Attorney
L?~ /60//
~/I
~
1
~
~
Property
!Ii
Purpose
Estate Valued
~
~
ij
1
I
j
-j
-1
-j
l
;1
l
l
~
Intended Use
Assessor's Parcel No.
land Area
Occupancy
Highest and Best Use
Date of Value
Indicated Value
EXHIBIT B
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.71-acre portion of Marina View Park located at south side of J
Street, west of Bay Boulevard, Chula Vista, California 92010
Fair Market Value
The fee simple Simple Estate
Establish basis for potential transfer of subject
571-160--06
2.71 acres (118,200 gross square feet)
1.89:f: acres estimated useable (82,375 net square feet)
Currently Public Park iliQ! Highest & Best Use)
Hold for future development of office or mixed use (office/retail)
May I, 1995
Land ($9.25 per useable square foot)
Sales Comparison Approach
$762,000
Final Opinion of Market Value
$762,000
Major Assumptions
Date of Report
Appraiser
Current Public Park use is not to be considered for valuation
purposes.
This appraisal is of land only and does not include park
improvements or furniture, fixtures and equipment.
Estimated useable land area is 82,375 square feet.
The feasibility of developing over the existing flood channel is
considered unlikely at this time due to unknown costs, timing and
the required approval process. This report assumes the additional
value added would not offset the cost and risk in the investment.
May 15, 1995
H.L. "Bill" lipman, MAl, CRE
Lipman Sterens Marshall & Thene, lne.
~ /t~/2
1
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
'1lem #= / t:,
November 7, 1996
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
John D. Goss, City Manager. ~ /"
C7 f_L") .
Chris Salomone, Community Development Director L
VIA:
SUBJECT:
Sale of Marina View Park to the Port District: Letter from the Chairman of the Port
District Board
In response to Council concerns, the attached letter from Jess Van Deventer, Chairman of the
Board of Port Commissions, indicates that recreational opportunities in and around San Diego Bay
remain a high priority and the Port District has never removed any recreational opportunities from
the San Diego Bay area. It also indicates their intention to respect local interest and concerns in
the planning of any changes in zoning or land use affecting properties within local jurisdictions.
Although this is not a contractual obligation, it appears to be the intention of the Board to seek the
input of local officials in land use related matters.
[(FKlmd) M:\HOME\COMMDE\I\INFOMEMO\MARINA.MEM (November 7, 1996 (12:15pm)]
Jt~/3
11/07/1995 10:14
5,1 '34771 0.,:5,
J "' S I11'.,''E5,HIEIHS
PAGE (12
~., C'15",~,o
-j \"
.,~ ~J\ ',-.
..... - .~: ."
c~..,.
~c. .. -. '~",_':-'
.--;:. .. ...-Q.
"0 ...... ,,,,,'
Pc",. I)
POR OF SAN DIEGO
Opcr::1tor (If tvlarinl? 1 rlninZlls and 5i:1r"I Diego InternMion<J.l/~irport
50AHD OF PORT COMMISSIONFl1S
:::hairrll.;;n of the Board
October 16, 1996
The Honorable Mayor and City Co ncil
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor and Council,
Y Oll and your council recently ha questions regarding the Port's acquisition of Marina
View Park. I hope the following re ponses will answer your concerns of: I. Has the Port
ever converted a park to comme -ial use? and 2. Will the Port seek the City's input
regarding any future changes in lane use?
In response, the Port believes that ne San Diego Bay is a regional asset for all who live
and work in San Diego. To that end, the Port has never removed any recreational
opportunities throughout the San iego Bay area. In fact, the Port continues to spend
millions of dollars to add additional ark lands throughout the region.
As you are aware, each cornmissio er believes in the community review process. It has
never been the intent of any com ssioner to change any zoning or land use provisions
without the review of the locally el ted officials.
The protection of rec.reational tacili es, especially in the South Bay, willlllways remain a
top priority to the Port of San Di ~o I hope tills letter has adequately addressed your
concerns.
Sinc.erely,
\.~..
~ L. ..... .
\; Jess Van Deventer
\Chairman, Board of Port Commissio
,
ers
~. /ft;-j tf
':61~)1 b,,)6-620rJ, PCr~:t (. 'fice 8m. 4~,), 5:;1)1 !)\l'gU, Cllllfnmii1421-12
'\ \ (, (
-
/'
(i~:,~':'~E::;'
"""" ...., "',-.. --.
~ " -- '" ""'-
.rten/I I G
C1lY OF
CHUIA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
November 7, 1996
Mr. Jess Van Deventer, Chairman
Board of Port Commissioners
Port of San Diego
P. O. Box 488
San Diego, CA 92112
Dear Chairman Van Deventer,
I am in receipt of your October 16, 1996 letter regarding the Port's acquisition of Marina
View Park in Chula Vista. I was pleased to hear your responses regarding the Port's
beliefs concerning parks and a description of the Port's historical position regarding
parklands throughout the region.
However, in your letter you had indicated if there was still any concerns regarding this
issue to please let you know. I am still not comfortable regarding the relinquishing of
the city's land use options should Marina View Park be sold. I believe additional
protection or some other procedure be established at a minimum to insure concerns of
the City Council regarding land use issues prior to consummating the sale of Marina
View Park. The continued cooperative relations between the City and the Port of San
Diego has always been an excellent one, and I am sure will continue. However, various
City Councilmembers and Port Commissioners change over the years and I think it is
incumbent upon the contemplation of the sale of any lands that the Port adequately
guarantee the City that it will insure the continued use of Marina View Park as a public
park. I am open to suggestions of how to more adequately address the issue.
Ultimately, the City would be enhanced by the sale, but further attention to the assurance
of retention of Marina View Park as a public park needs to be addressed since this is a
key issue for which this City must not be at risk in the future.
....-----
/t/S
276 FOURTt, AVENUE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 919101(619) 691-5044
.
I would be happy to discuss this with you and look forward to necessary safeguards to
be incorporated in any proposed Port acquisition of Marina View Park. Thank you for
your willingness to focus on this very important issue.
Sincerely,
ne
N
JRR:pw
cc: Mayor and City Council
Port Commissioner David Malcolm
City Manager Goss
Jt:-' /J ~
CITY OF CHUlA VISTA
1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / 7
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Resolution J2(~~oncePtuallY Approving the
Tentative Agreement Between the city of Chula vista
and Sharp HealthCare for e Purpose of satisfying
Sharp's Contractual Obli a ions to the city.
Assistant city Managerc:L
City Manager~ (4 sths Vote: Yes___ NO___)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
In May 1996 staff informed the city council of a letter of intent
between Sharp HealthCare and Columbia/HCA to begin discussions
which, if successful, would result in the conversion of Sharp Chula
vista from a non-profit to a for-profit hospital. Staff has been
monitoring the discussions between Sharp and Columbia since mid
1995 to determine what impact they would have on the contractual
obligations Sharp has to the City of Chula vista and to the
provision of health care/hospital services to our citizens. As a
result, staff, working with Deputy City Attorney Googins, concluded
that Sharp was contractually obligated to pay the city 10% of the
"net profit" of the transaction between Sharp/Columbia attributable
to the Sharp Chula vista hospital.
Staff has recently concluded negotiations with Sharp HealthCare
representatives regarding a tentative agreement to satisfy Sharp's
contractual obligations with Chula vista. The general parameters
of the proposed agreement provide the City with (a) a cash payout
at the close of escrow between Sharp/Columbia, (b) an agreement to
continue to operate the Sharp Chula vista Hospital as an acute care
facility through the year 2008, (c) an extension of medical
benefits with accruing interest through the year 2008, (d)
guarantees regarding Chula vista representation on the new non-
profit Board and (e) guarantees for Chula vista regarding potential
"upside" gains related to the future sale of Sharp I s remaining 50%
interest in the new entity.
The purpose of this report is to provide the city Council with a
brief history on the relationship between the city and Sharp and to
outline the proposed agreement for the City Council and request
conceptual approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council:
1. Agree in concept with the proposed tentative agreement
with Sharp HealthCare, and
/7---/
Item / 7
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Page 2
2. Direct staff to return with a contract, which implements
the tentative agreement, for formal approval by the city
Council.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
In 1978 the city of Chula vista participated in an agreement with
Chula vista Community Hospital to issue bonds which would assist
Community in the construction of a new facility on Medical Center
Drive. The agreement included a reversionary clause whereby the
facility would revert to the City upon dissolution of the community
Hospital corporate entity.
Agreement Modifications
In 1989 the city of Chula vista was approached by Community
Hospital (which had now become Sharp Chula vista Medical center) to
buy back Chula vista's reversionary interest. Council authorized
a new agreement with a sale price of $500,000 delivered in three
scheduled payments of $166,666 each.
In addition to the monetary considerations, staff also negotiated
the following contract provisions which would bind Sharp, or its
successors, until January 1, 2006:
1. Ten Percent (10%) of Sale Profits: If Sharp sells, leases for
more than fifteen years, or transfers by merger, or otherwise,
substantially all of its assets, it will pay the city ten
percent (10%) of the net profit of the sale. (Net profit is
defined as the net proceeds of the sale less depreciated book
value of said assets as reflected on the hospital's books and
records (please see attached "Acquisition Agreement by and
between the city of Chula Vista, Community Hospital of Chula
vista California Health Facilities Financing Authority Dated
as of May 1, 1989" Section 4(f)).
(This represents the contract provision which contractually
binds Sharp to negotiations with the city in the event of a
sale. )
2. Medical Services Account: Sharp would provide the city with
free medical services in the form of a $1 million "Service
Account". The Account would accrue interest at the rate of
) 7-2
Item
/7
Meetinq Date 11/12/96
Page 3
the CPI increase each year. Available services include such
major items as pre-placement physicals, urine drug screening,
DMV physicals and firefighters' annual physical exams. As the
City used the available services, the cost of those services
would be debited against the Service Account. Services would
be available up through May 1, 1999. If there was an unused
balance in the Service Account on this date, the City would be
entitled to a cash payment equal to 50% of this amount. (A
subsequent MOU with Sharp on this item executed in 1993
provided Employee occupational Health Care and Chemical
Dependency Services and other services which could be added in
accordance with the flexibility provided by the MOU.)
3. Sharp agreed to operate the hospital as an "acute care"
facility and in good condition and repair.
4. Any "excess revenues" generated during this period would be
used for health care needs in the city.
5. 50% of the local hospital board to be City residents or
business people.
6. City would have a right of first refusal to purchase the
facility in the event of Sharp's proposed sale of all, or
substantially all, its interests therein.
SharD/Columbia Transaction:
More recently, in December 1995, the City became aware of Sharp
HealthCare's letter of intent to form a partnership with
COlumbia/HCA. The general terms of this transaction creates a new
"for-profit" entity, 50% owned by Sharp, 50% owned by Columbia,
with Columbia acting as the managing partner. Sharp's 50%
ownership is represented by the value of its facilities including
Sharp Memorial, Chula vista, Murrieta and Cabrillo, with an
estimated total value of $400 million. In exchange, Columbia will
contribute facilities (primarily Mission Bay Memorial Hospital) to
the partnership and will pay Sharp about $200 million in cash,
which will be used by Sharp to retire existing debt. In addition,
Sharp will remain a non-profit organization which will continue
Sharp's charitable works. This action, which was recently approved
by the Sharp HealthCare Board, would change the majority of Sharp's
operations, including Chula vista hospital, from a "non-profit" to
a "for-profit" enterprise. As a result of this action, the city
notified Sharp HealthCare that it intended to invoke the 10% clause
under Section 4(f) of the Acquisition Agreement. (Although staff
/7-5
Item
)7
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Page 4
could have invoked its rights regarding "first right of refusal"
contract language, the monetary implications ($200 million) plus
legal expenses were considered cost prohibitive, and the idea of
running a hospital seemed out of the city's realm of expertise.)
