HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1996/10/08
Tuesday, October 8, 1996
6:00 p.m.
"I dec!are under pen~!ty of perjury that I am
ern):o:,:o:'~ t)'1 t:'1e Ci t'! of Chu;a Vista in the
o~ :ice of t',;:'~ (;:ty l.;;,:;;'.: itmd 1';'1:.\;;: ! P03'~c:j
this Arrcn~.;i1/rJ:)u;:;'J on tilo B:.ii!,'?tin B03/d at
the PUbIiC~I'~q Bu'~jinG [1 a}clty ~II on
DATED,/? _7,,'1& SIG"ED /0' . ~"
, /
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
Regular Meetin2 of the Citv of Chula Vista Citv Council
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. Oath of Office: Bob McAlister - Resource Conservation Commission.
b. Proclamation recognizing corporate co-sponsors of the City of Chula Vista 1996 Music in the
Park Summer Concert series. Mayor Horton will present the proclamations to the Chula Vista
Star-News, Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc., San Diego Gas and Electric Company, McMillin
Companies, EastLake Development Company, Bank of America, El Torito Restaurant, and Sharp
Chula Vista Medical Center.
c. Proclaiming the month of October 1996 as National Arts and Humanities Month in the City
of Chula Vista. Mayor Horton will present the proclamation to Bill Virchis, Vice Chair, National
Arts and Humanities Committee.
d. Presentation by Daniel Hentschke, City Attorney for Oceanside and Solana Beach, presidept of
the League of California Cities' attorneys department, concerning Proposition 218: Voter
approval for local government taxes. Limitations on fees, assessments and charges. Initiative
constitutional amendment.
*****
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 linal 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 avail11ble in the City Clerk's Office.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 10)
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" avail11ble 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 Deputy City Attorney stating that there were no reportable actions taken in
Closed Session on 10/1196. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed.
Agenda
-2-
October 8, 1996
6. RESOLUTION 18449 DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED CITY REPRESENTATIVES TO
ACQUIRE SURPLUS PROPERTY FROM THE CALIFORNIA STATE
AGENCY FOR SURPLUS PROPERTY - The City has been requested by the
Department of General Services of the State of California to update our list of
authorized representatives for acquisition of surplus property. This list was last
updated in February, 1993. In order for the City to be eligible to continue to
participate in this program, it is necessary to update this information. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (City Manager)
7. RESOLUTION 18450 ACCEPTING DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,200, AUTHORIZING
EXPENDITURE AND APPROPRIATING SAID DONATED FUNDS TO
THE POLlCE DEPARTMENT FOR PURCHASE OF RUBBER
FLOORING FOR THE INDOOR F1RING RANGE - The Police Department
recently received an unsolicited donation in the amount of $2,200 from North
Island Federal Credit Union. The donation was presented to the department for
the specific purpose of purchasing flooring needed at the indoor firing range.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police) 415th's vote
required.
8. RESOLUTION 18451 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH
THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR RECEIPT OF
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 AND
AMENDING THE CITY'S EXISTING CONTRACT WITH THE CHULA
VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR PRODUCTION OF THE
HARBOR DAY FESTIVAL TO PROVIDE FOR THE PASS-THROUGH
OF $30,000 OF THE PORT FUNDING TO SUPPORT THAT EVENT AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR -In July 1996, the City submitted
a financial assistance request to the San Diego Unified Port District for partial
funding of the Chula Vista Harbor Day Festival. The Board of Port
Commissioners approved the funding and requires the City to enter into a formal
agreement which stipulates certain conditions and City requirements for receipt
of the approved funding. This also amends the City's agreement with the
Chamber of Commerce to produce the event. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Public Information Coordinator) 415th's vote required.
9.A. RESOLUTION 18452 WAIVING THE BID REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVING AGREEMENT
WITH THE URBAN CORPS OF SAN DIEGO (NOT TO EXCEED
$34,500) FOR USED OlL RECYCLING EDUCATION SERVICES, AND
AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT - These
actions have been funded by a Used Oil Block Grant awarded the City by the
California Integrated Waste Management Board. The Urban Corps will continue
to provide support services to the 33 businesses in Chula Vista, Imperial Beach
and National City that Voluntarily accept used oil from the public. The Urban
Corps will also assist the businesses with the addition of used oil filter recycling.
Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Conservation Coordinator)
B. RESOLUTION 18453 AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1996197 BUDGET TO ADD A TEMPORARY,
PART-TIME POSITION (INTERN) IN UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE IN
THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT UNIT AND REALLOCATING
FUNDS THEREFOR
Agenda
-3-
October 8, 1996
10. RESOLUTION 18454 AUTHOR1ZING CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE ENCROACHMENT
PERMIT NUMBER PE-372 - St. John's Episcopal Church recently requested
that it be issued an encroachment permit to connect its private drainage facilities
to the City's storm drain system. This request does not fall within the scope of
the types of encroachments that may be authorized by the City Engineer without
first being approved by Council. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works)
* * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "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.) Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
ZAV-96-12; CONTINUATION OF A PREVIOUS PUBLIC HEARING
REGARDING AN APPEAL FROM A PLANNING COMl\fiSSION
DENIAL OF A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO INCREASE THE
HEIGHT OF A ROOFTOP SIGN FROM 35 FEET TO 42 FEET FOR THE
COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 396 "E" STREET IN THE C- T
THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ZONE - MARTIN ALTBAUM - This
is a continuation of a public hearing from 9/17/96 involving an appeal from the
Planning Commission's denial of a request for a variance to allow the
construction of a rooftop sign to 42 feet in height for the conunercial building
located at 396 "E" Street. At that hearing, Council directed staff to negotiate
witb the applicant to find a mutually acceptable solution regarding the height of
the proposed rooftop sign in conjunction with overall signage on the site. Staff
met with the applicant who indicates a willingness to reduce the rooftop sign
area to 124 square feet and a height of 38 feet. However, all four facia signs
would be installed as well. Staff reconunends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Planning)
II.
PUBLIC HEARING
RESOLUTION 18437 DENYING THE APPEAL OF COIN MART FROM THE DECISION OF
THE PLANNING COMl\fiSSION AND THEREBY DENYING A
VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A ROOF-MOUNTED SIGN
TO 42 FEET ABOVE GRADE FOR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING
LOCATED AT 396 "E" STREET WITHIN THE C-T THOROUGHFARE
COMMERCIAL ZONE
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the
Council's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda for public discussion. (State law, however, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak,
please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three
minutes per speaker.
Agenda
-4-
October 8, 1996
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City CouncU wiU 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 wiU be considered individuaUy by the Council
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please
fiU 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.
12. RESOLUTION 18455 APPROVING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE OF MARINA
VIEW PARK TO THE UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT AND AUTHORlZING
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 have 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)
13. REPORT RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY IMPLEMENT A PILOT
PROGRAM CHANGING THE FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION FOR
PARTICIPANTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL YARD WASTE COLLECTION
PROGRAM - The yard waste program collection frequency would change from
every week to every other week for a six month pilot period. The savings
accrued from a permanent change in service should be up to $0.52 per month
per household. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Conservation
Coordinator)
14. REPORT CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT MULTIPLE SPECIES CONSERVATION
PROGRAM (MSCP) PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORTlENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT - The City of San
Diego has re-circulated the Draft MSCP Plan and Draft Environmental Impact
Report/Environmentallmpact Statement (ElRIEIS) for public review. Staff has
completed a preliminary review of the Draft EIR/EIS. The report contains staff
comments regarding the Draft ElR/EIS, as well as comments received from the
Planning Commission and the Resource Conservation Commission. In addition,
staff will be returning to Council with additional discussion and comments
regarding the Draft MSCP and the City's Subarea Plan in the next few weeks.
Staff recommends Council authorize staff to forward a draft letter and any
additional comments that Council has to the City of San Diego regarding the
draft MSCP Plan ElRIEIS. (Director of Planning)
Agenda
-5-
October 8, 1996
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 Councilmembers.
Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
OTHER BUSINESS
15. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT IS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
16. MAYOR'S REPORT IS)
a. Discussion of City Attorney process.
17. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the regular City Council meeting on October 15, 1996
at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City
Council Meeting.
*****
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 law to be the subject of a closed
session discussion, and which the Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the
interests of the City. The Council is required by law to return to open session, issue any reports affinal 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.
18. 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.
2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Metro sewer issues.
Agenda
-6-
October 8, 1996
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RELEASE - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Gass or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
19. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
*****
10/8/96
LA Times
'14
Jarvis Name Retains Clout
in New Anti-Tax Campaign
. Ballot: Prop. 218 targets special assessments, other
local levies. Governments say it would tie their hands.
sends shudders through city halls
and county courthouses through-
out California.
"It doesn't handcuff us. It en-
cases us in a block of cement and
throws us in the lake," Daniel
Wall, lobbyist (or the California
State Assn. of Counties. said about
local governments' new nemesis:
Proposition 218.
Where Proposition 13 homed in
on property la.xes, Proposition 218
targets virtually all local levies:
general ta.xes such as those on
hotel occupancy and business li.
censes, fees for services such as
street sweeping, and special prop-
erty assessments for libraries,
landscaping. police and fire sup-
Please see JARVIS. A16
By DAN MORAIN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
SACRAMENTO-Nearly two
decades after Howard Jarvis ig-
nited an anti-ta.x rebellion with
Proposition 13, the political pros
who run the organization he
founded are taking aim once again
at local government's ability to
levy taxes.
Ten years after his death, Jarvis'
"mad as hell" image remains a
powerful draw for votes and politi-
cal money.
And as Jarvis' proteges cam-
paign for Proposition 218, the
eighth "Jar....is" initiative including
the big one in 1978, they are
finding the gadfly's name still
Continued from At
pression.
In general. Proposition 218 seeks
to ensure that no local tax can be
impcsed or raised without a major-
ity vote, hence the title, the Right
to Vote on Taxes Act. Not only
would Proposition 218 require a
vote on general tax increases, it
also would require a vote on taxes
already imposed in several cities
and counties.
"It's putting power into the
hands of th~ people," said Joel Fox,
the 47-year-old president of the
Jarvis group. "Ta.xation is the es-
sence of government. Control of
taxation is control of government,
and I believe we the people should
control government."
In Los Angeles County, hotel
occupancy taxes and business li-
cense taxes imposed last October
would have to go to a countywide
vote, according to David Janssen,
the county's chief administrative
oificer. The two taxes raise $6
million a year. Other levies bring-
ing in more than $HO million also
couid be repealed or challenged.
according to a county analysis.
,
.
Orange County has not per-
lormed a similar analysis. But
several cities in that county would
be aifeeted by the measure. More
than a dozen Orange County cities
have turned to hotel and utilitv
user taxes to balance their budget;.
Some would have to be put to a
new vote.
"I don't think the public is al-
ways aware of how difficult it is for
government to raise the funds we
need to provide services," said Seal
Beach Councilwoman Marilyn
Bruce Hastings. "I think this weuld
make it more difficult to levy those
fees we need."
In Ventura County, supervisors
arc contemplating a special assess-
ment to support the county library
system. That assessment would not
be permitted under Proposition 218.
Ventura County also has a business
license tax that would have to be put
to a vote under the measure.
. "It would tie the hands of gov-
ernment too much," Ventura
County Supervisor John Flynn
said. "It.s too strong of a proposi-
tion. People are going to have to
learn to put some faith and trust in
elected officials."
Proposition 218 deals with com-
plexities of local government fi-
nance. Add to that a baUot filled
with 15 me<J,sures, and it is little
wonder that Proposition 218 is
receiving little attention.
But local officials le:HJing the No
on 218 campaign say budgets in
I
.
Proposition 218 at a Glance
This is a constitutional amendment proposed by the Howard Jarvis
Taxpayers Assn. to limit local ta.xes.
WHATITDQES.' '.""::: '.
. Limits ability of local governments to raise or impose various
general ta.xes, fees and special property assessments. .
. Requires majority vote of the electorate for general ta.'( increase.
!II Eliminates some special assessme.nts for libraries and police.
. Gives voters the right to repeal any local tax by referendum or
initiative.
'ARGUMEI\n"S;WFA.VOR'''.;t.:.','"<,;~'i,; '..,. .': -.- u ;. "
. Ensures a vote on local taxes.
. Stops local governments fror.1 circumventing Proposition 13.
. Stops use of assessment districts to pay for general services.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST" c-", : , . ;;j;',' . .' .:.
. Takes at least $100 million from lucal governments statewide.
. Prevents cities and counties from raising money for needed
services.
iii Makes creation of assessment districts very difficult.
SUPPQRTERS'! ,},-.'.':, :<~-;;,,*-,,~':)..:.g..V>i..:"";~-;; '"" '. ~ - '
. Howard Jarvis Ta.'qJayers Assn., California Republican Party.
California Chamber of Commerce, California Farm Bureau.
-OP.PONEN:fS,,- ;';:~-",;: ,'.-' ~~.~'....' ~ :;, :,< -;~ ~ - >"";' -
. Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, public employee
unions, teachers unions, League of Women Voters. associations of
fire and police chiefs.
some cities and counties could be
devastated by Proposition 218.
"It essentially closes whatever
options have been left to local
government," Los Angeles County
Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said.
"What's at stake is fire suppres-
sion, libraries and, in some com-
munities, parks."
from the Howard Jarvis Tax-
payers' Assn., a nonprofit group
headed by Fox.
The nonprofit group receives the
bulk of its money from small
donors, most of whom are over 65
and backed Proposition 13. The
California Republican Party and
most Republican state legislators
have endorsed ProDosition 218.
The initiative.s 'goal is to limit
lccal taxes. Its main target is a
specific tax called special assess-
ments.
The proposition would signifi-
c;Jntly change the way the tax is
iposed, prohibiting government
fom paying for some services by
assessments and making other as-
sessments more difficult to impose.
In the wake of Proposition 13 in
1978, California's cities and coun-
ties have turned to these speciai
assessments to pay for a wide
v;Jriety of public services, such as
libraries, landscaping, fire suppres-
sion and extra police.
In 1993, the most recent year for
which statistics are available, local
Please see JARVIS. A17
The opposition campaign, run by
the consulting firm of Nelson &
Lucas Communications, includes
many teacher::; unions. public em-
ployee unions, trade associations
representing fire and police chiefs.
and firms that underwrite munici-
pal bonds.
Because of loopholes in cam-
paign finance reporting laws, the
No on 218 group has yet to report
how much money it has raised. It:;
first report is to be aVJHable later
this week.
The Yes on Proposition 218 cam-
paign. run by the Jarvis organiza~
tion, raised $1.1 million in the first
half of the year. with nearly
$800,000 coming in checks of less
than 5100. The remainder came
.
LOS A~GELES TIMES
JARVIS
CODtinued from A16
government raised at least $300
million from assessment dislrict.5,
up from $28 million in 1978.
Local officials say they ha ve
created even more assessment dis-
tricts since 1993. the year Gov.
Pele ,\,Tilson and the Legislature
began shifling $3 billion a year in
property tax revenues from coun-
ties to schools.
Propositi:m 218. a stale constitu-
tional amendment, would make it
more difficult for ]ocaJ government
to impose assessments, would re-
quire new votes on some assess-
ments that already are in place, and
prohibit assessments for general
services such as police and libraries.
Assessments that would prob-
ably be i11ega.! under Proposition
218 include a $9-mHlian annual
lcvy on property owners for Los
Angeles County libraries, and a
$lA-million special tax for extra
police in lnglcwood.
IT PropositiO:1 218 is approved, Los
Angeles County officials believe
the)' wouJd have to have a vote on
the S59-million annual assessment
for fIre suppression pajd for by an
annual ave~ge assessment of $55
per home in the county.
Under current. Jaw, cities, coun-
ties and other local taxing entities
bpose assessments after fl:'St de-
termining which property owners
would benefit from the sen'ice to
be provided, then mailing notices
to landov:ne:-s offering them an
opjXJrtunity to protesL Property
Suits by Riot Victim
Denny, Others Dismissed
A judge dismissed lawsuits filed
by truck dnver ReginaJd Q. Denny
and other victims of the 1992 riots
v.ho charged that police abandoned
SOuth.Cent...a.! Los Angeles at the
height of the violence.
The victims failed to show "dis-
'c:1.minaLory intent" b)' the city and
the Los Angeles Police Depart-
ment when officers withdrew from
the area of Florence and Nor-
mandy avenues, according to the
decision released Monday. U.S,
DisUict Judge W, Matthew Byrne
Jr. ruled that the LAPD's use of
'officers during the riots was "ra-
tionally related to a legitimate
,government purpose:'
The four suits claimed violation of
"the right to equal protection and
accused officers of leaving because it
\\"as a predominanU:r minorit)' area..
owners who do not vote-and oifi-
cials say most don't-are counted
as "yes" votes.
Under Proposition 218, however,
only votes cast would be counted.
Opponents say the change would
essentially prevent them from im.
posing assessmentS, because most
landowners who take the time to
fill out the ballots are tax oppo-
nents. Proponents respond by say-
ing the change would force local
officials to work harder at com'mc-
ing the public that the assessment
is necessary.
"We do not outlaw assessment
districts. We simply say they must
be approved by voters in ad\'ance,"
said Jonathan Coupal, attorney Ior
the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.,
and the main author of the measu:e.
Proposition 218 would amend the
state Constitution to say that only
!andov,'ners wouJd ha\'e the right w
vote on special assessments. The
voting would be weighted, based on
how much a landov,'ner would have
to pay in the new assessment dis-
trict If a large la!"ldowner would pay
twice as much as a smaller land-
owner, the Jarge landov,'ner's vote
would be worth twice as much.
Addilional!)', property owne...s
would not have to live in the
district to vote. They would get the
right-even if they are foreign
corporations or non-U.S. citizens
who reside in other countries.
''I'm nQt a foreigner-basher,"
said Supervisor Yaroslavsky, "but
you're going to tell me that some-
body sitting in London or Mel-
bourne or Tokyo is going to decide
whether there is [enough money in
an assessment district to fight] an
uncontrollable wildfire in the
Santa Monica Mountains? I don't
think that's what the California
electorate wants."
Proposition 218 supporters call
such arguments a smoke screen.
"We're reaIly being attacked un- .-
fairly on this," Fox said.
He points out that current law
already says only landowners have
the right to protest most special
assessments, and that the law al-
ready permits corporations and
noncitizens to file protests if they
own land in the districL
However, Proposition 218 would
place the weighted voting system
in the state Constitution, making it
impossible to change without a
constitutional amendmenL
Additionall)', some specific as.
sessment statutes, such as a fre-
quently used 1982 act permitting
assessment levies for streets, pro-
vide for a vote of registered voters,
not landowners.
Under Proposition 218, only
Ge~ th~ sto"Y. Get the Time~
landowners would have the right
to agree to assessments for street
conslruction or repair.
Assessments have been part of
California law since 1911. They are
traditional!y used for local sen'ices
such as mosquito abatement, flood
control. and sewer and water proj~
ecls, which directly benefit prop~
erty owners. Fox says assessments
never were meant to pay for'gen.
eral services like police, ambulan_
cesorlibraries.
But as local governments try to
raise money, Fox says, there have
been abuses. In the city of Orland
north of Sacramento, officials im-
posed a park assessment and
charged the same fee to property
owners who Jived more than 20
miles from city parks as was
charged to property owners who
lived across the streeL
The state Supreme Court af-
firmed that formula in 1993,
prompting lawyers at the Los An-
geles firm of O'Melveny &; Myers,
who represent local government,
to issue an analysis prodaiming.
"The Supreme Court seems to be
encouraging e>..'perimentation in
the use of assessments."
Fox cites other examples, like L.,e
Los Angeles Community College
DISt...;ct's proposed $12 fee on disL'ict
lando\\'ners for various projects, in.
cluding an equesuian center. Tne
coIlege disuict sought to charge the
same amount to all residents, no
matter how far they live from a
campus. After protests, the college
board plaeed the fee on the ballot
"If 218 loses," Fox said, "these
kinds of fees are going to appear
everywhere."
Times staff writer Carlos V. Louno
In Ventura and correspondent Shelby
Grad In Orange County contributed to
this story.
* Tl
LASER SURGI
Rnolutionar~' Laser Treatment to Elimin
laricose leins and Spider leins on Legs a
IJ/rraPubeT~ UL.~er Techniaues
As Featured on 20/20 and Dateline
Eyelid Surgery
'~.7rinkJe: Remo\'a!
Facial Resurfacing
Lip/Mouth Lines
Fa...e: Lift
Sdcl:1td ~ Sur~~
lopqualin'Eu;o
on u.ldtLascrl
Board Ccr:ified
FuHyAccre-ditalc
COSMETIC rROCEDURES
Liposuction. Tummy Tucks
:Kose: . Breast Re:du:-rions
Che:ek and Chin Imp!ant
Bre.ast Imp!ants and'Lifu
BEVERLY HIl
450 N, Bodford Dr,
CULVER cn
9700 Von;co Bl"
(310) 204-58
~GLENDALE
FEDE
~ ~-
,~
b ..ci~f~:~~
"lIl,~~']
,~~<~: r~
;- - -~ f~
'.,
._...-,
h~
:.:q~
_J~"':!J,:~:... .~:;-~.;; .;
",.",,,-, ..
h, ,," "-":\J'~t~~~~
. ,.,:Annu;JPerh&~t~
)i~~ll~l;.iI
o
.-'
:,.,::-:
~ ~ ,.,.-. ..
~~ ~/~~-<i~~-;j.
',:,,::
,-
h ,
Minimum deposit 0
L
The other way
1-800-834-
~ 199.6 GlendJt ~dt:ra! Bank, ES.B. Annu! Peretnt&PI
U Juh)ect .to ch...n~1r ,,'ilhout noticlr. J:::...tlr' :nay "ar:" b}. rq
CD depo'lt of Sl,OOo. Penalt}, for carly .,itharu'J. Offlrr aJ
B...nk. Memher FDIC.
Jl '/'/71 J:1
/,[<./J: ~ c~Y:
October 3, 1996
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City, Council /~ \/\ \
John D. Goss, City ManagervL1 ~3~ "-
City Council Meeting of October 8, 1996
TO:
FROM:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting of
Tuesday, October 8, 1996. Comments regarding the Written Communications are as follows:
5a. This is a letter from the Deputy City Attorney reporting that there were no reportable
actions taken by the City Council in Closed Session on October 1, 1996.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
JDG:mab
~~~
:--~~
~~~~
-=:...-~~
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Date:
October 2, 1996
To:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Glen R. Googins, Deputy City Attorney~
From:
Re:
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meeting of 10/1/96
The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss Christopher v.
City of Chula Vista, Public Employment Appointment, Public
Employment Release and labor negotiations.
The Deputy City Attorney hereby reports to the best of his
knowledge from observance of actions taken in the Closed Session of
October 1, 1996, there were no actions that are required to be
reported under the Brown Act.
GRG: 19k
C:\lt\clossess.no
5a.---/
276 FOURTH AVENUE. CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
<)/' PosI-Coo;i.merRoc)dadP48
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
~
Meetinq Date
10/8/96
Resolution JJrjl~;7 Designating Authorized
City Representativ~to Acquire Surplus
Property from the Ca i ornia state Agency for
Surplus Property
SUBMITTED BY City Manag~~~ s Vote: ___Yes -X-No
The city has been requested by the De~rtment of General Services
of the State of California to update our list of authorized
representatives for acquisition of surplus property. This list was
last updated in February, 1993. In order for the City to be
eligible to continue to participate in this program, it is
necessary to update this information.
ITEM TITLE
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution designating
authorized city representatives to acquire surplus property
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION
The attached resolution lists the city Manager and Assistant City
Manager as representatives of the City who have authority to sign
for surplus property in any amount.
FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution will authorize staff to
purchase surplus property at reduced cost resulting in a savings to
the city.
to -/
RESOLUTION NO.
/.rJ/~9
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED CITY
REPRESENTATIVES TO ACQUIRE SURPLUS PROPERTY
FROM THE CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCY FOR SURPLUS
PROPERTY
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the State Agency for Surplus Property has
requested that we process a resolution to authorize representatives
to acquire surplus property.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula vista does designate and authorize the officials
whose names, titles and signatures are listed below as the city of
Chula vista's representatives to acquire federal surplus property
from the California State Agency for Surplus Property under the
Terms and Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference as if set forth in full.
John D. Goss, city Manager
Sid Morris, Assistant city Manager
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John D. Goss
City Manager
N:\SHARED\ATTDRNEY\SURPLUS
~':2..
Sf f1 I 6 10%
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY
PETE WILSON, Go~rnor
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
PROCUREMENT DIVISION
MA TERIAl SERVICES
701 BURNING TREE ROAD
FUllERTON, CA 92633
(714) 449.5900
Sept. 11, 1996
Chula Vista, City of
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: John D. Goss
Dear Mr. Goss,
According to regulations governing the Federal Surplus Property Program, all donee
organizations must renew their eligibility periodically.
Because our records indicate updated eligibility for your organization has not been
accomplished in some time, we request that you complete the attached renewal
application form and return it to us within sixty days from the date of this letter. FaIlure
to respond within that time will result in automatic cancellation from the program.
When your completed form is returned to us, only those names listed thereon will be
considered current. All previous authorizations of personnel will be rescinded.
If you have any questions, or additional time is required for return of the completed form,
please call.
Sincerely,
~~
FAY BUENA, Office Assistant
State Agency for Surplus Property
attch.
&.-..3
@..-...
. .
:.,,; .
--
. ..
.,.....
~
. ,
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
(A) TIlE DONEE CERTIFIES TIIA T,
0) It is a public agency; or a nonprofit institution or organization, exempt from taxation under Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1954; within the meaning of Section 200(j) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended, and the regulations
of the Administrator of General Services.
(2) If a public agency, the property is needed and will be used by the recipient for carrying out or promoting for the residents of a given
political area one or more public purposes. or, if a nonprofit tax-exempt institution or organization. the property is needed for and will be used
by the recipient for educational or public heaJth pur~ including research for such purpose. or for programs for older individuals. The
property is not being acquired for any other use or purpose, or for sale or other distribution; or for permanent use outside the state, except with
prior approval of the state agency,
(3) Funds are available to pay all costs and charges incident to donation
(4) This transaction shall be subject to the nondiscrimination regulations governing the donation of surplus personal property issued under
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI, Section 606, of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act 01 1949, as amended,
Section 504 01 the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended, and Section 303 01 the
Age Discrimination Act of 1975.
(B) THE DONEE AGREES TO TIlE FOLLOWING FEDERAL CONDmONS,
(1) All items of property shall be placed. in use for the purpose(s) for which acquired. within one year of receipt and shaH be continued in
use for such purpose(s) for one year from the date the property was placed. in use. In the event the property is not so placed in use, or
continued in use, the donee shall immediately notify the state agency and, at the donee's expense, return such property to the state agency, or
otherwise make the property available for transfer or other disposal by the state agency, provided the property is still usable as determined by
the state agency.
(2) Such special handling or use limitations as are imposed by General Services Administration (GSA) on any item(s) of property listed hereon
(3) In the event the property is not so used or handled as required by (B)(I) and (2), title and right to the possession of such property shan at
the option of GSA revert to the United States of America and upon demand the donee shall release such property to such person as GSA or its
designee shan direct.