Sharp's initial position was that if section 4(f) of the agreement
was applied, they would structure the deal with Columbia without
Sharp Chula vista. Sharp also indicated that if the 10% clause
were to be applied to the proposed transaction, there would be no
net profits in which the city would share due to the amount of debt
and depreciation of the Chula vista facility. Nevertheless, due to
the leverage and rights reserved to the City under the contract,
staff has had a number of meetings with sharp HealthCare
representatives to discuss the proposed conditions under which the
ci ty might agree to the waiver or amendment to the agreement.
While Sharp and Columbia would likely proceed with their deal, with
or without the City's cooperation, negotiations of these terms is
of interest to them to simplify and expedite their transaction.
It was made clear that these discussions were tentative and that
any final action required approval by the Council and the Sharp
Board.
Proposed Tentative Agreement
The following represents the tentative agreement between the city
and Sharp HealthCare and would provide the structure on which a
final agreement would be completed and from which Sharp's current
contractual obligations would be satisfied. At a recent meeting,
the Executive Committee of the Sharp Board endorsed this proposal
subject to final language and full Board approval.
Deal Points:
1) Cash Consideration: Sharp to pay the City $1.8 million at
close of escrow between Sharp and Columbia HCA
(value: $1.8 million)
2) Cashout of Existinq Medical Services Account: The city is to
convert its current medical services balance, valued at $1
million, to cash. Said funds to be paid to Chula vista at
close of escrow. (value: $1 million)
(It should be noted that the City has accrued interest on this
account since its initial contract with Sharp and, due to
interest gains, has not reduced the principal.)
/7/1
I:tem / 7
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Page 5
3) New Medical Services Account: Sharp to provide the City with
a new medical services account in the amount of $500,000 with
accruing interest. All future charges for medical services
will go against the interest accrual first and then be applied
to the principal. The medical benefits will extend through
the year 2008 (the current contract expires 1999). At that
time any remaining principal will be paid in cash to the City
(value: $500,000).
The health care services will comply with those outlined in
the Acquisition Agreement and the subsequent (9/93) MOU
between the city and Sharp HealthCare for the provision of
Employee Occupational Health care, Chemical Dependency
Services and services added in accordance with the flexibility
built into the MOU and the following new services:
a. Drug screening for City employees.
b. Blood testing and blood draws as reasonably requested by
the Police Department.
c. The city's "out-of-pocket" expenses associated with the
hospital (or "technical") portion of emergency medical
services provided to city employees.
d. The City's "out-of-pocket" expenses associated with the
hospital (or "technical") portion of emergency medical
services provided to prisoners that are the
responsibility of the City of Chula vista. (The city
would be expected to provide adequate security for the
hospital's physicians and staff).
4. operating Covenant: A commitment from the Sharp Columbia
Partnership to continue to operate the Chula vista hospital as
an acute care facility through 2008. This covenant would
include a commitment to provide such services to the Veteran's
Home project proposed to be located in Chula vista. (The
services would be provided at Sharp Chula vista Medical
Center, as well as other Sharp Columbia Partnership
facilities.) still to be negotiated is the enforcement
mechanism for this covenant. city staff is proposing some
form of financial penalty in addition to the remedy of
specific performance.
5. Communitv Board: Appoint a Community Board comprised of
physicians practicing at Sharp Chula vista Medical Center, as
well as interested residents and working citizens in the city
of Chula Vista, to oversee quality matters and community
health care needs at Sharp Chula vista Medical Center.
/
)7-~
Item ) 7
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Page 6
6. Protection from "Uo-Side" Valuation: The City has crafted
language which protects the City on any "upside" valuation of
the Sharp Chula vista facility in the event that Sharp sells
all or a portion of its interest back to Columbia/HCA or
another party. Specifically, the city will receive 10% of
26.6% (Sharp Chula vista's proportionate value of the total
Sharp System) for any increase in value above the currently
established value of Sharp's new 50% ownership (value
established at approximately $200 million).
Throughout this process, staff has had concerns that past
for-profit hospital conversion deals have resulted in an
initial undervaluation of physical plants. This condition
protects the city from that eventuality and guarantees our
participation, in an amount equal to our present contract
rights, on any future efforts by Sharp to "cash in" on future
increases in the value of the facility.
7. Representation on the Non-Profit Board: Best Efforts to E~end
Excess Revenue: Sharp will reserve a minimum of 2 seats on
the new non-profit board, or 20%, whichever is greater, for
Chula vista residents, subject to Council approval (Sharp
anticipates the Board to be 9-13 members). In addition, Sharp
will commit to using its "best efforts" in spending funds
distributed to the non-profit from the newly formed for-profit
entity, to benefit Chula vista's citizens, in an amount equal
to Sharp Chula vista I s proportionate share of the total
system, or 26.6%. Sharp will also provide the City with an
annual report on its expenditures for review by the city.
Conclusion:
Although a tentative agreement has been reached between the city
and Sharp Healthcare, a final agreement is subject to:
* Agreement on final contract language between the City and
Sharp and approval by the respective legislative and
governing bodies for each.
*
Review by the Attorney General
Sharp/Columbia partnership to insure
value is assigned to this transaction
profit assets are protected.
of the proposed
that appropriate
and that the non-
"60 Minutes Broadcast": The City council may have seen a news
/7;- t
Item / 7
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Page 7
story recently broadcast on the show "60 Minutes" regarding
similar transactions by Columbia/HCA in the states of
Michigan and Ohio. staff has reviewed the broadcast and found
that no new issues were raised that had not already been
broached by staff with Sharp and the Attorney General's
office. specifically, staff has made the Attorney General
aware of, and constructed our proposed agreement to protect
the city regarding:
* Proper Valuation of Assets: The city is guided by it's
current contract language. Staff, the Deputy City
Attorney and the Finance Director are comfortable that
this language has been interpreted to reflect the best
interests of the City regarding payment to the city.
* Representation on the Non-Profit Sharp HealthCare Entity
to Facilitate Chula vista's Health Care Interests: Chula
vista will be represented by at least two board members
and will comprise not less than 20% of the final board
composition.
*
continued Operation: Final contract language
an operating covenant through the year 2008.
years beyond our current contract rights.
will include
This is two
* Charitv Work: As noted above, final contract language
provides for Chula vista representation to facilitate
continuation of these activities in Chula vista and
language requiring Sharp's "best efforts" to assure Chula
vista's citizens benefit at a level commensurate to Sharp
Chula vista's value to the total system (26.6%). Our 20%
representation on the non-profit board will help
facilitate this action.
* "Up-Side Valuation": Staff was very familiar with
concerns regarding undervaluation of assets in previous
non-profit to for-profit transactions. To protect
against this possibility, preliminary language was
structured requiring payments to Chula vista if Sharp
sells all or a portion of its 50% ownership. The city
would receive 10%, of 26.6% (Sharp Chula vista's
proportionate value to the whole), of the value created
above the established value of $200 million.
* Attorney General Review: The proposed Sharp/Columbia/HCA
transaction has been submitted to the Attorney General
J7~?
:Item / 7
Meetinq Date 11/12/96
Page 8
for review. Although new legislation will go into effect
in January giving the Attorney General "right of
approval," of similar transactions in the future, current
law only gives the Attorney General the "right of review"
and to determine the proper valuation to insure
protection of the non-profit's assets. staff has had
numerous conversations with the Attorney General
regarding our current discussions with Sharp as well as
providing correspondence to the Attorney General and the
legislature on this matter (see Attachments B1-B5). Even
if the proposed partnership is not consummated this
calendar year, it is not clear, and no implementing
regulations have been prepared, whether the
Sharp/Columbia deal would be subject to the new laws.
potentially, this deal could be considered to be "grand
fathered" under the old legislation since it was in the
pipeline long before the new law went into effect.
overall, staff is pleased with the proposed tentative agreement and
believes that the proposal provides a "win-win" for the city and
Sharp. ultimately, the city has been paid for its 10% of Sharp
Chula vista's value of the proposed Sharp/Columbia deal. Our
current balance of unused medical services account would be cashed
out and replaced with a new medical services account which accrues
interest and will cash out any principal in the year 2008.
Further, any "upside" valuation realized in the for-profit hospital
entity will be paid to the city at any future point of sale by
Sharp, full or in part, in a manner consistent with our current
rights. Finally, the city gains a minimum of 2 seats, or 20%,
representation on the non-profit Sharp Board that will continue its
charitable mission.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Sharp will pay $2.8 million to the city at the close of escrow of
Sharp's agreement with Columbia/HCA.
This money would be placed into the General Fund and could be used
for any municipal purpose. Sharp will provide the City with a
medical services account with a beginning balance of $500,000 with
accrued interest through the year 2008 to be used as outlined in
this agenda statement. Sharp agrees to charge all costs for use of
this account against interest first and the principal last. Any
balance remaining in the principal only will be paid to the City in
full by December 31, 2008. Finally, in the event of sale by Sharp,
/7-r
Item
/7
Meeting Date 11/12/96
Page 9
in whole or in part, of its interest in the for-profit entity, the
City will receive 10% of 26.6% of any increased value above the
base value of approximately $200 million.
Attachments:
B-1 to B-5
Acquisition Agreement by and between city of Chula
vista and California Health Facilities Financing
Authority (May 1, 1989)
Attorney General letter dated 1/10/96
Testimony of John Goss, City Manager dated 12/15/95
A-1 to A-16
C-1 to C-4
9/1/93 MOU between Sharp HealthCare and City of
Chula vista
D-1 to D-4
Newspaper Articles
(9/4/95 Modern HealthCare)
(6/25/96 Union Tribune)
(9/29/96 Union Tribune)
/7/;
RESOLUTION NO. );Y 'If{ '/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA CONCEPTUALLY APPROVING THE
TENTATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AND SHARP HEALTHCARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF
SATISFYING SHARP'S CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS TO
THE CITY
WHEREAS, in May 1996 staff informed the
a letter of intent between Sharp Health Care and
begin discussions which, if successful, would
conversion of Sharp Chula vista from a non-profit
hospital; and
City Council of
Columbia/HCA to
resul t in the
to a for-profit
WHEREAS, staff has been monitoring the discussions
between Sharp and Columbia since mid 1995 to determine what impact
they would have on the contractual obligations Sharp has to the
City of Chula vista and to the provision of health care/hospital
services to our citizens; and
WHEREAS, as a result, staff, working with Deputy City
Attorney Googins, concluded that Sharp was contractually obligated
to pay the City 10% of the "net profit" of the transaction between
Sharp/Columbia; and
WHEREAS, staff has recently concluded negotiations with
Sharp Health Care representatives regarding a tentative agreement
to satisfy Sharp's contractual obligations with Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the general parameters of the proposed agreement
provides the City with (a) a cash payout at the close of escrow
between Sharp/Columbia (b) an agreement to continue to operate the
Sharp Chula vista Hospital as an acute care facility through the
year 2008 (c) an extension of medical benefits with accruing
interest through the year 2008 (d) guarantees regarding Chula vista
representation on the new non-prOfit Board and (e) guarantees for
Chula vista regarding potential "upside" gains related to the
future sale of Sharp's remaining 50% interest in the new entity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby conceptually approve the tentative
agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Sharp Healthcare for
the purpose of satisfying Sharp's contractual obligations to the
city.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is hereby directed to
return with a contract, which implements the tentative agreement,
for forma approval by the City Council.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
sid Morris, Assistant City
Manager
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City
Attorney
C:\rs\sharp.agr
////v
Jt4~
November 7, 1996
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City Manager<<
City Council Meeting of N~mber 12, 1996
TO:
FROM:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting of
Tuesday, November 12, 1996. Comments regarding the Written Communications are as
follows:
Sa. This is a letter from the Acting City Attorney reporting that there were no reportable
actions taken by the City Council in Closed Session on November 5, 1996.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
JDG:mab
/' . .
.726
ftECtlVEO
"B9 0Ci' 9 ro0:29
RECORDING REQUESTED BY . "'1'
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURI(;!fl60F CW.~.\;:':~,~'
E. Rando 1 ph Hooks CITY CLbt..J UI"r "..-
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, California 95814
::#/7
89 a09871Z
~. RE:CCnnED IN;]
~ OFne',,!. 'Po,:CCROS
OF S.t.H ~':.'..: :OiJl\l Y. C.I.
89Jm 13 AHlIi 12
I _~ERA l. LYLF;_ 1
l..ElUHTf I"<ECOP.O~
...
fK' fE!;
ACQUISITION AGREEMENT
by and between
CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF CHULA VISTA
and
CALIFORNIA HEALTH FACILITIES FINANCING AUTHORITY
Dated as of May 1, 1989
3966H-5727h2
y- )7-//
Ct> ~"-C:".i
~
Parties. . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . .. . . . . ...... . . ... .... .. ........ 1
Preambles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4 -
Section 5
Section 6
Section 7
Section 8
Section 9
Section 10
Section 11
Section 12
Acquisition of Facilities................. 2
Acquisition Price......................... 2
Services Portion of Acquisition Price..... 2
Covenants of Community Hospital........... 2
Effective Date............................ 6
Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Governing Law............................. 6
counterparts.............................. 6
Severability.............................. 6
Amendments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 7
Successors and Assigns.................... 7
Covenant Running with the Land......~..... 7
Section 13 - Payment of Costs.......................... 7
Section 14
5727h2
Attorney' & Fees...........................
7
i
Y J7~!;2
THIS ACQUISITION AGREEMENT, made and entered into as
of the first day of May, 1ge9, by and between the CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of California (the
-City.), the CALIFORNIA HEALTH FACILITIES FINANCING AUTHORITY.
a public instrumentality of the State of California (the
-Authority.) and COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF CHULA VISTA, a
nonprofit public benefit corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of California (.Community
HospiteI-) ;
WIT N E SSE T H:
WHEREAS. Community Hospital has previously issued
its Hospital Facility First Mortgage Bonds (the .prior
Bonds.), dated as of June 1, 197e, pursuant to an Indenture of
Mortgage and Deed of Trust (the .Prior Indenture.), dated as
of June 1, 197e, by and between Community Hospital and Bankers
Trust Company of California, N.A., as successor Trustee;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terns of the Prior
Indenture, the City has the option to acquire title to the
health facilities (the -Health Facilities.) of Community
Hospital upon payment of an option price equal to the amount
necessary to defease the Prior Bonds;
WHEREAS, the Authority has authorized the issuance
of its Hospital Revenue Bonds (San Diego Hospital
Association), Series 1ge9A. in the aggtegate principal amount
of forty-seven million five hundred one thousand ninety
dollars and fifty-two cents ($47,501,090.52) (the -Bonds.) to
provide funds to acquire the Health Facilities from the City
following the exercise of the City's option, to refinance
certain indebtedness of Community Hospital and to finance
certain improvements and additions to the Health Facilities;
WHEREAS, the City has determined to sell the Health
Facilities to the Authority; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has determined to purchase
such facilities from the City and lease such facilities to
Community Hospital pursuant to the Lease Agreement (the -Lease
Agreement-), dated as of May 1, 1ge9, by and between the
Authority and Community Hospital;
.OW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and
of the mutual agreements and covenants contained herein and
for other vood and valuable consideration, the parties hereto
hereby agree as follows:
~ /7)}
,
Section 1. Acauisition of Facilities. The City
hereby agrees to sell to the Authority, and the Authority
hereby agrees to buy from the City, all right, title and
interest of the City in and to the Health Facilities, as set
forth in Exhibit A hereto. The City shall execute and deliver
a quit claim deed conveying title to the real property portion
of the Health Facilities and a bill of sale conveying the
personal property portion of the Health Facilities to the
Authority on the date of issuance of the Bonds (the -Issuance
Date-).
Section 2. Acquisition Price. In consideration of
the purchase by the Authority of the Health Facilities from
the City, the Authority hereby agrees to pay a purchase price
equal to the following:
(a) $8,293,191.13 on the Issuance Date, which shall
be used by the City to exercise its option to purchase
the Health Facilities from Community Hospital pursuant to
the Prior Indenture and shall be deposited in the Escrow
Fund created pursuant to the Escrow Agreement, dated as
of May 1, 1989, by and between Community Hospital and
Bankers Trust Company of California, N.A.:
(b) $166,666.66 on the Issuance Date, $166,666.66
on the first anniversary of the Issuance Date, and
$166,666.67 on the second anniversary of the Issuance
Date, all of which is to be paid solely from payments to
be made by Community Hospital pursuant to the Lease
Agreement:
(c) $1,000,000 in services to be provided by
Community Hospital, as described in Section 3 below.
The Obligation of Community Hospital to make the payments of
money and services specified above, and the obligation of the
Authority to forward such payments to the City upon receipt as
payment of the purchase price of the Health Facilities, is
absolute and unconditional and shall not be subject to any
right of offset against the City or terminate upon any breach
of the Lease Agreement or other termination of the Lease
Agreement or be subject to any right of abatement under the
Lease Agreement. The City is hereby given the right to
enforce directly against Community Hospital thepayment of the
~oneys and the furnishing of the services as specified in this
Agreement.
Section 3. Services Portion of ACQuisition Price.
(a) As a payment of rent under the Lease Agreement, Community
Hospital shall establish a -Services Account- for the benefit
of the City, which shall be initially credited with one
2YQ ////1
5727h2
million dollars ($1,000,000). As services are rende~eO as
described below, Community Hospital will debit the Services
Account with the charge for the service. Community Hospital
will provide the City with an annual statement of activity
within the Services Account, which statement shall be subject
to verification by the City during regular business hours of
Community Hospital's chief.financial officer upon three days'
notice to Community Hospital. Community Hospital will also
provide information to the City concerning activity in the
Services Account more frequently than annually upon the
request of the City.
(b) On each anniversary of the Issuance Date,
Community Hospital shall credit the Services Account with an
amount equal to the-product of (1) the balance remaining in
the Services Account as of the said anniversary date times (2)
the percentage increase from the immediately preceding
anniversary of the Issuance Date in the Consumer Price Index
for all urban consumers for the San Diego area.
(c) Services to be provided by Community Hospital
shall initially include those set forth in Exhibit B attached
hereto. Community Hospital and the City agree that the type
of services required by the City during the term of this
Agreement may 7ary, and further agree to negotiate in good
faith from time to time at the request of either the City or
Community Hospital to add services to, or modify services on,
Exhibit B and to determine the amount to be debited to the
Services Account for such services.
(d) The Services Account shall be debited when
services are rendered in an amount equal to (1) the amount
shown on the then-current published fee schedule of the
Community Hospital as its charges for the provision of such
services, (2) if charges for such services are not listed on
such fee schedule, the amount customarily charged by Community
Hospital to persons other than the City for such services, or
(3) if charges for such services are not listed on such fee
schedule and such services are not provided to persons other
than the City, the cost to Community Hospital to provide such
services. The amount of the debit for each service shall be
determined by Community Hospital and approved by the City in
advance of the service being rendered. .
(e) Unless an estension ia agreed to by Community
Hospital and the City, the Services Account ahall terminate
upon the .arlier of (1) the date upon which there is a zero
balance in the Services Account and (2) the tenth anniversary
of the Issuance Date. If a balance remains in the Services
Account upon the termination of the Services Account,
3 Y r7j~
5727h2
Community Hospital shall pay to the City in cash fifty percent
(50\) of the balance remaining in the 5ervice~ Account on such
~ate. .
Section 4. Covenants of Community Hospital. In
consideration of the conveyance by the City. of title to the
Health Facilities to the Authority, and the lease by the
Authority of the Health Facilities to Community Hospital.
Community Hospital agrees to comply with the following
covenants from the Issuance Date to January 1, 2006 (unless
such compliance is waived by the City):
(a) Operation as a General Acute Care Hospital.
Community Hospital will cause the Health Facilities to
continue to be operated as a general acute care hospital
and to be kept in good condition and repair with proper
equipment and qualified staff.
(b) Use of Excess Revenues. Community Hospital
shall use all revenues in excess of expenses generated
from the operation of the Health Facilities to operate
and enhance services and facilities at the Health
Facilities or at other locations in the City of Chula
vista; provided, however, that nothing in this subsection
shall (1) prevent Community Hospital from paying for
services provided by affiliated organizations, including
San Diego Hospital Association (.SOHA-), a California .
nonprofit public benefit corporation, and its affiliates,
(2) limit the ability of Community Hospital to repay bona
fide loans made to Community Hospital by SOHA (or any of
its affiliates), or (3) limit in any way the ability of
Community Hospital to make payments on obligations issued
under that certain Master Indenture of Trust, dated as of
June 1, 1988, between SOHA, Sharp Memorial Hospital, a
California nonprofit public benefit corporation, and Home
Fed Trust, as master trustee, or on other obligations or
indebtedness jointly guaranteed by Community Hospital and
SDHA (or any of its affiliates). Annually in connection
with the preparation of its audited financial statements,
Community Hospital shall file with the City a report of
its independent public accountants to the effect that
Community Hospital has complied with this covenant for
the immediate preceding year.
(c) Community Representation on Board of Directors.
Community Hospital shall cause at least fifty percent
(50\) of the members of its Board of Directors to be
residents of the City or persons with their principal
place 'of business in the City.
jU;: /7-/t
4
c'''''''''''"'t
(a) Qualitv of Care. Community Hospital shall
maintain a high quality of care at the Health Fici1ities.
(e) Riqht of First Refusal. If Community Hospital
aesires to sell all or substantially all of its interests
in the Health Facilities to another person, Community
'Hospital shall so notify the City, which notice shall set
forth the price and the terms and conditions of the
proposea sale ana the name of the proposea purchaser.
~he City shall have the right ana option for thirty (30)
days after delivery of such notice to elect to purchase
the Health Facilities unaer the same terms and conaitions
ana for the same consideration as specified for the
proposed sale. The City shall deliver written notice to
Community Hospital of its election to exercise its right
within the thirty (30) day period. If the City does not
exercise its rights under this subsection, Community
Hospital shall have the right to sell the Health
Facilities to the proposed buyer, but only for the
consideration and under the terms and conditions
containea in the notice to the City, or for other
consiaeration ana under other terms ana conaitions
more favorable to Community Hospital. Notwithstanaing
anything in thisoubsection to the contrary, the City's
rights unaer this subsection shall not arise in any of
the following circumstances:
(1) the transfer upon foreclosure of a mortgage
or deed of trust or the transfer to a mortgagee or
beneficiary of such mortgage or deed or trust in
lieu of foreclosure: '
(2) the transfer by a mortgagee or beneficiary
subsequent to its acquisition of the Health
Facilities in accordance with clause (1) above: or
(3) the transfer by Community Hospital to a
general or limited partnership of which Community
Hospital is a general partner provided that
(i) Community Hospital retains at least a twenty
percent (20\) interest in such partnership and
(ii) such partnership agrees in writing to be bouna
by all of the covenants, conditions and restrictions
in this Section 4.