(q TIlE DONEE AGREES TO TIlE FOLLOWING CONDmONS IMPOSED BY THE STATE AGENCY, APPLICABLE TO ITEMS WITH
A UNIT ACQUISmON COST OF $5,000 OR MORE AND PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES, REGARDLESS OF ACQUISITION COST,
EXCEPT VESSELS 50 FEET OR MORE IN LENGTIl AND AIRCIIAFf,
(1) The property shan he used only for the purpose(s) for which acquired and for no other purpose(s).
(2) There shall be a period of restriction which will expire after such property has been used for the purpose(s) for which acquired. for a
period of 18 months from the date the property is placed in use, except for such items of major equipment, listed hereon, on which the state
agency designates a further period of restriction.
(3) In the event the property is not so used as required by (C)(I) and (2) and federal restrictions (8)(1) and (2) have expired then title and
right to the possession of such property shall at the option of the state agency revert to the State of California and the donee shall release such
property to such person as the state agency shall direct.
(D) TIlE DONEE AGREES TO THE FOLWWING TERMS, RESERVATIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS,
(1) From the date it receives the property listed hereon and through the period(s) 01 time the conditions imposed by (8) and (C) above
remain in effect, the donee shall not sel~ trade, lease, lend, bail, cannibalize, encumber, or otherwise dispose of such property, or remove it
permanently, for use outside the state, without the prior approval of GSA under (B) or the state agency under (C). The proceeds from any sale,
trade, lease, loan, bailment, encumbrance, or other disposal of the property, when such action is authorized by GSA or by the state agency,
shall be remitted promptly by the donee to GSA or the state agency, as the case may be.
(2) In the event any of the property listed hereon is sold, traded, leased, loaned, bailed, cannibalized, encumbered, or otherwise disposed of
by the donee from the date it receives the property through the period(s) of time the conditions imposed by (8) and (C) remain in effect,
without the prior approval of GSA or the state agency, the donee, at the option of GSA or the state agency, shall pay to GSA or the state
agency, as the case may be, the proceeds of the disposal or the fair market value or the fair rental value of the property at the time of such
disposal, as determined by GSA or the state agency.
(3) If at any time, from the date it receives the property through the period(s) of time the conditions imposed by (B) and (C) remain in effect,
any of the property listed hereon is no longer suitable, usable, or further needed by the donee for the purpose(s) for which acquired, the donee
shall promptly notify the state agency, and shalL as directed by the state agency, return the property to the state agency, release the property to
another donee or another state agency or a department or agency of the United States, sell, or otherwise dispose of the property. The proceeds
from any sale shaH be remitted promptly by the donee to the state agency.
(4) The donee shall make reports to the state agency on the use, condition, and location of the property listed hereon, and on other pertinent
matters as may be required from time to time by the state agency.
(5) At the option of the state agency, the donee may abrogate the conditions set forth in (C) and the terms, reservations, and restrictions
pertinent thereto in (D) by payment of an amount as determined. by the state agency.
(E) THE DONEE AGREES TO THE FOLLOWING CONDmONS, APPUCABLE TO ALL ITEMS OF PROPERTY LISTED HEREON,
(1) The property acquired by the donee is on an "as is," "where is" basis, without warranty of any kind.
(2) Where a donee carries insurance against damages to or loss of property due to fire or other hazards and where loss of or damage to donated
property with unexpired. terms, conditions, reservations, or restrictions occurs, the state agency will be entitled to reimbursement from the donee
out of the insurance proceeds, of an amount equal to the unamortized portion of the fair value of the damaged or destroyed donated items.
(F) TERMS AND CONDmONS APPLICABLE TO THE DONATION OF AIRCIIAFf AND VESSELS (50 FEET OR MORE IN LENGTII)
HAVING AN ACQUISmON COST OF $5,000 OR MORE, REGARDLESS OF TIlE PURPOSE FOR WHICH ACQUIRED,
The donation shall be subject to the terms. conditions, reservations, and restrictions set forth in the Conditional Transfer, Document executed
by the authorized donee representative. C, .". 'I
" .....
'~..
:'i,.,
:";;' S"J!' oI'CGlllornlo
Department of General Services
State Agency for Surplus Property
701"Bumlng r... Rood
. Fullerton, CA 92633 (714) 44N900
#" 3'7?O:J.~()
SASP Form 201-A 3/92
ELIGIBILITY RENEWAL APPLICATION
FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY PROGRAM
~i:~;i;;i.:I~:~~ '~~ZV ()I=
11'4'/," ,
I,:,,,, '~rga~ization u a:., '
~: ;~)'M!3LJf; 'A"Qli:NCY ,0
, _ A. Conservation
_ B. Economic Development
j,,;'f'U f:~m;...i \~ C. Education
.J' t"..~J!U. M, ~ D. Parks and Recreation
.,',J 10 me ,,<,,~ E. ,; Public Health
Public Safety
2 or more listed
Other (includes
library/museums)
Homeless Program
Ci4 LA LA ~:~~
CityO;ULA
VISe,/1
Telephone CDtCJ !vA 1- 503/
COllnty5AtJ D,E{.,() ZIP /q ICf f()
NONPROFIT AGENCY _
_ J. Private Education
_ K Private Health
_ L. Older Americans Act for Sr. Citizens
_ M. Homeless Program
~F.
_G.
nj b-juoi1l1t:}-J ~'H;
1(J /tn;f oi b~, ..d: i '.~ "Jj [
10 ""!(,.:~.t .,1;.' .,,;t "i :
.,)",. !I), .......------, l
"
NOTE:
Categories J-K-L-M
Number of sites
Enrollment or number of clients served
"
: "" I I,., ~J:
RESOLUTION
:,jlL;'
.'I/1(J (
"BE IT RESOLVED by the Governing Board, OR by the Chief AdmmlSrative Officer of those
" organizations which do not have a governing board, and hereby ordered that the official(s) and/or
employee(s) whose name(s), title(s), and signature(s) are listed below shall be and is (are) hereby
,. authorized as our representative(s) to acquire federal surplus property from the California State
,::";',', Agency for Surplus Property under the Terms and Conditions listed on the reverse side of this form."
,; d~ '
~-<prinjJ( type) ,
1::> Oi?€-l S
^ ,T 0/..1 ~J 7), GD S'5
~LE
" SST, y
:~ l-r-{ ,f;~~~~~~
~
t." '" ; ~ , . j ", ","
(hill ".F..r~~ !h:;d;. ';1'. 11
'UI)J/, (....,.i t,..;
j:'i.::"'.':,':'",'."PAS~ED AND ADOPTED this_day of
r')rl~J~.. 'jj..j'
,19 _, by the Governing Board of
by the following vote:
jf' Jr4'oI.:f~jL?" '11"1',.11"
i 11:':1 ,0: ,lH 'I;'~
Ayes: _; Noes: _; Absent: _'
II!')". '
,Clerk of the Governing Board of
do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full,
true, and corrept copy of a resolution adopted by the Board at a meeting thereof held
at its regular place of meeting at the date and by the vote above stated, which resolution is on file in
" the office of the Board,
" I,,,;
'.: 'Ii'.. '",
i'1."~..An~) -,,'j r (Signed)
ie', I'" '0 :"[1.1"
. . AUTHORIZED this_ day of
OR
, 19 _ , by:
" bill. .
Name of Chief Administrative Officer
"'~(Signe(J)'
FOR STATE AGENCY USE
Application approved:
Comments 'or additional information:
Application disapproved:
1..,\.<,.
Date:
Signed:
6-..>
- 50
(Tille)
"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM 7
MEETING DATE 10/8/96
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /g--Y5s?ccepting donation in the amount of $2,200,
authorizing expenditure and appropriating said donated funds to the Police Department for
purchase of rubber flooring for the indoor firing range.
SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police fl:"'- / ~ ',\
. '. \ ''f\''1~'\
REVIEWED BY: City Manager _!-- \ n \ . ____
(4/5ths Vote: YesXNo_)
The Police Department recently received an unsolicited donation in the amount of $2,200 from
North Island Federal Credit Union. The donation was presented to the department for the
specific purpose of purchasing rubber flooring needed at the indoor firing range.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the donation and authorize expenditure
of said funds to the Police Department.
DISCUSSION:
This donation is a result of the North Island Federal Credit Union's (NIFCU) philosophy to
celebrate and share its success in reducing check fraud losses with the community that makes
it possible. In the past two years, NIFCU has reduced their actual check fraud losses by
$126,000 and the number of fraud cases by 50%. This is during the time when experts in the
financial industry report a 200% increase in check frauds. In addition to actual losses, NIFCU
has documented that they avoided $300,000 in losses during the past 12 months through early
detection. These accomplishments were a result of the "mutual success" of the NIFCU and the
Police Department, specifically Agent John Madsion's efforts. Agent Madison provided support
and document fraud training to NIFCU staff. This is another example of the Police
Department's commitment to take a proactive approach to reduce crime in partnership with the
community.
As a result of this success, NIFCU forwarded a check in the amount of $2,200 to the Police
Department and requested the money be spent to "help make a safer, more pleasant environment
for our officers to conduct their ongoing firearm training." The check was accompanied by a
personnel "Thank You" for the ongoing training and support provided by the Police Department.
FISCAL IMPACT: The $2,200 donation will be appropriated to account 100-1030-5362
(Materials to Maintain Buildings) and spent for said purposes. There is no general fund impact
or re-occurring cost.
7~!
\',
RESOLUTION NO. I yL/fCl
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING DONATION IN THE AMOUNT
OF $2,200, AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE AND
APPROPRIATING SAID DONATED FUNDS TO THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT FOR PURCHASE OF RUBBER FLOORING FOR
THE INDOOR FIRING RANGE
WHEREAS, the Police Department recently received an
unsolicited donation on the amount of $2,200 from North Island
Federal Credit Union; and
WHEREAS, the donation was presented to the department for
the specific purpose of purchasing rubber flooring needed at the
indoor firing range.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby accept the donation in the amount
of $2,200 and authorize its expenditure for purchase of rubber
flooring for the indoor firing range.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the $2,200
appropriated to Account 100-1030-5362 (Materials to
Buildings) and spent for said purposes.
will be
Maintain
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
C:\rs\NIFCU.don
7~
\
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item g"
Meeting Date ~,?
Resolution / K"J/S IAuthoriZing the Mayor to execute an
agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District for receipt
of financial assistance in the amount $30,000 and amending the
City's existing contract with the Chamber of Commerce for
production of the Harbor Day Festival to provide for the pass-
through of $30,000 of the Port funding to support that event and
appropriating funds therefore.
SUBMITTED BY: Public Information coordi~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~-l ~\\\3L~5ths Vote: YesXNo_
In July 1996, the City submitted a financial assistance requ~ to the San Diego Unified Port District
(Port) for partial funding of the Chula Vista Harbor Day Festival. The Board of Port Commissioners
approved funding of $30,000 at their meeting of Aug. 20, 1996, and the Port requires that the City enter
into a formal agreement which stipulates conditions and City requirements for receipt of the approved
funding. This item executes that agreement for the Harbor Day Festival and amends the City's agreement
with the Chamber of Commerce to produce the event.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an
agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District for receipt of financial assistance in the amount of
$30,000 and amending the City's existing contract with the Chamber of Commerce for production of the
Harbor Day Festival to provide for the pass-through of $30,000 of the Port funding to support that event
and appropriating funds therefore.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION: In July 1996, the City submitted financial assistance requests to the San Diego
Unified Port District for partial funding of the Harbor Day Festival, Summer "Pops" Concert, Arturo
Barrios !OK Invitational and Chula Vista Expo '97. The Board of Port Commissioners approved the
funding for all four events (for a total of $87,500) at their meeting on Aug. 20, 1996. Following
approval, the Port District requires the City to enter into formal agreements which stipulate certain
conditions and City requirements for receipt of the approved funding. This 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 are 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.
~'I
r
Meeting Date /o/X;/,~
Several weeks after the Port funding was approved, the city received a written request to provide "Exhibit
A" which briefly describes Harbor Day as well as the promotion and media activities that were designed
to help publicize the Port as a co-sponsor of the event. While the city staff returned "Exhibit A" just a
few days after the Port's letter and requested the contracts as soon as possible since the event was
scheduled on Sept. 21, the contracts were not received in time to bring this item to Council prior to the
event. Therefore, this is a bookkeeping action to transfer money after the event. A similar action also
will have to be taken to sign the agreement and accept funds for the Summer "Pops" concert, since the
contract for that event has not been received yet. The Port District contracts for the Arturo Barrios
Invitational and Chula Vista Expo '97 have not been received either and will be brought to Council at
a later date with the Summer "Pops" concert contract.