(f) Profit Participation on Sale of Health
Facilities. If Community Hospital sells, leases for a
term of fifteen (15) years or more, or transfers by
merger all or substantially all of its right. title and
interest in and to all or substantially all of the assets
of Community Hospital. including the Health Facilities.
~' /7//7
5
c,,?,,?.,,
to an unrelateO thirO party, Community Hospital shall pay
to the City ten percent (10\) of the net prof.it of the
sale, net profit being defined as the net proceeds of the
sale less depreciated book value of said assets as
reflecteO on Community Hospital's books and records,
(g) Affiliation with Fan DieQo Hospital
Association. The amendment of Community Hospital's
articles of incorporation anO/or bylaws to proviOe for
San Diego Hospital Association becoming Community
Hospital's sole statutory member shall not be deemed to
be a transfer or sale unOer this section.
Section S. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be
effective simultaneously with (1) the issuance of the Bonds,
(2) the acquisition of title to the Health Facilities by the
City, (3) the acquiSition of title to the Health Facilities by
the Authority, and (4) the lease of the Health Facilities to
Community Hospital, All such events shall be deemed to occur
simultaneously,
Section 6, Enforcement. An action may be brought
by I~y party to this Agreement directly against any other
party in the event of breach of any provision hereof,
provided, however, that the obligation of the Authority under
Section 2 hereof shall be limiteO to moneys receiveO by the
Authority under the Lease Agreement for the purposes of making
the payments required under this Agreement and the Authority
shall not in any way be responsibility for the performance Dr
lack of performance of Community Hospital of its obligations
under this Agreement.
Section 7, GoverninQ Law. This Agreement shall be
governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California.
Section 8. Counterparts, This Agreement may be
executeO in several counterparts, each of which shall be an
original and all of which ahall constitute one instrument.
Section 9. Severability, If any provision of this
Agreement shall be held invalid or unenforceable by any court
of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate
or render unenforceable any other provision hereof.
Section 10, AmenOments, This Agreement may be
amenOeO, changeO, moOifieO or terminateO only with the written
consent of the parties hereto; proviOeO, however, that the
written consent of the Authority shall not be required to
amend the provisions of Section 3 or 4 hereof.
~/7);r
6
.
Section 11. Successors and AssiQns. This Agreement
shall inure to the'benefit of and be binding on the City,
Community Hospital and the Authority and their successors and
assigns.
Section lZ. Covenant RunninQ with the Land." This
Agreement shall be recorded in the office of the Recorder for
the County of San Diego and shall constitute an encumbrance
on, and a covenant running with, the real property portion of
the Health Facilities.
Section 13. Payment of Costs. All costs associated
with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.
including without limitation all costs, fees and taxes payable
by the City or the Authority in connection with the transfer
of the Health Facilities to the Authority, shall be paid by
Community Hospital upon demand by the City or the Authority,
respectively.
Section 14. Attorney's Fees. In the event of
default by Community Hospital in its obligations pursuant to
this Agreement. Community Hospital shall pay all attorney's
fees and other costs incurred by the City to enforce this
Agreement. In the event of any disputes as to the
interpretation of this Agreement, the party prevailing in the
resolution of that dispute shall be entitled to recover from
the other party all reasonble attorney's fees and related
costs.
y //1;
7
S727h2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
this Agreement by their duly authorized officers as of the day
. and year first set forth above.
(Seal)
ATTEST:
~~ Dp~-
~ity Clerk "}
ATTEST
By
Executive Director
ATTEST:
-4 JJ .D. ;t.1~.
S727h'
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
~gGc
a r
By:
CALIFORNIA HEALTH FACILITIES
FINANCING AUTHORITY
By Thomas W. Hayes
Chairman
By
Deputy
CHULA VISTA
CO~TY HOSPIT
By V
1]"..--ffJ // <-2t::)
~ ,"-.... -' / L--
8
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
this Agreement by their duly authorized officers as of the day
and year first set (orth above.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
Mayor
(Seal)
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
City Clerk
CALIFORNIA HEALTH FACILITIES
FINANCING AUTHORITY
By
Thomas W. Hayes
Ch*~~~~
Deputy
By
ATTEST
By
COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF CHULA VISTA
By
ATTEST:
8
~/ 92/
S727h2
EXHIBIT A
The following ~escribe~ real property in the City of
Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California:.
Parcel 3 as shown on Parcel Map No. 7034, in the
City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of
California, accor~ing to Map thereof file~ in the
Office of the County Recorder of said County,
March 17, 1978 as File No. 78-107000 of Official
Records.
All right, title and interest of the Community
Hospital of Chula Vista in the personal property located on
said Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 7034, in the City of Chula
Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
Map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of said
County, March 17, 1978 as File No. 78-107000 of Official
Records, and constituting -goods,- as defined in Commercial
Code Section 9105(1).
'2Cl:.."'_c..,.,.,....,
A-I
,~ /7 ,/2
EXHIBIT B
Patient Services Offered by Community Hospital
Employee Benefits Related Services
Community Hospital will work in good faith with the
City toward the development of favored contracts for the
provision of health care services for employees and retirees
covered by one of the City's health insurance plans and their
dependents. It is envisioned that this contract will result
in substantial savings in medical espenses to the City.
City of Chula Vista Residents Related Services
The following programs and services will be offered
to such employees of the City and their dependents. such
retirees of the City covered under one of City's health plans
and their dependents, and such residents of the City as may be
specified by the City in connection with a request to
Community Hospital to provide a particular service:
1. Wellness and Health Education
a. Smoking cessation
b. Weight control
c. Diabetes
d. Heart-healthy nutrition
e. Stress management
f. Alzheimer's support group
g. Arthritis
h. Heart disease
2. Health Care ScreeninQ Services:
a. Cholesterol screening
b. Diabetes screening (blood glucose)
c. Skin Cancer acreening
d. Co1orectal cancer screening (hemoccu1t)
~~
- /'7;-'
" .- \
- ..-----
8-1
5727h
3. Traininq Proqrams and Services:
a. CPR certification
b. First aid certification
c. Drug prevention training
d. Flu immunization
Sick-Child Day Care
Community Hospital agrees to work in good faith with
the City to investigate the feasibility and possible
implementation of providing a day care center at the Health
Facilities for sick children.
B-2
yfC(/7<J-1
3966H-S727h
.
.
..
/.~~;t ,-~
1~-nLL-
& LI ~ ~hrU.d',
I
iJ ill . 00 \;k./nl1fi'1~
. . bf~
(: c ~ ......"" -;'~~'J
RESOLUTION NO. an,F;
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING ACQUISITION AGREEMENT REGARDING THE
CITY I S REVERSIONARY I.NTEREST BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA HEALTH FACILITIES FINANCING AUTHORITY
AND C.0MMUNITY HOSPITAL OF CHULA VISTA, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
~ The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of_
the CitY-2f Chllla__V_i~t_~t;h!tt_!;hat certain AcquIsitiol1~;:ee!l1!'!ntn_
reqai"afng the City's reversionary interes-t:--h-etweenTHE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, CALIFORNIA HEALTH
FACILITIES FINANCING AUTHORITY and COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF CHULA
VISTA, dated as of May 1, 1989, a copy of which is attached
hereto and incorporated herein, the same as though fully set
forth herein be, and the same is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula Vista be, and he 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
~~~~ .. 'P
~R. Asmus, Asslstant City
Manager
5594a
ron, Clty Attorney
NOTE:
Acquisition Agreement was not
received from Collll1unlty Hospital
of Chula Vista, attached is an
executed copy. 11/14/89
~7-,/~
Co lr~. bl.!
ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this
25th
day of April
19 Rq ,by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Coune ilrnenilers McCandliss, Nader, Cox, Malcolm, Moore
NAYES: Counei 1 members None
ABSTAIN: Coune; 1 members None
ABSENT: Couneilrnembers None
~jL~
'TTE"b~JMU b 11j df.;/dAj'
City lerk
Chula Vista
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) 55.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, JENNIE M. FULASZ, CMC, CITY CLERK of the City of Chulo Vista, California,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is 0 full. true and correct copy of
RESOLUTION NO. 14056
,and that the some has not been amended or repealed
DATED
City Clerk
~)7.:2?
CC-660
< \ '\ t /
"'"'...~>." '//
""- .-
~ /~..;::-
.....,..... -.'OP ____ --~_
-.....~~-:.,...
..............~--
CllY Of
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
SHIRLEY HORTON
January 10, 1996
Dan Lun9ren, Attorney General
1515 K Street #600
Sacramento, California 95814
RE: Non.Profit Hospital Conversions: Sharp HealthCare
Dear Mr. Lungren,
This letter is a follow-up to the recent Assembly Health and Judiciary Committee hearings on the conversion of non-
prof~ hosp~als to for profit corporations.
Chula Vista, as home to Sharp Chula Vista Medical Center, is keenly interested in the outcome of the negotiations
between Sharp and Cclumbia/HCA and the review of that transaction by the Attorney General and the Legislature.
Our sta'ff took particular note of Deputy AG Jim Schwartz' comments at the December 15 hearing, and we wish to
provide whatever information or assistance we can as your review continues.
Attached is a copy of Chula Vista's written testimony from the hearing, along with a copy With the C~y's current
contract w~h Sharp/San Diego Hospital Association. Under the terms of thiS contract and in recognition for the C~y's
role in defeasance of hospital bonds, Sharp is obligated to provide the City with $1 million worth of in-kind medical
services, a first-right-of-refusal on certain sales or mergers, and 10% of the net profits if there is a transfer of all or
substantially all of the interest in the Sharp Chula Vista Hospital. Since these latter two provisions may be impacted
by the specific terms of the proposed transfer, we are understandably anxious for those terms to become public.
Sharp has committed verbally to stand by all existing contractual commitments, and we are heartened by their spirit
of cooperation. However, given the history of other non-profit health care acquisitions, we want to make certain that
there is not a risk that Chula Vista and even Sharp itself (or a successor non-profit trust) being short-changed via a
less than fair market value sale.
We ask that in your review of the transaction, you require the parties to pay for an independent appraiser who would
report directly to your office. This is standard practice in the development industry when pursuing projects in c~ies
and can assist you in obtaining the necessary expertise and timely review that might otherwise unduly impact your
operations. Also, as part of that appraisal, we ask that consideration be given to both the present and anticipated
value of the assets. If, for example, PacifiC Care can go from a $360,000 estimated value in 1984 when the non-prof~
was converted to a $45 million value in 1985,' why does the charitable foundation only reap the benef~s of the lower
sales price? This question of future valuation became even more pointed when the hearings revealed that Sharp is
retaining a three-year option to sell its 50% share in the partnership, but that any such sale would be at the 1995
value.
W~h the assets of a non-profit hospital chain truly being public investments, the City of Chula Vista urges you to play
an active role in maximizing both the public participation and the public benefit as you review this proposed sale.
Sincerely,
d~
rton
ce:
Jim Schwartz, Deputy Attorney General
City Council
c:\wp51 \Ietters\sharp.ag
;t~ J'-;, /7
~ I (,/'
, See attached; Clearinghouse Review, August-September 1995.
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910' (619) 691.5044' FAX (619) 476.5379
@ PoIl..C--~Paper
ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
ASSEMBLY HEALTH COMMITTEE
Joint hearing on Sharp HealthCare/Non-Profit Hospitals
San Diego County Administration Building, Room # 310
December 15, 1995
Testimony of John Goss. City Manaaer. City of Chula vista
The City of Chula vista is concerned that in the conversion of non-
profit hospitals to for-profit entities, and in the specific case
of Sharp HealthCare's announced for-profit partnership, the needs
and health of the community should carry primary importance.
As you may know, Sharp HealthCare has had a presence in the City of
Chula vista since 1989 when they assimilated Chula vista Community
- "---.--
Hospital into the Sharp HealthCare group via a $47 million revenue
bond issuance and refinancing of the hospital's existing debt.
In a three-way agreement between the City, Sharp, and the
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, Sharp agreed to
provide Chula Vista with $1 million worth of in-kind health care
services, to grant to the City a right-of-first-refusal in
conjunction with any planned sale, and to pay the City 10% of the
net profit from any sale or transfer of all or substantially all of
its right, title and interest in the property. Today, that in-kind
debt has a remaining balance of more than $700,000, and depending
on the estimated value and sale price of the hospital, the 10% of
net profits could range from $0 to several million dollars.
Clearly within the context of this agreement there will be a need
for the City to sit down and discuss with representatives of Sharp
how they feel this agreement applies to the proposed "joint venture
partnership" with COlumbia/HCA and how they would. propose to
respond to the specific conditions of the agreement with the City
of Chula Vista. As legislative or other intervention is
considered, such as to place funds in a separate charitable
foundation, the City asks that any such terms first respect the
prior contractual and community health care obligations that Sharp
bears to the City and residents of Chula Vista.
.~/7/,2Y
City of Chula Vista Testimony
December 15, 1995, Page 2
The city has several issues with the proposed transactions that we
feel the Legislature and Attorney General's office must address to
ensure that the interests of the public are fully considered:
* How would tbe aale affect overall community bealtb care needs?
Columbia/HCA has a history of acquiring community hospitals
and then closing them. In 1995 alone, it has closed seven
hospitals, for a total of 1,300 beds that are no longer
available within their local communities.' Even assuming that
all Sharp's hospital.s-.are kept .open,__we want assurances that
the non-profit assets created by this sale will serve the
needs of each of Sharp's local communities and that
communities would still retain local representation in the use
of those assets. We don't want the current level of health
care diminished to our community.
* How would the aale affect indigent care? If these hospitals
are truly to operate as they did before, we don't want to see
the new for-profit carrying out only "profitable" medicine
while leaving health care for the poor on taxpayers doorstep.
* How will this sale affect veterans care?
Chula Vista has been designated by the Governor's commission
and the legislature as the No. 1 priority site for the state's
next veterans bome, which is adjacent to Sharp's Hospital in
Chula Vista. with the effectiveness of this 400-bed facility
linked to its location and cooperation with Sharp's Chula
vista Medical Center, it is imperative that the hospital's
place and role in the community be ensured.
* How ia tbe value of tbe property being determined and bow is
the public being repaid for ita investment? There has been a
dangerous precedent recently of non-profit assets being
Modern Healthcarc, Sept. 4, 1995
~
/ .// ) c:;
/ c--/
City of Chula vista Testimony
December 15, 1995, Page 3
undervalued in their transfer to for-profit entities. When
Pacific Care converted to a for-profit company in 1984, their
assets were originally valued at $366,000. One year later,
that figure had jwr.ped to $45 million, with today's value
estimated at $2 billion.
The City asks that Columbia/HCA pay for an independent
appraisal of the property. Just as any homeowner would demand
an appraisal before selling their home, so the public has the
right to know.:1:.he.....value of our..;ommunity. .health care provider
before we accede to its sale.
* We aslt the Legislature and Attorney General to maximize public
participation and information as this deal and other potential
bids are considered.
* Finally, we reassert our request that disposition of funds
from the sale, whether to Sharp or 80me other charitable
recipient, follow satisfaction of Sharp'S e:li:isting contractual
obligations to the city of Chula vista.
We wish the committees luck in sorting out these complex issues,
and we remain available to answer any questions you may have.
John D. Goss
city Manager
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Ph: (619) 691-5031
Fx: (619) 585-5612
~
--J ---:"
/ '/ /),?
/ / 0-
Tabl. 1: Undervaluation 01 Call1ornla HMO.
Amount to Charity at
HMO Tim. 01 Con~,,"lon Lat.r V.lue Curr.nt V.lue
Family H.&JIII "'an (FMP) Ua,45f.OOO ('''') l'U,W,oOc (UN) ., ,11' .000.000
"o~ndIUCln H.lilll $11,000.000 (' 8U) $302.100.000 ('''5) I' ,113.000,000
"aei""" ""11Il $350,000 (' ...) ~.300.505 (18U) $2, '83,000.000
.
Il'Iill'lC "nltn Car. 1553,000 (1815) 137.500.000 ('''5) Not AVI;latlle
.
Table 2: Underv./uatlon 01 HMO. Out.ld. of Call1ornla
Amount to Charity It .
Hultll Corporltion Tim. 01 Oonv.,.lon Lat" V"ue Current Value
AIIaClote "1~latrl; IUoo,Ooo (1813). 118.100.000 (1'15) Nol Av.III~I,
Cenl.r, TI~on Sonngs. FL
Gruter 8rlog'001l I ....,8,375 ('US) ",41',371 (uee) 1'10."0,000 ('8931
Foundation. TrumouU. CT
Greater Oelawlr, Vall,y
MUIII'I C,rl/O,1 Val HMO, 1100,000 (118-4) 120.000.000 (1885) Not "vlillbl,
Con;Crdvill'. "A
Group HUIIIl A..o;lallon. 15-'0,000,000 (1113) 150,110.000 ("03) Not AVlllalll, I
Walnln;tcn, OC
Grouo Heallll Plan 01
Grel,er SL LOUIS. ".000,000 (1 peS) J,I.O.OOO.OOO (' 885) ".,110.110
SL Lo~il. 1.10
H.rnOk Alia Bllallil~OY 12. 100,000 (1187) 114.100.000 (1J10) NDIAvailaOIt
(MEALS). "u.OIO. CO
WII"Y Medio&! C'l'Ilar 1200,000.000 (m5) 1115,000.000 ('815) NO! Availlbl.
WioMa. KS
PresOyl.nanl 5t. LIIkt's
Hallll'cart Co~..IiDn. "23.000.000 ("85) 1"0.000.000 ("U) NOt ......1I1b1t
O.nv.r. CO
..
>>
s... t.,.. Rhonela L. ."rlell., .', CII...II.IIo,.".. H,,/r' "Ia~. Co F,"""'Jlt. w.~ ST J"
Apr. 4.1995. II 81; Salley. '"P'" "Olf.. .
...!JOUST-SEPTEMIER 1995 I CLhllNCHo~n ~F1f'"
~.
-".
, -. _,,) r?
'-/7//5(
..,..,.
TOTI'lL P.08
SHARP HEALTHCARE & CITY OF CHULA VISTA
EMPLOYEE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTHCARE
AND
CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY SERVICES
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
This Agreement between SHARP HEALTHCARE and the City of Chula Vista, effective
September 1, 1993, is entered into for the provision of Employee Occupational Hea1thcare and
and Chemical Dependency, as defined in this Agreement, by Sharp Hea1thCare to qualified
employees and dependents of the City of Chula Vista.
WHEREAS, this agreement, which is offered to City of Chula Vista employees on September
1, 1993, followed the City's acquisition agreement with Sharp Community Hospital of Chula
Vista, and
WHEREAS, that acquisition agreement provides a $1 million service agreement in which Sharp
Community Hospital of Chula Vista will deliver occupational hea1thcare and psychiatric services
to City of Chula Vista Employees and credit a service account with the appropriate charge, and
WHEREAS, other hea1thcare providers within the Sharp Hea1thCare System will assist Sharp
Community Hospital of Chula Vista in the write down of the $1 million service debt.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows:
L CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY SERVICES:
Sharp Hea1thCare agrees to provide Chemical Dependency services to qualified City of
Chula Vista employees and dependents who present to Sharp Cabrillo Hospital for
treatment. Sharp Hea1thCare acknowledges that the provision of services to City of
Chula Vista employees and dependents will be in accordance with prevailing hea1thcare
standards, as applicable, in the community.
/P~/?<J2
.~'
2. OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE SERVICES:
Sharp Hea1thCare agrees to provide Occupational Medicine services based on the
specifications outlined in Attachment 2 to qualified City of Chula Vista employees who
present to Sharp Rees-Stealy Occupational Health Program. Sharp HealthCare
acknowledges that the provision of services to City of Chula Vista employees will be in
accordance with prevailing healthcare standards, as applicable, in the community.
3. COMPENSATION:
As per the Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Sharp Community Hospital
of Chula Vista, as referenced above, the Chemical Dependency and Occupational
Medicine healthcare services provided to employees of the City of Chula Vista will be
valued at the rates specified in Attachment A & B and that reimbursement valuation will
be applied to reduce the $1 million service debt.
The valuation for services not specified in Attachment A & B will be at a rate that is
mutually agreed upon between both parties.
4. SERVICE UTILIZATION REPORTING:
Summary reports will be available at the request of the City of Chula Vista on a
quarterly basis. Report specifications will be mutually agreed upon by both parties.
S. TERM OF THE AGREEMENT:
The initial term of this Agreement will commence on the effective date of this Agreement
and shall be renewed, upon the terms and conditions of this Agreement, for successive
one year terms.
This Agreement can be terminated upon mutual written agreement between Hospital and
Payor for such termination.
Additionally, this Agreement can be terminated at the option of either party without cause
upon at least ninety (90) days written notice to the other party.
/1 /~~
y(~
.--, .-,
/7~ -)5
/
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the dates
listed below:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
i fJ._;-;(~
cy; fl1cvv~(M
0_ J-U
Date: 1 /
Title/
SHARP HEALTHCARE:
a
/) .
r~
Date:
Title:
/' -~
/~.
/7~ 3 L!
ATTACHMENT "A"
CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY SERVICES:
Structured Outpatient Program
(limited to a 6 week duration) $2,800 (Case Rate)
Inpatient Admission
(limited to 30 day length of stay per admission) $8,500 (Case Rate)
Services are inclusive of facility and professional services.
/1 .--ff .-"./
? ~I /7/) /7
The week in healthcare
YoUnt H,..lt/w1u
september 4, 1995
Columbia planning more closures
'V.ie'~ going lD be wry aggressiw in doing this." The call was a
regularly scheduled meeting with analysts lD explain Columbia's
semnd~ tinsanri.1 results.
Columbia officials declined to say which hospitals would be
dosed and consolidated. However, such consolidations are a ",r.
ollary of Columbia's strategy in which it builds a netWOrk of pr0-
viders in an urban market. To red""" costs. it often closes one or
more providers. In El Paso. Texas. where Scott bought Colum-
bia's first hoopitals in 1987, he bought ~ and shut one,
Scott has said
closing hoopitals is
a way to force effi.
ciencies inlD the
healtlu:are system.