The Port District approved $30,000 to support the 1996 Harbor Day Festival and Tall Ship Festival which
was held Saturday, September 21, 1996. The City has a contract with the Chula Vista Chamber of
Commerce to produce Harbor Day (Attachment "B "). The contract, which stipulates funding allocated
by the City during the FY 96-97 budget process, was executed with the Chamber to allow the Chamber
to proceed with the planning of the fall Harbor Days Festival. The contract was finalized prior to
receiving the Port District contract, and the Chamber contract is now being amended to include the
funding provided by the Port; this action amends the agreement to add the terms of the Port District
contract and provides for the pass-through of $30,000 of the Port District funding to the Chamber of
Commerce for production of the Harbor Day Festival. (Attachment "C")
The Port District has indicated that their financial grant program was significantly reduced this year, and
they expect this trend to continue with additional cuts required next year as well. The Port District
reductions have been applied to member cities as well as outside agencies requesting funds. These
reductions have decreased financial support of Chula Vista events by $12,000 in 3 years. In 1994-95,
the Port District helped in funding five City events for a total of $99,500, and in 1995-96 funded four
events at $93,000. This year's total funding is $87,500 for the four events. The Port agreement is
attached (Attachment "A") and includes a General Terms and Conditions section which contains Hold
Harmless language and insurance requirements. The City was in full compliance with the insurance and
hold harmless stipulations for the Harbor Day Festival, and the City executed the Port District Tidelands
Activity Permit which contained similar language and requirements.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Port has approved $30,000 of financial assistance for this event, which
supplemented approved City funds of $12,000 for Harbor Day. In addition, the City provides a number
of services and support for an estimated total in-kind contribution of more than $21,000. With this
action, the City accepts $30,000 in unanticipated revenue and appropriates those funds to the community
promotions account number 100-0130-5202 for reimbursement of expenses for Harbor Day. Port District
funding greatly enhances the scope, quality, and diversity of this event, and benefits the City and its
populace by providing an attractive special event that attracts large numbers of people to the Bayfront.
Attachments: "A" - Port Agreement - Harbor Day and Tall Ship Festival
"B" - City Contract with Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce - Harbor Day Festival
"C" - Amendment to City Contract with Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce
8",)..
RESOLUTION NO. /8"'15/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT
DISTRICT FOR RECEIPT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 AND AMENDING THE
CITY'S EXISTING CONTRACT WITH THE CHULA VISTA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR PRODUCTION OF THE
HARBOR DAY FESTIVAL TO PROVIDE FOR THE PASS-
THROUGH OF $30,000 OF THE PORT FUNDING TO
SUPPORT THAT EVENT AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS
THEREFOR
WHEREAS, in July, 1996, the City submitted a financial
assistance request to the San Diego Unified Port District for
partial funding of the Chula Vista Harbor Day Festival; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Port Commissioners approved funding
of $30,000) for this event at their meeting on August 20, 1996, and
the Port is now requiring the city to enter into a formal agreement
which stipulates conditions and City requirements for receipt of
the approved funding; and
WHEREAS, the City is currently a party to an agreement
with the Chamber of Commerce for which additional funding is herein
being provided.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve a contract with the San
Diego Unified Port District in connection with the Chamber of
Commerce's production of the Harbor Days Festival to provide for
the pass-through of $30,000 of the Port funding to support that
event, on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.____
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City does hereby approve
the First Amendment with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce for
the Harbor Days Festival to provide for the pass-through of $30,000
of the Port funding to support that event and the Chamber's Agree-
ment to abide by all provisions of the Port District Agreement, on
file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
authorized and directed to execute
behalf of the City of Chula vista.
that the Mayor
said Agreements
is
for
hereby
and on
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city Council does hereby
accept $30,000 in unanticipated revenue and appropriate those funds
to the Community Promotions Account 100-0130-5205 for reimbursement
of expenses for Harbor Day.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jeri Gulbransen, Public
Information Coordinator
~"'3
(! ~ r ( , ----r- .
Ijj-~~ 1"- Ct'-t'-a tL(~d--:VX -L,-
Ann Y. oore, Ac ng C~ty ~
Attorney
Attachment "A"
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 nonprofit
corporation, herein called "Contractor."
RECITALS
1. Contractor has a Program known as the 1996 Harbor Day and Tall Ship
Festival.
2. 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 obligations of the parties as
herein expressed, District and Contractor agree as follows:
1. Proaram: 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
Y-f
'\ .I
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 Aoreement: 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 Thirty
Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00) 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.
2
~;.5'
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
(60) 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
8'''?
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. Reoortina Reauirements:
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.
c. A statement of revenues and expenditures and a balance
4
g-"7
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 year.)
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 Required: 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
g-,g
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
8',.9
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
g~ /tJ
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. Insoection 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
~,//
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 year.)
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
- 8""/;1.
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
8" / J
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, gifts,
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. Eaual Opportunitv and Non-Discrimination. Contractor hereby agrees to
comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1 964, 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. Withholdina 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
8'" / r
agreement. The Executive Director shall thereafter advise the Board of the
notification of termination made to the Organization.
12
8"- /5
~~~
=--~~
~~~~
"""'~~
CITY Of
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
HARBOR DAYS AND TALL SHIP FESTIVAL
Exhibit A
The City of Chula Vista shall produce the Tenth Annual Chula Vista Harbor Days and
Tall Ship Festival on September 21, 1996, on the tidelands along Chula Vista Harbor and
in Bayside Park. The City will provide overall administration and coordination of the
event. The event shall include a full day of activities including free tall ship tours, five
stages of entertainment, children's activities, a classic car show, business showcase,
food and beverage concession, crafts fair, and booths from a variety of community
organizations. City shall provide all required equipment and services for the event,
which includes, but is not limited to, the following:
A. Overall event coordination
B. Police services required for traffic and crowd control
C. Fire services required including EMT support
D. Free tours on tall ship "Californian" (under contract with City for public events/tours)
and historic schooner "Bagheera"
E. Parks and Recreation staff services including clean-up in the park
F. Free shuttle bus service from parking areas to bayfront events
G. Public information services including development of publicity materials
City shall provide extensive promotions and media exposure for the event, identifying the
San Diego Unified Port District as co-sponsor of the event. Publicity shall include, but
not be limited to, the following:
A. Writing and mailing/faxing of press releases and photographs
B. Direct contact with local and regional media including newspapers, radio and TV
stations
C. Production and purchase of advertising
D. Design, printing and distribution of event flyers
E. Design, printing and distribution of event programs
F. Inclusion of Port vessels (I.e. Harbor Police) as part of ship tours/displays, if available
G. Invitation to Port commissioners to introduce event entertainment
H. Invitation to Port to have booth(s) which could include displays on recreational
activities on tidelands, efforts to clean up San Diego Bay, and/or trade and cargo
activities of the port
I. Features in special audience publications such as Chamber of Commerce
newsletter
J. Announcements on 1610-AM Traveler's Information Radio Station
K. Design and placement of exterior advertising on a number of Laidlaw trash trucks
that serve the South Bay Region
L. Placement of Port banners on stages and other prominent event locations
[5- / t.
276 FOURTH AVENUE, CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691.5031 . FAX (619) 585.5612
'i~~ IUI~~~
Attachment "B"
AGREEMENT SETTING OUT THE TERMS AND OBLIGATIONS
OF THE CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR THE HARBOR DAYS
FESTIVAL IN REGARD TO THE EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS APPROPRIATED
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into the 10th day of September, 1996, by
and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to
as "City", and the CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE for the HARBOR DAYS
FESTIVAL, hereinafter referred to as "Chamber";
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Chamber is the primary organizer of the HARBOR DAYS
FESTIVAL, a special event promoting Chula Vista Harbor, to be conducted in the City of
Chula Vista on September 21, 1996, and
WHEREAS, both the City and the Chamber will benefit from the media exposure
attendant to the Festival, and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista desires to encourage the beneficial aims of the
HARBOR DAYS FESTIVAL through appropriation of reasonable amounts of City funds,
and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has established a policy for consideration of
requests for funding by private organizations and individuals, and
WHEREAS, such policy stipulates that no expenditure may be made out of any
appropriation awarded said organization unless an agreement has been reached between
the parties setting out the terms and conditions for the expenditure of such funds.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties
hereto as follows:
1. The organization known as the CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE/HARBOR DAYS FESTIVAL agrees to produce the Tenth Annual Chula
Vista Harbor Days and Tall Ship Festival including tree-to-the-public musical
entertainment, tall ship tours and related activities for the day-long event.
2. The CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE/HARBOR DAYS
FESTIVAL agrees to expend City appropriated funds to meet bona fide obligations
incurred in performing services related to participation for the Harbor Days and Tall Ship
Festival, in an amount not to exceed $12,000, in fiscal year '96-97.
%-/7
3. The Chamber agrees to list the City as a co-sponsor of the Harbor Days
Festival and publicize the City in all releases and fliers, print advertising, programs and
information sheets.
4. The Chamber agrees to submit, within 60 days following the event, a
complete report of all expenditures and shall specifically list the purposes furthered by
the City appropriated funds of $12,000 for fiscal year '96-97.
5. That the City of Chula Vista, at its discretion, may require the CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE/HARBOR DAYS FESTIVAL to provide or allow the City to undertake
a complete financial audit of their records.
6. That the term of this Agreement shall be for the period from 09/10/96
through 06/30/97, unless further modified to include other permitted expenditures of funds
that are appropriated by the City of Chula Vista.
7. The Chamber agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City against and
from any and all damages in property or injuries to or death of any person, or persons,
including employees or agents of the City, and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless
the City, and its officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, suits,
actions or proceedings of any kind or nature of or by anyone whomsoever in any way
resulting from or arising out of the negligent or intentional acts, errors or omissions of
Chamber, or any of its officers, agents or employees relating to the event.
8. The Chamber shall throughout the duration of this Agreement maintain
comprehensive general liability insurance covering all operations hereunder of Chamber,
its agents and employees with minimum coverage of one million dollars ($1,000,000).
Evidence of such coverage, in the form of a certificate of insurance and policy
endorsement which names the City as additional insured, shall be submitted to the City
Manager's Office, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910, on or before
September 16, 1996.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE/
HARBOR DAYS FESTIVAL
{!!P",j~~FJ 2
Cha er CEO
g-,,/8""
Approved as to form by
cc" 71{ ~A-,.....Q
City Attorney
] /
~ /;
~ ...
, /, . /.. / '
_,
..-,' L.<" _ ".-t..L--,
, Chamber o~reSi~
Date q It '3 Jq(o
<6"'/1
Attachment "C"
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH THE CHULA VISTA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR THE HARBOR DAYS FESTIVAL
IN REGARD TO THE EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS APPROPRIATED
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT, made and entered into the 8th day of
October, 1996, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a chartered
municipal corporation, herein referred to as "city", and the CHULA
VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE herein referred to as "Chamber" for the
HARBOR DAY FESTIVAL, for purposes of amending that certain
agreement between the parties entitled CITY OF CHULA VISTA and
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ("Agreement"). The Agreement is
hereby amended in the following regards only:
1. Section 2 is hereby amended to read in full as follows:
2 . The CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE/HARBOR DAY
FESTIVAL agrees to expend city appropriated funds
to meet bona fide obligations incurred in
performing services related to participation for
the Harbor Day and Tall Ship Festival, in an amount
not to exceed $12,999 $42.000, in fiscal year '96-
'97. Chamber acknowledqes and aqrees that $30.000
of such amount shall not be payable to the Chamber
unless and until the city receives such funds from
the Port.
2. New section 9 is hereby added as follows:
9. Bv siqnature on this amendment. Chamber herebY
aqrees to abide bv all of the terms and
conditions of the city's contract with the San
Dieqo Unified Port District ("Port") for the Chula
vista Harbor Dav Tall Ship Festival. as entered
into bv the city and Port this 8th day of October
and effective on the date as last executed bv those
parties. which conditions are incorporated herein
bv reference as if set forth in full.
All other terms and conditions of the aqreement with Chula
vista Chamber of Commerce remain in full force and effect.
(Next Page is Signature Page]
2'" ;' ,2, c?
[Signature Page to First Amendment to Agreement with
the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce for the Harbor Days Festival]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this First Amendment has been entered into
the day and year hereinabove set forth.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Mayor of the city of Chula Vista
ATTEST
city Clerk
Approved as to form by
~~
.-,~ --:-
c' yAtt rne - /
6----
~/;L!
,t\
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 9
Meeting Date 10/8/96
TITLE:
J 8"J/5...2-
RESOLUTION Waiving the Bid Requirements,
Requesting Council Approval of the Agreement and Authorizing the Mayor
to Execute Agreement with the Urban Corps of San Diego (Not to Exceed
$34,500) for Used Oil Recycling Education Services.
Resolution /8"J/53 Amending FY 1996-1997 Budget to Add a
Temporary, Part-Time Position (Intern) in Unclassified Service in the
Environmental Management Unit and Reallocating Funds Therefor.
SUBMITTED BY: Conservation Coordinator(
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~Ci \;Y\ j~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes..x. No-J
City Council approved Resolution 18296 ~ ~ 21, 1996, authorizing the City Manager to
accept a Used Oil Block Grant for $79,963 from the California Integrated Waste Management
Board. The grant identifies an ongoing partnership between the City of Chula Vista and the
Urban Corps of San Diego (Corps) that dates back to the initial used Oil Opportunity Grant in
1994. This year's grant cycle provides funds to implement used oil recycling public education
services through June 30, 1997. The Urban Corps was originally selected because of their
unique ability and history of providing environmental awareness programs and employment for
local youth.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute the
Agreement with the Urban Corps of San Diego for used oil recycling education services.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission
reviewed and recommended submittal of the Block Grant including the Urban Corps
Component at their October 23, 1995 meeting.
DISCUSSION:
This Used Oil Block Grant provides funds for a regional program (Chula Vista, National City
and Imperial Beach) to maintain the state certified used oil recycling centers established by the
City and the Corps in past grant cycles. As part of their certification agreement with the state,
certified centers agree to accept used motor oil from the public during their regular operating
hours.
The Corps is a State chartered non-for-profit private corporation. The Corps mission is to
provide employment training services in the resource conservation field for at-risk youth.
Chula Vista was the first city to establish a partnership with its local Corps to implement a
9../
Page 2, ItemL
Meeting Date 10/8/96
used oil grant. The Corps has provided used oil public education and technical assistance through
the used oil grants for the past two years. The State has extended that model and now provides
used oil grant funding directly to local Corps throughout the state. The Corps has also provided
the City's office recycling program and has employed approximately 30 youth from Chula Vista
over the past two years.