Part of the cost of closures is simply a write-down of assets,
which doesn't inoolw spending money, However, Columbia also
must pay severance and ()I1tpl.,..,.",,.nt CXJStS for employees who
aren't offered jobs at other Columbis facilities.
In the case of the Gilmer employees, the hoopital will close
Sept. 30, but employees will be paid tIuough Oct. 28. Gilmer
had been a Healthtrust facility, Healthtrust bought it from Bay.
lor Health Care System. which ~tened lD clooe the money.
losing hospital in 1992 if it didn't find a buyer, Healthtrust
bought it in January 1993.
"You have to have enough patients to operate a medical fa.
cility like Gilmer efficiently," said Columbia's Steve Blaine
about the Gilmer closing, 'Patients want and need the best
staff. the latest equipment and services. and you just canOt
sustain that with a revenue stream generated by 10 to 12
patients a day,'
It's diflicult to measure how many hospitals have clooed this
year because the American Hospital Association dl!Clded to dis-
continue its closure list. However, thanks to Columbia. the num-
ber of acute-<:an! hospitals lD clooe in Texas aJready has eclipsed
the 1994 figure. Last year, nine hoopitals clooed in Texas. but
only one was a medicaJ/~ hospital. The other eight were
psychiatric hospitals, an outgrowth of the overbuilding in such
facilities in the late 1980&.
The only medicaJ/~ hoopitallD close in Texas last year
also was a Columbis facility, 25lH>ed Sam HoustDn Memonal
Hospital in Houston.
This year. nine Texas hospitals haw clooed or are set to close,
or those liw are owned by Columbia.
or Columbia's closures, ~ are in the HoustDn market,
which generates $1 billion in revenues for the hospital chain,
The most recent closure will be MedicaI Center Hospital. a for-
mer Hospital Corporation of America facility that was merged
into Columbis last year. MedicaI Center Hospital has lost SiD
million owr the past ~ yean, aa:ording to HCIA. a Balti.
more-based healtlu:are information company,
Howewr, Columbia's closures are clearly pert of a sttatelt" 00
deploy inpatient resoun:eII in the right locations. Although it's
closing hospitals as pert of its mow to make its regional health
systems more efficient. it's alao building hospitals in growing
markets whe~ it wanta to be located. So far. Columbia has
opened two hospitals in Texas this year and 8I1IlIlIIIICed plans to
build hospitals in Naples, Fla., and Orem. Utah.
Columbia hoopitals that ha... dosed or are set to close include
84-bed Doctors Hospital, Conroe, Texas; 4O-bed Gilmer Medical
Center. 9().bed Westbury Hospital, HoustDn; l4O-bed Grant Cen-
ter Hospital, Miami; 2OO-bed Palm Beach Regional Hospital,
Lake Worth. Fla.; 23~ Medical Center Hospital. Houston:
) /. ~7 /J and 4i5-bed Medical Center Plaza East. Fort Worth. Texas,
/ ---> Y -Sandy Lutz
Modem HealU"lCareJ$eDtemOer 4. 1995
J
A rural hospital in eastern Texas last week announced it
would close, recalling shadea of the late 1980s and early
1990s, when dozens of financially strapped hospitals in small
towns shut their doors.
However, this month's closure of 46.bed Gilmer Medical
Center represents a different twist on hospital closu~s, This
one is induced by investor-owned giant ColumbialHCA
Healthcare Corp.
So far this year, the Nashville, Tenn.-based healtlu:are system
has closed or .nnnnn<W\ the cloeuno of aeven hospitals with
nearly 1.300 licensed beds. More CoIumbis closures are likely,
although exact locations aren' being released.
Although Columbia's inclination to buy hospitals is almost leg-
endary, it is proving to be the biggest instigator of hoopital clo-
SUlOS as well. Only the military has discuseed closing more h0s-
pitals this year,
Last month. Columbis took a pretax charge of $387 million for
"merger and facility costs.' That total included a variety of costs
~ to its $5.6 billion merger earlier this year with Health.
trust. another investor-owned chain.
or that charge, $282 million was ~ to a write-<lown of as-
sets for hospitals that would be consolidated inoo others. It alao
included an unspecified number of facility ~lllCll!ltlents,
"Clearly, our goal is to do as many consolidations as we can.'
said Richard Scott. Columbis's president and chief executiw offi.
cer. in a confe=ce call with Wall Street analysts last month.
y
Hospital closures
LAM E S A vJ,JID~ -rill ~ ~/ler I,t;
Grossmont Hospital lease deal set
Grossmont Hospital will be leased to Columbia/HCA
Healthcare Corp. under a deal recently approved by the
publicly elected board of the La Mesa facility.
Grossmont's board voted 5-0 Friday to lease the hospital
for 30 years to Columbia/HCA, which is buying control of
Sharp HealthCare's six hospitals in the region. Grossmont .
had been leased to Sharp for a five-year period.
Columbia/HCA will pay $53 million to Grossmont's
board for the new lease, which will replace the existing
Sharp-Grossmont agreement, officials said.
Grossmont's board then will retire the hospital's debt,
leaving about $38 million for future health-care projects in
the East County hospital district.
The board will control the $38 million endowment and
decide how to spend annual interest income from the fund,
said Jim Stieringer, board president.
,
~
/7- 5'7
/ /-
~.
\L
00
=
o
-1'""'4
~
r.Jj
<D
&
00
<D
00
-1'""'4
~
~
~
-~
~
~
~.I:\..
it
..=~
oo.~
~]
o ;;s
~~
~~
00 ~
'Qf)~
;@l
=1
Q) s
-,- --~."~
B
'"
C>
C>
~
C>
OJ
'"
ril
~
j ::;
, ril
-E-<
0..
ril
rn
~;,;
<<:
(4
.z
'"
rn
.
ril
1 z
l ~
~
'"
E;'
z
o
~
z
'"
o
d
ril
~
o
z
<<:
rn
ril
II:
E-<
~~:E =.s~~~S ~
8~] .s:!:;.~~5
>..~.... "'CJ t1CI"t' c; ~ -
g..c: tn ..."1:1 Q.l <Il iilk! tn
:Ill t !!i!.!A~ Coo ~
'= =13 lS c..c.81!1 j;
~~ 'i~l!~:afS_<
lU'S.5 is e.... Q,) =-= is Q,lU">.
"CIo.... 2:! 11 ~e-5 d" ~-g;;.~
9"", 0:3 u g....:;.9 0 e.!!
_NQ,)<Il = 5c-c'"'CI.DU
IV- = Q.l .0 e-tJ iJ'!! '"' = a
:3 g 0= i ~ 0 g ~~ :-a.!:!
=.~ S!: "'~.:! OU~
t8~~ ti~"E g.'3~'ig~
~'a u.: ~ ~a'd'll
~s.s~~.s ~g~~~~ '~Q.l
=; s tS.=.s:€ ~';:';;'EJ:::a s."'CI 8.~
tIl'~~8~:t ~~,ge<ll.8='Eo'5
....... olJ ."... 0.;;;;1 e tit 0 ~Lt)
e5 &.5 0 g ~ a 1:d3 0.$ S QA tMl..8
:s 5:=....=i'E ~VLn u E]~~'~""
g.::~ !fe ~ ~~=oE~ ~t eo!!]
"'CJ~ 0 Q.l ~o_Q.l. =c.~....
<I..l 0 ~... ~ "" . ... <II = <II 0 5 4)':::'
...::r; a'l:! tlll_._ E 0.<'11:"9, .... c'" ll"
lJ c.- ... = :i so!! i\ Q.l >. c.:J
Jg~]~!~.~c~B=~1~;~
....eQ,l.a.-c.....;:::lc.- ~>.=~~...
"'CJ ~~<~~=~~]~~iQ.lo~
=~_..c:u<'l>.<'I~-:sleo~~.....-
<r.n.- :c.c t-<l.ij....... ()lo;J
.~~~~~~<~~~].~s~~i
.... __OIl.... _<.<:>....,C':l..Q Ut.,l
"CI .....c: Il.l <Il '''' Ul "4.1' 1-0__
-::; -=.t::.c:'" t ,'p iU..c: Q.l ell o:!
(5 o~.....o.....c:e -:01....10<4.1 .-
u a.~t~.5"'.! 1i5~ :=>.13~
~ a~~<~~~ ~l3~Cll~~
~ =::l=u~.oQ.l -.!laC:~
.! mOO e:C <'l 0;'.3 t !:''::~ Q,lC'3
.~ ~.g35 5 ~ ~.~ ~~e- ~=
.s <G .0.... tGo 0. c-
JS:gf:isg .;; ~iil-lo'::~
:2 .....;:Jc..=:.=e~ .~a 8....~e
1J ] ~~8~.!::l~ >.< e~ 8..=
I x='~~~~!:~~.!=:8
'g e.3~ ~~j!~.s.s"';i"~.!! ~ e.
~"<'lCllM~*-~"CII-oE~--.
04.1-=,," .o:ltlll >.coeo.v::l
~ ~cn 8. '$ "a.=.5 ~ .tJ """ :;:I ~ Q.l - ci.
~~.5~~i~oel.U~a'~~~!
"'.... u ca..c: Q.Q.I 0 C u..:::...!Xl
Cll':'~O= Cll]~-e<til!.c:
oj"CI ~ 0 ~ Il.l il...S:EJt.... ~
~~.9:G~ ~.s~:t=.8~
~~t;!.8] ~~~8~~7i1
.....c:c 4.10 oc:olE"'"cri
..c:"'t:~>.l:l !i3/Ucoi!:l"CIiJ:
'~1O'l!=:g~ 08.S Of/J:!5
<Il ;>'Il.lS e:ltjUl.......O
]~ ~ tl ~~ l!~ ~'2 8Jc:;
\C.:::! ~::I5 0 r.n_~ I.lc C .
<II I"l "Cl l"l.+! O::l..c
"5lE .S~i!i tf.:.:5c!l 15 'i
aO>.-;tlO"CI ~~4.I <Il ~
3 p.~ .5 Il.l G.i ::l ~:a >. r: * l'4
gj"O.S Be a<.c,:! E..9l!.!!
'C(/l; ~ t:~ ....El.~]~ ~r-- S'
.5 ~'>.s:r:.s ~ 1.1< IS 8
.;!ls1l.u~1i .:...,;,~~~
'1I.l ::J""lN1::! ~:a:iftl~"'~
ID.oI; Il.l-e III ill.... V >>A
;:~~(I)~'57!e ]g~~]a
.!!! 1i:loo- Q~Illg.1
~........ (I) '..0 l:lll0 G>
~:<~"'O.1lO <fle~lX.1
]~uv]~ ~8e~"'O.
~ c."''i ~ 'rB~- $
llGa1{ 11 ~ ~ O..~ 8'&.8c
c c"'e 01:i 0 Q,j.i iIl,c 0
o ~ ,c ,c CIl ......
~ ~1:i-a ~]1!.8 c:! :l.~ Q,~
l?l ....u;o:;...... ""'i ~ ~:r'S.8.a
G>>>~ 0"C llGC~' ~"5i"e ~~
C G>........ 8. = 0 :a'Cl" ....-... >-
=::.:: G>"l::I o".;::l~"'O~ ~"C::::l';:l
~ "i~ lS.~"eL.e !!.2~~ ~
t.sij'Cl'.s .8 ~;"='a
Hll!~~] .9~he.
~~;:I] l>~~H~
g ~.3 Us ~ a g .9 j
8;~~;:1 U:;;gl
~~~8~, ~~ili'o",
.I '3~.9~e..9 &.8,_:;<5
.II~ i~ ~-ii~-21" ~~ ~U
I\i u I;,s.'l.a e,u '"
Ii..ce ._-'" ~u.s..