Attachment A is a recommended agreement between the City and the Corps that provides up to
$34,500 in funding for the Corps to implement the operational component of the used oil recycling
education grant. The primary mission of the Corps grant component is to provide supplies and
ongoing technical assistance to the thirty certified used oil recycling centers in Chula Vista,
Imperial Beach and National City. The Corps will also coordinate the addition of used oil filter
recycling with selected certified centers. The City's previous used oil grants have provided the
Corps with approximately $145,000 for which the City has been fully reimbursed by the State.
Those funds allowed the Corps to purchase vehicles, a computer and other supplies that make it
possible for them to continue this and future grant cycles cost effectively. A secondary but
important benefit of the grant is the development of new jobs and job training for at-risk youth
from Chula Vista. The Corps currently provides employment training and jobs for approximately
100 youth from San Diego County at their City of San Diego site. Approximately 15 of those
youth are from Chula Vista. A copy of their project description and complete scope of work is
included in the agreement.
Additionally, the grant provides funds for employing interns to assist with the grant's
implementation. These intern positions will be used to employ Corps members to work directly
with the Conservation Coordinator. The internship will allow Corps members from Chula Vista
an opportunity to work exclusively on the grant in the South Bay during the grant cycle. These
resolutions implement the service agreement now needed to move forward on the project.
FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the proposed agreements ($34,500) is funded through a
grant of $79,963 from the California Integrated Waste Management Board and has been
appropriated. The grant also provides for the purchase of additional public education materials,
intern salaries and overhead payments to the City for administration of the grant.
mtm:used oil
cntcts96.cas
Attachments
9-;2..
RESOLUTION NO. I~~~~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE BID REQUIREMENTS AND
APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH THE URBAN CORPS OF
SAN DIEGO (NOT TO EXCEED $34,500) FOR USED OIL
RECYCLING EDUCATION SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, City Council approved Resolution 18296 on May
21, 1996, authorizing the city Manager to accept a Used oil
Opportunity Grant for $79,963 from the California Integrated Waste
Management Board; and
WHEREAS, the grant identifies an ongoing partnership
between the City of Chula vista and the Urban Corps of San Diego to
implement the grant services; and
WHEREAS, this year's grant cycle provides funds to
implement used oil recycling public education services through June
30, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the Urban corps was originally selected because
of their unique ability and history of providing environmental
awareness programs and employment for local youth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby waive the bid requirements and
approve the Agreement with the Urban Corps of San Diego (not to
exceed $34,500) for used oil recycling education services, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~-'
,
Michael Meacham, Conservation
Coordinator
9-3
~',
RESOLUTION NO. /2"1/5..3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING FY 1996-97 BUDGET TO ADD
A TEMPORARY, PART-TIME POSITION (INTERN) IN
UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT UNIT AND REALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR
WHEREAS, the Used oil Grant provides for interns to
assist with the grant's implementation; and
WHEREAS, this intern position will be used to employ
Corps members to work directly with the Conservation Coordinator;
and
WHEREAS, the intership will allow Corps members from
Chula vista an opportunity to work exclusively on the grant in
Chula Vista, National City and Imperial Beach during the grant
cycle.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby amend the FY 1996-97 budget to add
a temporary, part-time position (intern) in the Unclassified
Service in the Environmental Management & unit and reallocating
funds as set forth in Schedule 1.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
City
Michael Meacham, Conservation
Coordinator
C:\rs\usedoil
9-~/
SCHEDULE 1
Reallocation Schedule
Used Oil Block Grant 270-2715
Fund Affected by Reallocation Reallocation
Amount
5298 Contractual Services -$8,000
5105 Hourly Wages $7,600
5143 Medicare Contributions $ 290
5145 Pars Contribution City $ 110
9-5
..,\ TT ACHMENT A
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and the Urban Corps of San Diego
for Used Oil Recycling Center
Recruitment and Technical Assistance Services
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated October 9, 1996 for the purposes of reference only,
and effective as of the date last executed is between the City of Chula Vista ("City"), and Urban
Corps of San Diego, a non-profit, public benefit corporation of the State of California, and whose
place of business and telephone number is, 1864 National Avenue San Diego California
92113 Telephone Number (619) 235-0137 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals'
Whereas, City received a grant from the California State Integrated Waste Management
Board, pursuant to an agreement ("Grant Agreement") by which City is to comply with certain
terms and conditions ("Administrative Procedures and Requirements") for the implementation
of a used oil recycling program ("Program "), a copy of which agreement is hereto attached as
Exhibit A; and,
Whereas, Consultant desires to assist the City in the implementation of the Program
and is willing to abide by all the Terms and Conditions required of the City by the Grant
Agreement; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to
City.
Whereas, Consultant desires to assist the City in the implementation of the Program
and is willing to abide by all the Terms and Conditions required of the City by the Grant
Agreement; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to
City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement.
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 1
9-(,
\ ,')
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
On the condition that City and CWIMB remain in a valid contractual Grant Agreement
by which CWIMB is paying City grant monies thereunder, Consultant shall perform the
following general services "General Duties":
Consultant shall, in the detail outlined herein, generally deliver supplies and provide
technical assistance to certified Used Oil Recycling Centers in Chula Vista, Imperial
Beach and National City. The Urban Corps shall also assist with the establishment and
service of used oil filter collection and recycling at three certified used oil recycling
centers with one being in National City. The Corps shall also assist with used oil
public education at special events; 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, entitled "Scope of Work," Items 1-10,
not inconsistent with the General Duties, and in doing so, comply with and perform the
Administrative Procedures and Requirements that City is required to perform under its Grant
Agreement with CIWMB, attached as Exhibit B, according to, and within the time frames set
forth therein, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified therein within the time
frames set forth therein for delivery, time being of the essence of this agreement. The General
Duties and the Detailed Scope of Work and Deliverables required in the Scope of Work shall
be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined Services by
the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this
Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so,
City shall in good faith, and after meeting and conferring with Consultant, reduce the
compensation herein payable to Consultant.
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 2
'-7
\_,\
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services
("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services
offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a fixed fee basis agreed to in advance
in writing, but not at the rates or fees greater than Consultant recovers from its best clients.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services
or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions
and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and 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 coverage, in the following categories, and to the limits specified,
policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V"
or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance
coverage in the amount of $1 000 000.
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance
coverage in the amount of $1 000000, 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 of $ N/ A , unless Errors and
Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy.
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
2pty9.wp
November 2.
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 3
9-~
,
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 Commercial General Liability Insurance
Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which
shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall provide initial training to Consultant. The City will also communicate any
changes dictated by needs of the certified used oil centers and advise the Corps how those
needs shall be met.
B. Compensation
On the condition that City and CWIMB remain in a valid contractual Grant Agreement
by which CWIMB is paying City grant monies thereunder sufficient to fund the compensation
of Consultant, upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the
City not more than quarterly consistent with the Administrative Procedures and Requirements,
attached, and in amounts not greater than set forth in Detailed Scope of Work, City shall
compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the Administrative
Procedures and Requirements, in the amount set forth in the Detailed Scope of Work, subject
to the requirements for a 10 % retention which will be released to Consultant when same has
been received by the CIWMB and Consultant has satisfactorily performed under this
Agreement.
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 270-2715-5298
to be charged upon making such payment.
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 4
9-7
,,-.
\_i,
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated as said
party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine
administration of this agreement.
City: Michael T. Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
Consultant: Stuart Watson, Used Oil Recycling Project Manager
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory
provisions hereof.
5. Hold Harmless
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 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.
6. 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, and all equipment and vehicles in good and
operable condition, purchased with grant funds shall become the property of the City.
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 5
9,/&
,~'...
7. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence,
errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense
to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions,
Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing
herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
8. 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, and all equipment and
vehicles purchased with grant funds shall become City's sole and exclusive property, and shall
be returned to the City in a good and operable condition. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 6
9-/1
\ .,'
11. 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.
12. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City
unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the
City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated
by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City
in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
13. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the
claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
14. 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.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 7
9-/~
15. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to
act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall
be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the
United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with
return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of
the designated parties.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. Governing Law/Venue
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.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 8
9--/.1
F. Property
Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) the CIWMB retains the option to
recover the computer, printer and or vehicles purchased by this and previous used oil grants
for four years. The City has also retained the right to reclaim those vehicles, computer and
printer within the four year period stipulated by the state. The Urban Corps will return one
van ( 94 Ford Cargo Van, tag no. 0175460), upon execution of this agreement. The City has
and shall retain a Computer and Monitor (tag no. 017541).
Should the San Diego Urban Corps not be terminated and successfully complete this contract
and successfully complete a 1997/98 agreement with the City of Chula Vista the Urban Corps
of San Diego shall be awarded full ownership of 1) Laser Jet Printer (tag no.017540), 2)
Computer and Monitor (tag no. 017539), 3) 88 Ford Passenger Van (tag no. 017545),4) 94
Ford Cargo Van (tag no.017546).
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 9
9-/'1
1~'1
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Urban Corps of San Diego
for Used Oil Recycling Center
Recruitment and Technical Assistance Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete
consent to its terms:
Dated:
,19
City of Chula Vista
by:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Dated:
Urban Corps of San Diego
By:
Sam Duran,
Executive Director
mtm:used oil
uc-agre2.96
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 10
9-J~
\,t,
Exhibit List to Agreement
Exhibit A: "Detailed Scope of Work for Urban Corps of San Diego"
Exhibit B; Administrative Procedures and Requirements
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 11
9-/?
EXHIBIT A
"SCOPE OF WORK"
Used Oil Centers:
I) This function is intended as providing the following service to each certified center
established in Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City as needed, but no less than, one
telephone contact and/or site visit every three months.
2) Providing; l)used oil containers, 2) funnels, 3) drain pans 4)rosters, 5)counter displays,
6)contaminated oil information slips, 6)premiums, 7)Certified Center Program brochures,
Certified Center Sign(s) and other materials as determined by the City.
3) Collecting; completed rosters, rejected empty used oil containers for preparation for
recycling or reuse on site visits, completing; the certified center check list, and other
documents required by the terms and conditions, and administrative procedures of this grant.
4) Recruiting, establishing and maintaining three used oil filter drop-off centers among the
certified South Bay Used Oil Recycling Centers (selection of the specific centers will be at
the Urban Corps discretion). One Center shall be in National City and at least one shall be
in Chula Vista. The third center may be in Chula Vista or Imperial Beach however, it shall
be geographically disparate from the other Chula Vista location. The Corps shall collect
crushed used oil filters from the three centers and delivering them to a metal salvage dealer
as needed and shall maintain a copy of the manifest. Need is projected to be at least
monthly but not more than bi-monthly, (filter collection may be limited to the amount
generated by the public (not the center operations) at the discretion of the Urban Corps if the
amount of filters generated increases to quantities unmanageable by the corps,
Public Education:
5) Special Events; deliver, set up and present the public education materials including; certified
center lists, sign(s), brochures, premiums, canopy, games and other materials upon request
by the local grant manager with 72 hour notice to the Urban Corps and provision of
premiums by the city but not more than eighteen times per year.
6) Mobile Displays: Three displays shall be continuously displayed in major public places.
Establish a list of businesses (in advance) that will accept the portable used oil displays for
at least one month, and arrange for transport (by Corps interns assigned to City) and set up
of displays at new sites and provide a list of sites for service to local grant manager.
Arrangements should include provisions such that no display shall be at a single site for
more than 90 consecutive days in a given calendar year.
9-/7
Scope of Work
Page 2
Administration:
7) Within 15 days of the end of quarter provide; I) completed certified center check lists for
each prior contact, 2) a report of certified center non-compliance items, 3) copy of the
manifest/receipt for used oil filters delivered to metal recycling facility and other documents
pursuant to the terms and conditions, administrative procedures and policies of UBG4-95-
1407-37 as attached 3) maintain inventory list that includes amount and purpose for any
South Bay Used Oil Project Premiums taken or used by Urban Corps staff.
General:
8) Field Assistance: staff and vehicle support to provide for the initial transportation and
storage of bottles and premiums as well as other functions associated with used oil recycling
and public education but no more than four times per year with at least 48 hours notice.
9) Urban Corps to continue use of a computer (tag no. 017539), printer (tag no. 017540), and
Aerostar Passenger Van (tag no. 017545) for execution of grant at their own expense
(inclusive of payments made by the City for services during the agreement period):
Discontinue:
10) Use of Ford Aerostar (Cargo Van), to be returned and registered to the City upon execution
of this agreement.
Payment:
A)City will order and pay for costs of containers, back up containers, container dolly for used oil
filter collection, bid, source and item selection arranged by Urban Corps and purchase made and
funded by City,
B) City will purchase stickers, manifests or other documents required for used oil filter collection
(Corps to arrange bid, source and item selection and purchase made by City),
C) City will purchase used oil recycling containers and public information required to service
centers,
D) The City will pay the San Diego Urban Corps up to $34,500 between July 1, 1996 and June 30,
1997 for services and technical assistance provided inclusive of all costs at $20.00 per hour.
Payment will be made from invoices documenting completion of task(s) within this "Scope of
Work."
9-/6
~.
Ex#/~ ,'-r
l;rTAeIlMENT B
.. .
,':0"::
: :";::::';:;::::::
. F:~!~:!;J:::i1
'.....
lIir~m""'."'~.idh
'.
RECYCLE
USED OIL
Used Oil
Recycling Block Grant
Fourth Cycle
Administrative Procedures and
Requirements
. - ~
-. - ..
9 - /'1
.
USED OIL RECYCLING BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
Fourth Cycle - 1996197
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
'\
INTRODUCTION
These Administrative Procedures and Requirements set forth the policies and procedures for
administering the Block Grant made through the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board's
(CIWMB) Used Oil Grant Program. This document, which is incorporated by reference into the grant
agreement, describes the contract procedures, administrative reporting requirements, and instructions for
obtaining payment of the grant. Direct any questions regarding this document or the grant agreement to
your CIWMB Project Manager or Darlene Falconer at (916) 255-2657. Mailin9 address is: Califomia
Integrated Waste Management Board, 8800 Cal Center Drive, Mail Station 4, Sacramento, CA 95826.
PROGRAMS
Local used oil collection programs are to be developed by the grantee, and it is the responsibility of the
grantee to ensure all costs are appropriate. All costs must be directly related to the used oil collection
program.
A. ELIGIBLE COSTS
Block Grant funding is for the maintenance of existing programs or the establishment of new programs
that address the proper management of used lubricating oil. Grant awards will only fund activities begun
on or after June 30, 1996 and completed by June 30, 1997. Examples of the types of activities eligible for
funding are listed below:
. Expansion or maintenance of an existing local used oil collection program
. Establishment or expansion of regularly scheduled or on-call curbside collection of used oil
. Construction or improvement of pennanent facilities for the collection of used oil (if other
hazardous waste is collected at the facility, only the portion relating to used oil will be funded)
. Public education materials addressing the proper collection or disposal of used oil.
. Assistance to a private entity for initial or ongoing expenses associated with offering free
collection of used lubricating oil to the public
. Purchase of equipment and supplies for collection of used oil (e.g., curbside containers, oil test
kits)
. Personnel expenses directly related to the local used oil collection program
. Travel expenses. directly related to the Implementation of. Iocall,lsed oil collection program.
Mileage expenses may not exceed $0.24 per mile. Per diem may not exceed $79.00 plus tax per
night for lodging, and meal allowances may not exceed $5.50 for breakfast, $9.50 for lunch, and
$17.00 for dinner during a trip of 24 hours or longer.
2
,
9*'.u/
.'
. Used oil disposal costs
. Storm drain stencilling (grant will fund up to 30% of costs)
. The used oil expenses of a HHW mobile, permanent, or onlKlay event collection program
. Used oil collection facilities at marinas
. Staff training directly related to the implementation of the local used oil collection program
B. ELIGIBLE COSTS REQUIRING PRE-APPROVAL
Grantees must receive pre-approval before making expenditures listed below. Please submit requests in
writing to your CIINMB Project Manager explaining the cost, providing bid,s or estimates (when
appropriate), and justifying the need. Failure to request approval may result in payment not being made,
. All public education or advertising materials, including materials previously approved (e.g., flyers,
posters, mailers, videos, 1V and radio scripts, customized premiums). Grantees must submit a
final draft of these materials to their CIINMB Project Manager for approval prior to production. At
least 75% of a public education/promotion piece must be devoted to used oil to be considered for
full funding. Please allow five working days to review public education material.
. Total staffing costs exceeding 50% of the total grant award or $75,000, whichever is less.
. Any video production costs exceeding $5,000.
. Costs for oil filter-related equipment and/or oil filter collection costs exceeding 5% of the total grant
award,
. Purchase or leasing of any vehicle or trailer.
. Used oil collection tanks exceeding 550 gallons.
. Financial assistance axceeding $2,500 for a privately-owned collection center..
. Total costs for transportation and hauling of contaminated lubricating oil exceeding $1,000 during
the grant term.
. Formula to be used by the Grantee to determine reimbursement for the used 011 portion of a
mobile, temporary, or permanent HHW eventlfacility.
. Purchase of rerefined lubricating oil
C. INELIGIBLE COSTS
Any cost not direClly related to the implemeritation Of a 'Iocer used 011 coI1ection prOgram' Will not be funded,
These include but are not limited to the following costs:
. Costs for services rendered or goods purchased prior to June 30, 1996 or after June 30, 1997.
An invoice dated after June 30, 1997 can be honored If it clearly shows the services were
rendered during the grant ter
3
'~,2.1
.
. Overhead
. Any portion of a program funded by another CIWMB loan or grant program
. Overtime costs (except for local govemment staffing during evening or weekend events when law
or labor contracts REQUIRE overtime compensation)
. Oil spill remediation
. Enforcement activities
. Computer hardware or software
. Office supplies
. Underground storage tanks
. Feasibility or planning studies
. Programs clearly not cost effective
. Travel expenses not directly related to the implementation of the used oil program.
. Any food or beverages (e.g., as part of meetings, workshops, training) except as part of per diam
as described above
. Equipment or other materials that are not primarily used to implement the used oil program
. Purchase or retrofitting of vehicles for any activities other than for curbside used oil collection
. Financial assistance to a collection center that does not accept oil from the public for free
. Staff training not directly related to the implementation of the local used oil collection program
. Costs related to industrial generators
PUBLICITY AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
. The Grantee must acknowledge the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board's funding on all
promotional materials and equipment funded by this agreement. Vehicles or other large pieces of
equipment purchased with grant funds must have a sign attached Indicating it was purchased with
CIWMB grant funds and preferably using the "used oil drop" logo. Such signs are available from the
CIWMB at no cost. The Grantee, with their CIWMB Grant Manager's approval, may develop their own
sign.
. .
Public education or promotional materials must list all grant supported collection centers within the
jurisdiction or indicate a telephone number for information on the nearest center.
- o. _ ...
.
4
9 ~,,2..~
PROGRESS REPORTS
The Grantee must submit a Progress Report with each Payment Request. If a Payment Reauest has
nat been submitted by Navember 15.1996. the Grantee must submit a Proaress ReDDn by
December 11. 1996 covering the first five (5) months of the grant term. The CIWMB Project Manager
may request a Progress Report from a Grantee at any time, and has authority to immediately suspend or
terminate the agreement if progress is unsatisfactory.
Grantees should use a format similar to the attached sample progress report. Each Progress Report shall
include the following information:
. Describe in detail all work completed since the previous Progress Report. Please arrange by the
categories required for the Payment Requests. Discuss why the work was considered an
appropriate part of a local used oil collection program, list the results achieved, and problems or
other special situations encountered.
. A brief discussion of anticipated accomplishments for the next reporting period.
. Attach five (5) copies of all final public education, advertising, or promotional materials purchased
and/or distributed with grant funds.
GRANT PAYMENTS
A complete Payment Request must include the following documents:
1. A completed Payment Request Form signed by the individual named by the resolution;
2. An Itemization of expenditures using the categories described in Section B "Submittal of Payment
Requests;"
3. A Personnel Expenditure Summary (if applicable) explaining time spent on used oil collection
programs. See attached sample.
4. Documentation supporting all claimed expenditures (e.g.,invoices, receipts, cancelled checks)
A. GENERAL GUIDELINES
. Payment will be made to the Grantee only. It is the responsibility of the Grantee to pay all
contractors and subcontractors for purchased goods and services.
. The State shall withhold ten percent (10%) of the total Grent award until all conditions
stipulated in the agreement have been satisfied.
. Grantees who have not fully met the Block Grant eligibility requirements described in
Public Resource~ ~e 548691 rconditionaleligibility") ma~ h~~ up .~.50% of each
Payment Request Withheld depending upon the CIWM~ Project Manager's analysis of the
Grantee's progress toward meeting the eligibility requirements.
. Requests for advance payment must be submitted in writing to the CIWMB Project
Manager and demonstrate the Grantee's need for advance payment. Suggested
documentation includes purchase orders, bids, etc.
"
5 9-~.3
B. SUBMITTAL OF PAYMENT REQUESTS
Payment Requests must include an itemization of all expenses and be supported by
documentation as described below. Grantees are encouraged to use the format outlined in the
attached sample itemization.
. Curbside Collection - Include any costs for establishing or continuing a curbside used oil
collection program.
. Certified Collection Center(s) - These expenses include establishing or enhancing
collection services at a certified used oil collection center, such as collection tanks, testing
equipment, disposal costs, city/county staff time, or contractor/consultant costs.
. Certified Center Compliance - Expenses for site inspection, training of site personnel,
and report preparation.
. Non-certified Collection Center(s) - Include expenses for establishing or enhancing
collection services at any non-certified used oil collection site or the used 011 portion of a
permanent household hazardous waste site. These expenses may include collection
tanks, testing equipment, disposal costs, staff time, etc. PI...e note th., these centers
must accI/ot usad 011 from the oubllc ., no charae.
. Temporary/Mobile Collection - Include expenses only for the used oil portion of
household hazardous waste collection events or mobile programs and clearly show how
these costs were determined.
. School Education program(.). Include expenses for developing and implementing
used oil school education and awareness programs.
. Public Education. Any expense for the development, printing, and distribution of public
education materials that encourage the appropriate disposal of used oil. Include costs for
promoting used oil collection centers and curbside programs.
. Other Costs _ Include any other costs that cannot be assigned to other budget
categories.
C. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Supporting documentation must be Included with the payment request (i.e., legible copies of
receipts, invoices, cancelled checks, and personnel expenditure summary). Supporting
documents must contain sufficient information to establish that purchases made or costs incurred
are eligible for payment. PurchRH ordgrs will not bA ~Dted as aDDmoriAte d~llrN!!ntatiDn of
expenses.
-f'ersonnet a_, ,dil>., ..S'1'I'IIIstbe"cDrnputed"Orr1ICtlli"... .....' I!'orrgrant'ftlllted lCtivities. This
should be done using the attached 'Personnel Expenditure Summary" form or some other format
that contains the following information:
. Expenditures should be broken out by the classification(s) of the empioyee(s), source
document (e.g. timesheet, date), date worked, hOurly wage/rate (including benefits), and
number of hours worKed, and grant related tasks performed.
(
6
9,,) 'f
.
. Total personnel expense claimed (hours X rate), and by task. Please complete for each
employee.
· The form must be signed by the appropriate supervisor. If this form is submitted for
contractor personnel, it must be signed by a supervisor at the contracted entity and
signed by the person whose signature appears on the Payment Request Form.
D. RELEASE OF FUNDS
Payment Requests will be reviewed and forwarded for approval of payment when the Grantee
has submitted all required Progress Reports and the CIWMB Project Manager has determined
them tobe satisfactory. Grantees can typically expect payment within 45 calendar days from the
date a Payment Request is approved by the CIWMB Project Manager.
The CIWMB Project Manager will release any funds withheld due to a Grantee's 'conditional
eligibility" with the first Payment Request processed after the Grantee has fully met all eligibility
requirements. The CIWMB Project Manager will release the ten percent (10%) retention upon
receipt and approval of the Final Report and final Payment Request.
GRANT CLOSURE
The Final Report must be received by the CIWMB Project Manager by August 15, 1997. If requested, the
Grantee shall make an oral presentation to the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board. Format
instructions for the Final Report will be sent to the grantees during April, 1997.
The grant will be closed when the Final Report and Final Payment Request are submitted and It is
determined that all required tasks of the grant have been completed. It is mandatory that the Final Report
be approved before the Final Payment Request is approved and forwarded to the State Controller's Office
for payment.
AUDIT REQUIREMENTS
This grant is subject to audit. The Grantee is responsible for maintaining source documents substantiating
the expenditures claimed for at least three (3) years after termination of the grant
(June 30, 2000), and must make them available at the time of an audit. Records relating to the
implemented program include. but are not limited to: expenditure ledger, payroll register enbies. time
logs, paid warrants, contracts, .change orders, invoices. and cancelled checks.
FAILURE TO COMPLY
Failure to comply with the reporting requirements specified above may result in termination of this
agreement or suspension of any or all outstanding Payment Requests until such time 8S the Grentee has
satisfactorily completed the reporting provisions.
EXCEPTJONS
Any exception to these Administrative Procedures must be r8QuestAd in writinp. The request will be
reviewed and a determination made by the CIWMB grant manager within ten (10) working days from the
date of receipt.
7
9-.2~
.
,
Sample Progress Report .
CITY OF GRANTOILLE
CONTRACT NO. UBG4-94-12~5
PROGRESS REPORT
JUNE 30 - OCTOBER 5, 1996
CERTIFIED COLLECTION CENTERS
The City has a population of 538,100 and currently has three certified used oil collection centers and
needs two more to meet the eligibility requirements for this Block Grant. In an effort to obtain two more
centers, we established a list of 28 businesses as possible contacts (see attached list). Every business
on the list has been contacted and an appointment was made to meet with the owner/manager if possible
Only three businesses were unwilling to meet with us. Jesse's Maxi-Lube, Acme Lube and Oil, and Sam's
Service Station. During on-site meetings we gave each business the CI\l\lMB packet of information on
certification and explained how we'd assist with collection costs and would like them to distribute the
collection containers to the public. Since those meetings ABC Oil has agreed to become a certified center
and submitted their application to the CI\l\lMB. We are still working with the other companies and hope to
have two or three more certified by the end of the grant term.
In trying to encourage businesses to become certified centers and to help centers already certified to
continue in the program, we are offering financial assistance in the form of paying for the collection and
disposal of the used oil, and providing drums to collect oil filters. To date we have provided used oil
collection twice for the Chief Auto Parts and the Jiffy Lube for a total of four collections. We will continue
providing this service and extend it to other businesses as they become certified collection centers.
PUBLIC EDUCATION
The City of Grantoille's public education program consists of developing and printing a three-fold brochure;
purchase and distribution of used oil collection containers; display banners; and promotional items.
Since 63 percent of the City's population is Hispanic. we determined that the three-fold brochure should
target the Hispanic residents. We have completed a first draft of the brochure and have enclosed a copy
for CI\l\lMB Used Oil Staffs review. We plan to print the brochures during the next quarter and distribute
to certified centers, auto part stores, and City Hall. We also plan to distribute these brochures at the local
Auto Show in March and at Earth Day in April.