.... ....t: ~ ~ u 1! ~.i ~.1'28.a
a.t;..- t.I 0.c-5 0.0 ;:c;;
"I
..
i
0;
~
A-
i
'"
J!
~- -:l / -'7 --- '75
~ ~ ) . 5
0.../ ,~
, 'pm
ll{ ~~Yro s,{1'~u~ A:awo>>y alp
(q ~ 8U!aq quiMUlUOP Iuowe
lllC . 5Pl.Quo:> IUVltnrtlOJ c:Im:fs
"suoJ;.aJodlo:> lyoJd-JoJ 01 qa&n JO
)~ alp ~ p;M.IOA~ uaaq aA.8q oqJA
,aA9~~ uonl.rod.Ioo lyoJduou JO
quawa8Ul?.1.lV ItrelfDsuro s'f:>alp b
U~1r sflI p~ 'reap VJHllr!qwnJO:)
dJetlS alp }O Ma!Aa.l alp lurs!A-Jad
ns S! oqJa IIJaual A:iMlJOne al1Q9
ilndap I 'ZlJIMl{JS "3 sawer
'WOK)lJ(X)SeJD.~
elfl OfS:!.ldms passa.ldn pUl? 'SJal
IBW ~JO} lfS1l1 J;)AO lonuo:> ou srq
[UOMSn3: pres 'a:>Jo} lfSlI ;)lfllfl!A\
~~.loJa S! Ol{M d.mfs JO luap~aJd
Q!^ .loroas II 'A:eJ.mW 'w ;)llalOJ
"A:f;)lllA!Jd P!"8 JaqWilW OK).1O}
jSlfl, e ..'s3oM uo PIOl{ IIr!1U1lsqns
; sit( all A:I~;)J ~ uaqA\ 'sJUNl
!~plal ~OU s,al{ alf!1 Bun;)1r }O
lof pooJ AlqeuOSeal I I~p 1,;)1{..
'ssa:>OJd aJPuOf ;}tfl tq
liMJOAII! A[{1'J8'a~UJ S! pue 'P<fS~
~ uoqeuuoJU! ~eqJa P<f~Oflap nq
in <Y.lJO} 'fS1Q Oftp ~0fS lpJOMSJl3: 1.RtP
alou sJ<KIwaw OK)JO} 1(SlQ InQ
"P<fI!A~ SIEt.'lI. all asn~
no.I8 alfl}O sBuptJaW news P<fpuOfl
re put 'a:>.loJ 1fS11 Oflp lfl!A\ ~AIOA
11 IOU SIEt.'lI. quoJaSfl3 P!IIS 'ft'U0fS1J
!lf8:lfda~s uewoJasal(ods dJeqs
'OOO'OSt$ ,noqo
J iOta} ~U1IfDSUO;) renuue aA~
1 S! AtPaUodou aH 'UOJlIIZ!\fd.1O
111fS 0M{l 01 ltrel[RSUOO Ir stJ!VWou
4 IRq '0'" YJH!"!'lwnl<>:}dmr.;
tp BlI!Joo\l!BU> J01jO '0& (!Jdy
A~G }~ n p.unou OfH "P!"8
!1r!:lYJO d.mts 'l(;wA IS~ lUaww~
O} ac<Ilrf!8A1l'Un S'lW. lpJoJaSJ13
. ~'laAaI1.1OJWOO e 1'"
'tre S;):)uetrg ;)tp Jaa!AaJ 'SJ1Pgjo
:nq& lp!A\ W&Op 1!8 01 ~ a:JlOJ
SI10iKp 'OfW 01 swaas I} 'a:JlOJ lfI'1
'l{1"~ a:>uap!JUO:> JO 1pV9Jq ~
~ 8M palaP!WO:l ;)l{ p!" aH
',u01Ul&O\lUO dIeqs
l{l".M:>J alqeneAI aq ptnOM letp
~uow alp JOJ SlURowe pallrW!18;it
la" ApnJfl .ualp ltql Jauodou
WOJ} I.l.IIOfI 01 p;lUtIrQs sea. nOli}(
'u091tUJOJ
l! 3umal II! sJ:Ifap 1noql wa:mm
a5WJm os1' - .raqumu nloJ
~ e S! oqJa put 'olOt!a ues JO
10!"'!; PlY jlIB"1 Otp 0"'J1P _
~~11 aql - nOli}{ A.108ou~
.", "sp.l00aJ :>nqnd all
~q,," qJnotp UaAa Willp laB 1,up'p
1q ~a{1'S alp UO <Y.l!RC) s,{\!'J~~
~uJOny al11s alp tp!14 lsnJny UJ
am SlUilWn:>op .loJ pil'fSI aq u;XU
bC~G I
"sa", JaAaU lnq 'Jl!';J.( S1lP A:[JQ
uo~esue.n ;Jtp JO sP.11ap JO pawoJ
-II! aq Ol palf'Se aq p!'8 SSG!
'8IJl'lOP _ 01 ',"",!JIll dIeqs JO
OK)U11:>nlou alp JO ~It:):olq sWOt;)uoo
SJoq.ll1( aq pm !sox lng 'SSil:>o.Jd
atp UJ AI~Aq~ alad!;)!l.Ied 01 p;l!J1
srq ;)q 'lpJoJaSf13 "X Jalad aAnn:>a
-xa Ja!lP dmfs ~JPaJ-MOU Aq lnA:
sN}. AIJQ OK)JOJ )[811. alp uo aq 01
pa>[U SII.M ;)q a:>lqS 18'tp p!" SIOX
"pamS!W ann pue aweu S!lf lUllJa
l.usaop aq aUl!l awlIS alp I' 1nq
'Alunoo alp ~ spaau a1l:)-1uaB!plI!
snowoua ~lp JO asnr.>aq p;JAloAlI!
aq 01 paau II SlOta} aq SAes ssoX
'ewwalW a1\!':)!Iap e Slua
-s;)Jd a:>JoJ )[8"11 alp - SJaqwaw
JOJlpO awQS pUll - $SOH lOA
..'1uno:> suo~do UV..
"P!'8 lanO.l~ ..'Al!UOWWO:> OJl{1 lI!
SW;)lqoJd l{1paq Joftnu uo SaA!l:>ads
-Jad aAlt( oqJa asoql If\!' 8uoWl! UO~
-IKIP!l.Ied ~1U1l0;)ua 01 1ue.M (..
"08;)!0 ues JO q:>.mqJ IS!pol{1aW
palron 1SlJ.::I OJtp II pUaJaAaJ JOroOfS
S! 'UIIUIJ'!eq:roo latpo s,aJlOJ )(9lQ
aql '.lauoJ~ 'IUaW;)lI1S paudiud e
II! pres JanoJ~ l(uW 'AaH alp ,,'Aes
01 s2tf Alrunwwo:> <X(118lfM 8l1!Jl!'OM1
1noqe palpxa S! a;)JoJ "S"l1 mo..
"spaau aJl!':>-tpleaq laWUR uo loads
aq lJl!':) lUalUNt.Opua alp WOJ} s8l1!
-we;) 11mUU\!' .MOl{ UO - UO!lep08SV
tel!dSOH ola~ ues alp - JUWCXI
S,d.mfs as~pe 01 pasodOJd uaaq
sit( Ot;)JoJ lISIQ Jaqwaw-oZ y
"aassau
-uo~ JO 'cUo:> o.re:>tpJl'OH YJH!"!'l
-wnlG:)- 01 sJ1Q!dsoq 81' UJ lSilJall1!
8umOlluro JO at" s,d.reqs IYOJduou
at{1 tuO.IJ awoo 01 sluawaluaue
l'Puetrg uo luawwoo :>!lqnd JOJ A1!l1
-nlJOddo lS.Jg alp aq ffiJD. oBilKI ues
UJ lootpS ql!H UfO;)urJ 1e AtpSan~
tJ!Iaq 18'tp s8tJ!.leaq J!lqnd ;XU
'sUOMdo al~
-nwoJ W;)tp draq 01 {\!'~ alp lnoqe
uonlftUJOpq Aal( laB Ol sawp Ie alqe
.un uaaq aAeq .{alp An - 101:>a.IW
lUilWl.Rdap lp~ Alunoo 'naX 'X
""'I0l{ ''<1 'tmlI.IJl'1P-OO 0 B"!P"P
.lI! - SJ<KIWilW Ot;)JoJ )(SIQ awas
"uo~URJ JP.M. I! Jaoq put Ot;)uapuacl
.,aPII! S,dno.1B' alp lnoqe suoHsanb
aA8'lt sJaqwaw awos 'poHWoJ 8UJ
-aq 8"! Ot;)Jo.!llfU~ spaOtN t{1paH A1
.runWWOJ d.m(s alp se uaAa lng
'SJl'l!<fs04 ....JtpJl'OH dIeqs
JO ares pasodOJd alp WO.IJ sJe'fIOP
JO SUO!ffiW JO RSn ;}fq!8SOd uo l(ilaJa
"!'l1 BlJ!1I1I!ll"'l 'BII!J=I Pf04 fITJ'.
Ot;).1OJ )(981 e 'spaau aJ1t.)-lplr..ltl A1!U
-nwwro uo UO!lIftUJOJll! 8~aas
lI3J.llL!llUV.LS
IIOlIlICI1".ca
. ares mOJJ 8p1ItlJJO
asn alfJ uo jlrnoom
~TOq Ol aaJoJ lfSU~
r
'W;JlsAs iUII:)
-lplr..ltl 1J1:)!Jawy ~ JO Sluauod
-WO:).mfvw amp.md nq U. n s.m.(
lua:>aJ UI spunoq pue sdeat OJ UJaOJI
pllq seq VJH/e!qwnrG:) 'Aneuop
-IIU 8Jl!'l!dsoq OOE tmfl a.lOW lp!A\
.. 'S;)nUaAaJ aUJIn.DUJ
AOVU!IJIW JO pD!.Iad I UJ ~
8une.Iado Jilql~}o l[RSilJ" atp aJilJA
SilSSOl 8une.lado S,d.mfs palOU
uodou PUOwtuq{ lpRU"IS au
'Sp.lO:>a.lOl~e 'UO!l
-f!W 6'8$ JO sassal {1"Uo!llUadouou
pUll uO!If!W 8"tl$ JO sa8S0f fVUOP
-emo paAIoAII! J1QOl S!1IJ. 'sp.IOO
-iJ 01 'lI!PJro:>I '.rea.{ 1"P UO!JP.m
8'EZ$ JO {e:10l e lSOf dmIs ln8
"SpJO:>
-aJ s,dno..tB lppaq ;)lp 01 3tJ!pJO:>
-:>8 'UO!If!W OSL$ JO sanUaAaJ: lJu!
-1eJado palI!qwo:> P8'lt d.mfs 'S661
'OE "1das 8l1!Pua lnA f1!;)SY alp OJ:
..'AlrunWWO:> alp
}O spaau alq"l1~ 0Mp II!JIRJ 01 uo!f
-S:!W S1! AfSllO!.las WA. Sil3f\!'l p.xvoq
aq.L. "s!JAal S,d.mfs P!" ..'saop
p=q (drel(SJ otp l{UI1jll,UOP I Puv
~:p!IJU0:> e 8! aJ'al{l 3fU!lP l,UOP (..