An order for 7,000 used oil collection containers has been placed and should be received by October 15.
1995. The stickers for the containers have been developed and printed. Distribution of the containers will
begin immediately at the City's used 011 collection center and also at the Chief Auto Parts and Jiffy Lube
certified collection centers.
i
8
~ -,,2 V
,.
City of Grantoille - Progress Report
June 30 - October 5, 1996
Page 2
We had planned to purchase the banners in July, however, the company from which we were
going to order them suddenly went out of business. We hope to be able to find another company
and place the order by November. These banners will be placed over the city's main street and
used at public events.
We are in the process of reviewing the types of promotional materials available to determine what
will be the most appropriate to get our message across to recycle used oil. We want Items that
will be long lasting and likely to be used frequently so that the message Is seen over and over.
We'd like to purchase three different Items and plan to make this purchase by January 1996.
Plsllse note .thlltJbis.JlluDpJa is.Dal~o~,,/Ii. ..DICOlDlTlllQl/ed..fD~t for...P.rogU1S6 Reports end
demonstrllte the type of Informlltion thllt Is required. h mllY be epproprillte for GrentH8 to provide
more detllil depending upon the scope of the progrem or other consideretions.
9
7-:; 7
,
\
SAMPLE PAYMENT REQUEST ITEMIZATION
CITY OF GRANTOILLE
CONTRACT NO. UBG4.94.123-4S
PROGRESS REPORT
JUNE 30 . OCTOBER 5, 1996
CERTIFIED COLLECTION CENTER(S)
"Waste Management Specialist 1- 60 hrs. @ $18.S0 hr. & 32% benefits
"Waste Management Specialist II .20 hrs. @ $22.38 hr. & 32% benefits
.Clerical - 24 hrs. @ $13.25 hr. & 32% benefits
"'Used 011 transportation & disposal - 4 pickups ~ $50 per pickup
Subtotal
PUBLIC EDUCATION
"Waste Management Specialist 1- 32 hrs. @ $18.50 hr. & 32% benefits
"Printing of stickers for used oil containers. 7,000 @ 35~ each.
Subtotal
TOTAL EXPENSES
.Copy of time sheetsltime logs attached. with used 011 grant time highlighted
"Copy of invoice attached, claimed expenses are highlighted
10
9., .l~
'.
$1,465
591
420
UQQ
$2.676
$ 781
~
$3.231
$S,907
i
, '
1./
California Integrated Waste Management Board
Used 011 Grant Program
TArms and Conditions
Pumose The purpose of this agreement is to establish the terms and conditions of the Used Oil Block Grant.
Definitions In interpreting this agreement, the following terms will have the meanings given to them below, unless the
context clearly indicates otherwise.
A. "Board" will mean the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board.
B. "Executive Director" will mean the Executive Director of the Celifomia Integl'llled Waste Management
Board, or his/her designee.
C. "State" will mean the State of Califomia, Including but not limited to, the Califomla Integrated Waste
Management Board and/or its designated officer.
D. "Grantee" will mean the recipient of funds pursuant to this Agreement.
E. "Program Manage~' will mean the Board staff person responsible for monitoring the grant.
Audi1. The Grantee agrees that the Board, the State Controlle~s OffIce and the State Auditor Generars OffIce, or their
designated representatives, will have an absolute right of access to all of the Grantee's records pertaining to the
agreement to conduct reviews and/or audits. Grantee's records pertaining to the agreement, or any part thereof
-equested. will be made available to the designated auditor(s) upon request for the indicated reviews and/or audits. Such
records will be retained for at least three (3) years after expiration of the agreement, or until completion of the action and
resolution of all issues which may arise as a result of any litigation, claim, negotiation or audit, whichever Is later.
If an audit reveals the Board funds are not being expended, or have not been expended in accordance with the agreement,
the Grantee may be required to forfeit the unexpended portion of the funds and/or repay the Board for any Improperly
expended monies.
Drull-Free Workolace Certification The Grantee, by signing this agreement, certifies compliance with Govemment Code
Section 8355 in matters relating to providing a drug-free workplace. The Grantee will:
A. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession,
or use of a controlled iubstance Is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for
violations, as required by Govemment Code Section 8355(a).
B. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Govemment Code Section 8355(b), to inform
employees about all of the following: (a) the dangers of drug abuse In the workplace, (b) the Grantee's
policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace, (c) any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee
assistance programs, and (d) penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations.
C. . Provide as required by Govemrrent Code Section 8355(c):ihat-ev.ry oaii'iPloY_ who worb on the
proposed grant (a) will receive a copy of the company's drug-free policy ltatement, and (b) will agree to
abide by the terms of the company's ltatement as a condition of employment on the grant. The person
signing this grant on behalf of the Grantee swears thet helshe Is authorized to legally bind the Grantee to
this certification and makes this certification under penalty of pe~ury under the laws of the State of
Califomia.
Nationalt..bar Relations Board Certification The Grantee, by lignlng this agreement, swears under penalty of pe~ury that
no more than one final unappealable finding of contampt of court by a Federal court has been issued against the
contractor within the immediately preceding two-year period because. of the Grantee's failure to comply with en order of a
Federal Court which orders the Grantee to comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board. - , ... ,2 'J
"
Used Oil Grant Tenns and Conditions
Page 2
"
.
Availabilitv of Funds The Board's obligations under this agreement are contingent upon and subject to the availability of
funds appropriated for this grant.
Pavment The Budget states the maximum amount of allowable costs for each of the tasks identified in the Work
Statement. The Board will reimburse the Grantee for perfonning only those services specified in the Work Statement and
presented on the payment request.
In the event the Grantee's projection of costs indicates a need to revise the Budget, the Grantee will notify the Board within
ten (10) working days of the discovery of need for revision.
Entire Aareement This agreement supersedes all prior agreements, oral or written, made with respect to the subject
hereof and, together with the Attachments hereto, Grantee's application and supplemental infonnation generated pursuant
to the grant agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties.
Failure to Comalete Proiect Given that the benefit to be derived by the Board from the full compliance by the Grantee with
the tenns of this grant is the investigation and application of technologies, processes, and devices which support
reduction, reuse and/or recycling of wastes, should the Grantee fail to complete the project, the Board will only reimburse
the Grantee for the work perfonned under the grant which resulted in either information, a process, usable data. or a
partial product which can be used to aid in reduction, reuse and/or recycling of waste as detennined by the Program
Manager.
Communications All official communication from the Grantee to the Board will be directed to the Grantee's assigned Used
Oil Grant Program Manager, Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board, 8800 Cal Center Drive, Sacramento, CA
95826. All fonnal notices required by this agreement will be given in writing and sent by prepaid mall, by personal delivery.
or by FAX followed by an original.
Canfidentiality/Public Records The Grantee and the Board understand that each party may come into possession of
infonnation and/or data which may be deemed confidential or proprietary by the person or organization furnishing the
infonnation or data. Such information or data may be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act,
commencing with Government Code Section 6250. The Board agrees not to disclose such information or data furnished
by the Grantee and to maintain such information or data as confidential when so designated by the Grantee in writing at
the time it is fumished to the Board, only to the extent that such information or data is exempt from disclosure under the
Califomia Public Records Act.
Publicitv and ACknowledaement The Grantee agrees that it will acknowledge the Board's support each time projects
funded, in whole or in part, by this agreement are publicized in any news media, brochures, or other type of promotional
material.
Ownershio of Drawinas Plans and Soecifications. The Board will have separate and independent ownership of all
drawings, design plans, specifications, notebooks, tracings, photographs, negatives, reports, findings, recommendations,
data and memoranda of every description or any part thereof, paid for in any part with grant funds, and copies thereof will
be delivered to the Board upon request. The Board will have the full right to use said copies in any manner when and
where it may detennine without any claim on the part of !he Grantee, Its vendors or subcontractors to additional
compensation.
Coovriahts and Trademarks. The Grantee assigns to the Board any and all Interests and rights to copyright or trademark
any material created or.deveIopecl4l/i&b.g~....:AIi...ssIgAment4.va1id-IHi~ peItioMlf-tile<<eation or development
of a copyright or trademark is paid for with funds granted by the Board. Upon written request by the Grantee the Board
may, at the Board's option, give express written consent to the Gl'llntee to retain all or any part of the ownership of these
rights.
As used herein, "copyrightable materiar Includes all materials which may be copyrighted II noted in TItle 17, United
States Code, Section 102, as follows: 1) literary works, 2) musical works, Including any accompanying words, 3)
dramatic works, Including any accompanying music, 4) pantomimes and choreographic works, 5) pictorial, graphic and
lCulptural works, 6) motion pictures and o!her audio visual works, and 7) sound recordings. As used herein,
"trademarkable materiar means any material which may be registered IS a trademark, aervice mark or trade name under
the California Trademark Law, cited at Business and Professions Code (B&PC) Sections 14200-14342. "Tredemark" Is
defined by B&PC Section 14207. "Service mark" is defined by B&PC Section 14206. "Trede name" is defined by B&PC
Section 14208. 9,. .:! cJ
1.
Used Oil Grant Tenns and Conditions
Page 3
,
,
Patents. The Grantee assigns to the Board all rights, title and interest in and to each invention or discovery that may be
capable of being patented, that is conceived of or first actually reduced to practice in the course of or under this
agreement, or with the use of any grant funds. Upon written request by the Grantee the Board may, at the Board's option,
give express written consent to the Grantee to retain all or any part of the ownership of these rights.
Successors and Assillns The provisions of the agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Board and
the Grantee and their respective successors and assigns.
Discretionarv Tennination or Assillnment of Aoreement The Board will have the right to tenninate this agreement at its
sole discretion at any time upon 30 days' written notice to the Grantee. In the case of earty tennination, a final payment
will be made to the Grantee upon receipt of a financial report and invoices covering costs incurred prior to tenmination, and
a written report describing all work perfonned by the Grantee to date of tenmination.
Stoo Work Notice Immediately, upon receipt of a written notice to stop work, the Grantee will cease all work under the
agreement.
Disoutes If for any reason the Grantee and the Executive Director cannot reach mutual agreement, the Grantee may refer
the dispute to the Board for final resolution.
Remedies Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, the rights and remedies hereunder are in addition to, and not in
limitation of, other rights and remedies under the agreement, at law or in equity, and exercise of one right or re.medy will
not be deemed a waiver of any other right or remedy.
: Severability If any provisions of this agreement ara found to be unlawful or unenforceable, such provisions will be voided
and severed from this agreement without affecting any other provision of the agreement To the full extent, however, that
the provisions of such applicable law may be waived, they are hereby waived, to the and that the agreement be deemed to
~ a valid and binding agreement enforceable in accordance with its terms.
Force Maieure Neither the Board nor the Grantee, including the Grantee's contractor(s), if any, will be responsible
hereunder for any delay, default or nonperformance of this agreement, to the extent that such delay, default or
nonperformance is caused by an act of God, weather, accident, labor strike, fire, explosion, riot, war, rebellion, sabotage,
or flood, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of such party.
Controllinl1 Law All questions conceming the validity and operation of the agreement and the performance of the
obligations imposed upon the parties hereunder will come within the jurisdiction of and be govemed by the laws of the
State of Califomia.
Comoliance The Grantee shall comply fully with all applicable federal, state and Iocaliaws, ordinances, regulations and
penmits. The Graniee must provide evidence that all local, state and/or federal penmits, Hoen_, registrations, and
approvals for the proposed project have been secured and shall maintain compliance with such requirements throughout
the grant period. The Grantee shall ensure that the requirements of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act are met for
any penmits or other requirement necessary to carry out the terms of this agreements. Any deviation from these stated
requirements will result in non-payment of grant funds.
Eauioment and Suoolies Subject to the obligations and conditions set forth in this section, title to equipment and supplies
acquired under a grantwill.llest.upon.acquisltionlA.the GRlntee.
UK. Equipment and supplies shall only be used by the Grantee in the program for which it was acquired as long as
needed, whether or not the program continues to be supported by Board funds.
Insurance The Grantee shall obtain, and keep in force for the !enm of this agreement, and require its contractors to obtain
and keep in force, the following insurance policies which cover any acts or omissions of the Grantee, or its employees,
enga~ed in the provision of. service specified in this agreement. Proof that the following Insurance is in piece shall be
submitted to the Board prior to the awarding of the grant.
1. Worker's Compensation Insurance in accordance with the statutory requirements of the State *tIere the work is
performed. 9 - .11
Used Oil Grant Terms and Conditions
Page 4
,
2. Comprehensive personal injury liability insurance, including coverage of owned, hired and nonowned automobiles.
3. Comprehensive property damage liability insurance, including coverage of owned, hired and nonowned automobiles.
4. Equipment and motor vehicle coverage at a level sufficient for replacement of property acquired under this
agreement.
5. Insurance coverage required for program implementation pursuant to Title 22, Califomia Case of Regulations, Section
66264.147.
Hold Harmless
A. Grantee agrees to waive all claims and recourse against the State including the right to contribution for
loss or damage to persons or property arising from, growing out of or in any way connected with or
Incident to this agreement. This waivar extends to any loss incunred due to any product, structure or
condition created pursuant to, or as a result of the grant agreement.
B. Grantee agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the State, its officials, officers, agents and
employees against any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, or liability cost arising out of
the activities undertaken, product, structure or condition created pursuant to, or as a result of this grant
agreement.
Nondiscrimination Clause (OCP - 2)
1. During the performance of this grant, the Grantee, contractor and its subcontractors will not deny the granfs benefits
to any person on the basis of religion, color, ethnic group identification, sex, age, physical or mental disability, nor will
they discriminate unlawfully against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color,
national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, age or sex. Grantee
will ensure that the evaluation and treatment of employees and applicants for employment are free of such
discrimination.