'd.mfs lfl!14 ..a.mlUilA IlI!of
;Jql JO VJHI~qwnrOJ 18!sse Ol pt:lSn
<KIlOU p[Roqs It. "pm aqs ..'I! 8un\!':)
-O(III 8! Ol{Ja pUll 01 II!JD. hallOW atp
aJaqJa lnoqe paWa:Juro au aM,.
"af1S J1Q!d
-sol{ alp WD.lJ A:auow iMp BumOllUO:>
P.IeOq 19oJduou s,d.mfs UJ ..1~Ja1UJ
JO l:>!IJUCX' R.. lnoqe pa!J.IOAl S! uon-
-~JO .1aq P!" Jill.mqtul}f puy
..'4\01 aq Ol
s.lIICIdde1(.. "Uoron S,JOKUnSUG:) tp!.&
A;JWOne ue 'Ja8.mqweH a(3 P!"8
..'slasse s,dmfs JO uonen(\!'A al{1
1noqlr ~ A.mA anr aNi.
"sdno.I8 M~ Jalpo
JO ""'" uu ponq 'uu!II!W 00" 10
ponJl'A or.>.. SJl'lfdso1l d.m{s Otp po
-pnpuoo ~ s,f'J~ A:awony
a'll lp!14 pam uodou 9,uug au
'IQnoAnq ;)Jl!':).lfl(Qq uo sasro
-OJ tp!q4\ ":>OJ: s~tQ.Ied puoW'lIlqf
lpnn1nlS JO aug BtIp[U8q lU:olUQSaA
-11] OOSJ:lUaIli lftS Otp po.l!'l dIeqs
'IQane f\!'1!d90q aq1 an(eA o~
"o:>sptreJ,!f: ues JO uo!lln s,Jawns
-UOJ "'I!l 'odno.tll .lollOOApo UIO.lJ
AU!ltuOlO ooop B1I]lloll .... .... -
UOn1m.[U lass, ;;np AI~ _
:pad illp JO sf!8lilp '~ tmY e
pJ\!'&Ol 8OfAOW (QP dmIs alp ry
'-11"_-
'"OIlOI1I]<>!V;)Hi"!'l
-wn[OJ-<l.tYqsJD.;)Q'OR[JUJopetJO.lO:>
apnpll! Ol AeM. JilpUR are SUO!llpoJ
-oN.... .l1!1Illmmoo J9J _ &S$
B"!lloll Al!\!OllJ Otp ""'" IBtp l'>!'l
-'iP otp tp!'" '.....A 0& ,oJ YJH!"!'l
-wnlO:> 01 """llOf "'I PJIlo" dIeqs
01 pilIeal Jaou fIQ~d90q paUA\O AP!I
-qnd atp 'reaP lUOWSSOJD alp Of
'P01l]WJOl
-up uooq ,ou nq "lOP Otp IRq
'A" sJ1'PYJO 'AlunG:) lpJoN
U'! Plaq <KI ffiA\ 8unOtaw Y
'pool{ uoa"l{ OISOI
'looqJS q8!H esaW 1rJ!W 1e
8 'PO 'w'd OE:L 01 OE:g_
"aAV tp.mo,!f:
9LZ 'SJilqWllqJ IpunOJ
Al!J Olll!A 1lJlI4J "'Il 10 Aop
-s.mq~ 'w'd OE:L Ol OE:g_
'oIOJ<!lftS'.,S
l!l6t 's OSI 'fOOlfOS 4B!H 11]0'
.lI!1 JO wn!JollPne ;)Ip II! Alp
-Ian~ 'w'd OE:L 01 OE:S_
:SWRJoJ A:l!URWWO:>
asalp l' IUOfWWO:> :>!fCInd iJ'f\!'l
ffi^\ a:>Jo.!l :J[Se~ SpililN lpllaH
A:1!UnwwOJ dnqs aq~
SIev.dsoq d.leqS
UO lIS SWR.IOJ
'ool '1!JOJd-JoJ Ol
p;lU'fAUO:> aq Ol papadg au A;XU
'YJHI~qWRfG:) lfl!IA SU09;)IISUUl
Ofl1U8das UJ paAIOAUJ aJ1 - op
-WOJO:) pue esaw '1l1! luOWSSOJ:D
- Sl'1!dsoq dJeqs.IatpO 0N4 a1l.L
"SUOPRl!lSU! 19w:d-JOJ n aleJado
P[RoJa [{1' - 1l0000000W tq A1!f!;)'J
o puo "l'!A 1lJlI4;J d.m{s 'Jl'llOd
8WO'] UJ 0ffi1ql!'J 'esaW AtI.In)l
U'! {1'1JotuaW - Sfl!'l!dsoq s,dmfs
'Ie~p YJHlIr!qmnroJ illfl U}
'AeJD.Od pUll oPJPUOO
-'3: II! lfIQ!Cf80q seq lp!llM. 'SWilldS
qlleaH opI.lawOd-nwO('d at(l
put A::a!J-!.I~ lp!14 0fl'!fYJ\!' Olll{1'SOd
-oJd apew seq osl' sddy..t::)S lYOJd
-uoN "S;)!l!f!;)eJ OSJO JO aseat twill
-Juof e JOJ suoP'!lolau ~^!8npG
U!laq Ol lp!llJa lpVA dn0J8 I l(:J!d
01 popodxo OJ1l _ JO dOl
'InfOtaJ& taa} ~ OR[J Of 'sJ1Q!dsoq
s,oSJn JaAO a'l'l Ol Iu!M S! 0SfI'
dno.df scfd!J>s ponq-llJIOf., 01l.l
'VJHI'!QwnIOJ 8l1!PnP1I! 'sdnoJl
l'1!dsoq aanp woJ} SfI9Odo.ld uon
-'!IYJ1! lpnOl Ol palOA apfSU1a:>() UJ
JalUil;) (l!':)!paW A1!J-!J~ JO SilalSTUl
JO pnoq Otp 'l{OO'l 1"1 ',o~mu
J1Q!Cf80q s,UOfJilJ alp JO lU:ol:>.lad Ot
tmfl alOw uO!laJodJoo paseq411!^
-qs'N illp a~ PfllO& letp aADW e
-1fJI0[ II"'] pue 18a.DfP.H UJ stelTdsoq
0N4 s,oSJn JilAO 0>>JI1 Ol3l1!PPfCl S!
YJH!'!qwn!O:l 'Jl'OP JOtpouo 1lJ
Ju....w...OW
. AnsnplJ!
J1Q!dsoq s,uolla.l alp JO lUa:JJad OE
lnoql! fOJluo:> PfDOJA VJHI'TqwnIOJ
'p;>lOJduJoo '! Jl'OP dIeqs otp JI
'uulll
-aJ e OflIU!WOP Aatp UilqJA $.lawns
-UO;) [(1' JOJ SOK)!.Id asn.DUJ Aalp pue
'all!':) 1uaB!PlI! 3D!uoddns ~ pJo:>a.l
Joad e aAIt( suonlJodJo:> lyoJd-JoJ
;)WOS letp ~oqs ;JAeq sa!plllS
"SlS;)Ja11I! A1!URunuo:> Ol UIIt
Jatpu SJOlSaAUJ 01 SJa.MSUII lRt;
tIO!1aJodJo:> aBnq I! Aq pa11f1I!WOp ~
l! J! WillSAs all!':) lfll'ilq s,uolliJ.I ilti
Ol uaddeq ffiA\ 12tf/4 lnoql Wil;)UO
alqlJ;lp!fuoo passaldx;) Sel{ aqs
'03a~ ues"<l 'Auatpn(J ouaJOI'
~ 8UJPn(:>UJ 'uonlBalap o8a!{
ues alp woJ} SJolflne-o;) f\!'J;)A;)lI S\!'
'Jl'OP d.m{s otp JO ..n""", lJ1ld t
uan!J.M SIIJa l{:>~.M 'a.manw aq~
"a.mleu!!f S!lf 10} UOSP.h
;)lad 'ADD OIl! luas pue ;unseal
alp passed tp~Ja 'alRlelS!8." au_
JO uo~nas ISI( alp 8u!Jnp 'OlUill
-e.c1lS-a '8.raqUOlS} INd uewAftltna
..sy Aq ~nponlJ! SlUA mq alf.L
"suoQ!
-odJo:> 19oJd-JoJ Ol s~:;m;e {1'1!dSo
19o.rduoa JO alllS atp laAO la1l\O'
AJOlern3aJ peoJC( a;)!JK) S,f\!'J9Uil~
AaWOnv;)lp saA!B 1etp I -uer1:laY
alf'l 01 p;llJadxa sT Ml!'[ lAau y
'YJH!"!'lwnIO:> puo dJ1lqs Uoo'"
-aq luawa3U11.I.I\!' ;)Ies alfl JO ;J.msol
JOJ all!lPlap IE ':>010 alfl ~JoJ;)q UOl
-pap e iJ)(l!'W 01 spadxa ZUeJAtpS
.81_111 UI H......:
"ales alfl a8uaRllp 01:j.IR0
.lO!JadnS e U! l!flSJa1!f e am: PIRC
aq 'P!" ZVeA\q:>s 'suonen08~
Act paArosaJ aq 1,UPJnOO 11ltp all!
Oltp lfl!A1 walqOJd e S! ;)Jatp salJ!l-
-J~lap a:JYJO S!lf n "leap ;)({1 aAoJdd
01 A1!.1olflne alp aAeq 1,USaop a
pres ZlJI/4lfJS '.M1!f allQS JapUn
'. 't6l!'[ 18nJ1 01 8UJPloo:>e pal
-ueq lJtqaq S! rnp aq~ p. Aes PfDo
uatp a:>YJO S!lf PfllS ZU1J&tpS
'lnfila.M .MiJJ !X;)U alp II! sp.to
-aJ palsanbaJ alp wn10u 01 1~
-X;) Aalp p!" SI'P!Do d.mfs "SUlJ(
a.msopsrP ISaJalUNo-P!t1UO:> c
s~lnll!W 8uqOJaw pJBOq wO.IJ 'spJO
4.1 f1Uon!PPI' }O sadAl tL auqslK'l
4J ~nar e dmfs panss! 'as\!':) at
JO ;)J.mp II! O;)SpueJ.!I ues lJ! (1l.I
-uaa A;)WOne A1ndap atp 'ZlJIJatp'
'X saure[ 'lpUOW S!IIl Ja!lll'3:
'AI.radOJdW! 19oJd PfRO.-
UO!PlSueJl al{1 qlVA palepo'llS
auo ou ~etp pUll AIJado.xd pan{\!'
aJilJ& PfOS BUJaq slasse atp letp a.m
.ua 01 a{llS pasodOJd alfl 8u!.Ma!^a
S! a:>!JJO s,f\!'Jau~ AaWOnv alf~
'pres S!IA~ ..'aA8'lt sAlJAf8 Aat!
pue 'pool arQI1!.l'tP iJtp JO lS;)Ja
.UJ 15aq alp lJ! :PI' Ol uopllnqo u'
seq.. PJeOQ 19w:duou d.mJs au
';)liJqdJqs.ratQ.l1l(
YJH/e!qwnloJ-dnqs IU!of aq
JO uO!llrJade atp WOJ} SPURl f'UO!
-lPpe I;)J 01 sadoq 0Sf1 PJeOQ lYOJ(
-UOU dmfs alp Pres 'A:aWOUII d.Jwq~
C-g UUJ4p~,umlW~
StIonsanb AtIUIU saSIU,
Sllllldsoq JO aJ1ls aq,
dJellS