2. Grantee will comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code, Section 12900
~.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (California Administrative Code, IltIe 2, Section 7285.0 ~.), the
provisions of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 3, TItle 2 of the Government Code (Government Code, Sections
11135 -11139.5) and the regulations or standards adopted by the awarding State agency to implement such article.
3. Grantee and any subcontractors will give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations
with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement.
4. Grantee will include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts and subcontracts
to perform work under the grant.
- ~.... -
UHd Oil Block a..nt . 1995196
f
9 'Jt?-
STATE OF
STANDARD AGREEMENT-
APPROVED BY THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL
CONTRACT NUMBER
A" NO
STD 2 ,REV 5.91)
UBG4-95-] 407
I. TAXPAYER'S FEDERAL EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
~IS AGREEMENT. made and en!ered in!o this 30th day of June. 1996. 95-6000-690
in the Sl<ile of California, by and between State..f California. through its duly elected or appoimed, qualified and acting
TITLE OF OFFICER ACTING FOR STATE
:
i
AGENCY
California Integrated Waste Management Board
, hereafter called the State, and
Executive Director
CONTRACTOR'S NAME
! City of Chula Vista , hereafter called me Comractor
WITNESSETH: That [he ComfaclOr for and in consideration of the covenants. conditions. agreements, and stipulations of the State hereinafter expressed,
does hereby agree fo furnish to the Stale services and materials as follows: (Set forth service to be rendered by Contractor, amount to be paid Contractor,
lime for performal/ce or completion, and attach pJpns and specifications, if any.)
Cnmractor agree~ (0 undertake and complete all necessary tasks to implement a local used oil collection program as authorized by Public Resources Code
48690 and 48691. AI a minimum. the contractor's used oil collection program must:
I. Include a puhlic education component that informs the public of locally available used oil recycling opportunities. AND
2. En5ure the contractor's Blod Grant eligihility requirements are met by ensuring that either of the criteria below or a combination of the two are
achieved and maintained during the grant term so that all residents are served: a) Provides used oil curbside collection for all residents of the city
including muhi.tamily residences: or b) ensures that at least one certified used oil collection center is available for every 100,000 residents not served by
curhside u5ed nil collection.
The term of tile agJt~emellt will he 12 months. commencing June 30.1996 and terminating June 30.1997. Contractor will be paid in accordance with the
attached Terms and Conditions and Administrative Procedures and Requirements. The State will withhold 10% of the total grant award until completion
of all work and other reqUIrements to the satisfication of the State in accordance with this contract.
Conlractor agree~ to abide hy all legal and administrative requirements for this grant as described in the Terms and Conditions and Administative
'edures and Requirements. excluding the paragraph entitled. "Entire Agreement" to read. "This agreement supercede5 all prior agreements. oral or
~n. made with respect (Q the subject hereof." These documents are attached (Q this agreement and incorporated by reference.
co:\n:\L:ED o~
SHEETS. EACH BEARtNG NAME OF CONTRACTOR AND CONTRACT NUMBER.
The provIsion!. on the reverse side hereof constitute a pan of this agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been executed by the panics hereto. upon the date first above wriHen.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA CONTRACTOR
AGE~c) CONTRACTOR (If o!htr lhat an inodi,'idual. Slate ....hether a corporation. parlnership. el(,1
California Integrated Waste Management Board City of Chula Vista
BY iAl'THORJZED SIGNATURE) BY (AlIT ~IGNATUR~
,. Y ( ~.
PRINTED NAME OF PERSON SIGNING PR~ NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING
Ralph E. Chandler JOHN D. GOSS, CITY MANAGER
TITLE ADDRESS
Executive Director 276 4th Avenue, Chula Vista CA 91910
AMOI:NT ENCUMBERED BY THIS PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE) rUND TITLE Department of General Services
DOCUMFNT
CA Used Oil Recycling Use Only
$79,963.00 (OPTIONAL USE)
PRIOR AMOllNT ENCUMBERED ITEM rHAPTER STATUTE rlSCAL YEAR
FOR THIS CONTRACT
$ - 0- 39tO-602-tOO 817 t991 19951%
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED OBJEn OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
TO DATE
$79.963.00 1100-51843-702
II ':ny certify upon my own personal knowledge thaI budgeted funds are availahle rBA NO I" NO
lur the penod (lnd purpose of Ihe expeooJfure stated ahove.
!SIGNATIIRI 01- "rCOI-NTINGOFFICER IDATI
,
I,.
o f'ONTI<,-'\CTOR 0 STATE AGENCY
o DEPT OF GEN SER
o CONTRULLI'R
o
9- .:J 3
.-............................
--A'Tf OF CAliFORNIA
STANDARD AGREEMENT
STD2(REV5-91) ,; .,;r~;:;'
III..: C,l!i,";11;:\)r ;j~r.:\.'" 10 inJ":J,HI1i1~. dct~l1d ,md ')&1\'c:.' hal'rnlt."s~ Ih,,' StJJ':. ib t)Ricer::,. agcllf~ and I."mph~~",'C's from an)
J.r:d ....11 ~1,1jm~ .Uld hb~~.... ut.:cruing. or rcsllltll~g. to a.ny and all cotUra.;tor~. suh;':l1l1fri1fo:fOrs. matcri:.lImc:.'n. laboreh and
m:; ,}th..:r pt:r:.on. lim: ,)r ~oTj"t}rati()n f\lrni~hjng (Jr ~urrl)jng \hwk ::.;:r\'i~I.'''', matL.'riah: or <;lIrpJies in connecli,,1n with
\hot pc:.'rf'iJnn~tn~~ ot"thJ;- ('(1ntraCf. and fl'\Jm an) clnd all ~lail1l~ ~mJ lo~~ec.; accruing or r~ul{in;; fl) any pe~. firm or
,,'\'rpl)r~1t:111\ ....110 I1L1) Ix' illjllrL'J or damag;.:d h; d1L' COIunK1 in th.: r,,':-fonnanc.: of this contract.
!n..: (.lJni:-:\..'~,;r, iinJ tht:' a!!~nb ;;md .:mploye--.:;,: \,f Contr.tctt}r in the peJ1~")nuancc of dlC a~TfC'o;:mrnt. shall ace in an
inJ;.:rC:I(~L'T1l .:ana~i;: and ndt .1~ 1"t1kL'TS or ~ml'I,):~cs or dg~nb. ,_Jfthc Sf:.11(' of Cali fomi a.
i ;11..' '>W.\,; nj~~. It'rmiil.1.1L' Iii;;; .t~r\"':ITI,,'nl and i:\t' relievc:d (\f th~ paymenl of &In}' consider.1tion to Conlroclor should
I .1j1!:;}.:~[,,~ ;~:I h\:;-t.:! J~lrnl th,; .,;ovcaant;.: h..:rdn ~ontained ill the tim~ and in dle marmc'r herein provided. In the event
,.. :.d\'" ~ ~..''''ir~ 1::.~t:~I!; the Sra~\'" nu:- P~'K':L'J \.du. rilL' work in a.ny JtI:1nn~r dt.~'med prop~r b) the StatL'. TIl~ cost 1('1 th~
....' ~~I~' \h,.i: ,"It, j~dLi{,~I.'d fh)m UJ!) ..:;un: ~H': rIll..' Contractor ...mJ.:r tJli~ agr~f."m~J1I: ane th~ bala.I1\,.'~. if an). ,h31! b..: pajJ
:;-;.. C"'l:;..;:~,;r Ui.',1 ..:..;;iur:J.
\', .f:h'l..:: :t~ .\ (:~I;.::\ ':OJ:"l'~'t of nl..' '>1..:.11<:. il,j::, .t~rL':::nl'm ;;; not a.....slgn~1blt:' h) C',}mr,ii.:!t\r .:iill~~ in "to,lOh..' (II' in par:,
.. .~' f... .;,_-,C;..~' ,. 'l:i" a;.:r':\":"1:~:II.
,~ \" .!li..'L!\....".
\ J:' ""..1,'1 !".... !\"nn:. If,.i.... (,\m7':,~.:.. ..hu! :".' ..~~ijJ i.;I:Il:':-:~ Ona(k' :1; ~\.Tili;lg .mJ ,i~I1i.:J ;..: iliC r.iJ,:-:":~
.'1.'. ..J" " ."..i ::::~~" ,:.~:i,i;!~~ ;11' ,::-:r..'e~1,clt lH'! IIlc\I;.j.:\~.a:t,:"; Ih=:\'I~j. ~hOJ.l! hI.' bl~;iing. fIn :.:.1'1:. P: tl:.: r~~:-:it'.. J~l'~L:
! "- ~:)I;..kn~d(111 :,\ !:1..' r~i,! (Ol1t:.O':'...:OI", a:, prn', icn: hl:-:'l'in. ,naB be in c"rnp~n:>OC1tion f~Jr ~H of C ontraL'tor\ t'\r.:n"L'~
iTl.....:-:-_~; ill :;:: :h.:::l\n:Utl~;:: hi:!':,:d~ IIH:luJin:: :ra\1..': ~U1d j1t'r J;~:TL Jnh.':-,~ 11th..:f"'\\..j<.;C' ~xpr..;....~I: ;'('1 ri'o\"idL'd
9-JY
'.
~
.
.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / Il
Meeting Date 10/8/96
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution /8'f5"'lauthorizing City
Permit No. PE-372
Director of Public workf ~
City ManagerJ{1 bfJ,j~1
Engineer to issue Encroachment
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
(4/Sths Vote: Yes _ NoX)
St. John's Episcopal Church at 760 First Avenue (see locator map on Exhibit "A") recently requested
that it be issued an encroachment permit to connect its private drainage facilities to the City's storm
drain system. This request does not fall within the scope of the types of encroachments that may be
authorized by the City Engineer without first being approved by Council.
RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt the subject resolution authorizing the City Engineer to
issue Encroachment Permit No. PE-372.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Neither Board or Commission actions are
needed in this case.
DISCUSSION:
After an arson fire destroyed the sanctuary at St. John's Episcopal Church located at 760 First
Avenue, the Church submitted plans to rebuild. The plans were approved by the City, which
included regrading the site and installing new storm drains. In order to carry stormwater to an
approved system off-site, the Church applied to the City to connect to its existing curb inlet in First
Avenue. (See Exhibit "B".)
The private l2-inch-diameter drain line encroaches approximately 20 feet into the right-of-way of
First Avenue before it makes connection into the back of the City's inlet box. The Church's
contractor will perform all of the work involved in this permit.
The encroachment permit and its subsequent recordation with the County Recorder will assure the
City that the Church and all its successors in interest in the property are aware of the pipe's existence
and of the owner's maintenance responsibilities that go with it.
The hydraulic calculations have been reviewed by this department and have been found to be
satisfactory as to capacity within all the lines.
ItJ -/
\;7
Page 2, Item / tI
Meeting Date 10/8/96
One alternative to this method of draining the site would be to install an under-sidewalk drain and
let the flow of stormwater into the gutter on First A venue. This is a less desirable alternative in that
it is preferable to keep as much drainage as possible within underground conduits, instead of on the
street surfaces.
In accordance with Section 12.28.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the issuance of this
encroachment permit must be authorized by a Council resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT: All construction of the drains and the connection to the City's inlet will be paid
for by the Church. The application fee for the encroachment permit has be paid by the Church.
Attachments: Resolution
Exhibit "A" - Locator
Exhibit "B" - Detail of location of encroachment
Exhibit "C" - Encroachment Permit No. PE-372
Engineering File No: 0710-40-PE-372
[M:\HOME\ENGINEERIAGENDA \PE-372.JWH ]
/~,~
RESOLUTION NO.
/?J/5o/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PE-372
WHEREAS, st. John's Episcopal Church at 760 First Avenue
recently requested an encroachment permit to connect its private
drainage facilities to the City's storm drain system; and
WHEREAS, said request does not fall within the scope of
the types of encroachments that may be authorized by the City
Engineer without first being approved by Council; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 12.28 of the
Municipal Code, Council must authorize the issuance of the permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby authorize the city Engineer to
issue Encroachment Permit No. PE-372 to connect its private
drainage facilities to the City's storm drain system in
substantially the form attached with such minor modifications as
may be required or approved by the City Attorney
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\encroach.per
/~-.:J
'I I II, '..L-j
::'1
f-AE 'i-- =1= j:..j
~~I-- ~ --I -1= >J#
... ..-'
, t' I- 1-... ):.-\- ;f-J::..:::
!!I :::., : il-+-- \.-J./ ~ - f-I--
u.__ ...... ::::::..,uu I- :::'::1:: ~ III:~::__. -:rlil~a~~ toto' '.
HILLTOP ;..- fI-..... "" z:--,.
'I 'III ::: I:: I '"
I .:':.. '.J lU '" '., t, t - ;: ~
--III II ' " : I ,.::~ ,,: ::::, ~. I-- 33
-~. ':'~'~-"~-f-~_~n, . .~...~t-~" ~, ~l
n,.': : : : : : : : : .: : ,:::: 'u IT :::.:" r,' '---'- I'
__.:.:. ~ ~ J ~ 51:::~1:!~ 5~. .:':. ~.:~~~C':::~t:.:; T~-b= .'LL~TO. ~y>...j ~~
>.::.'= -;:: =-- ::; == ~ :::. ::: ~~ 2 . .\t~,~i~,L,~ t ,::: J -_
E I:::,i",' III... _ --i . .., e.V,::~~:\""~'i! :_
~ ,..AI UI = = .w... ~....'7 ';""~\;.,,~.~~\'c.,:." L . - _
.>= >= :::: ::::: ,.'. "\L%"':!-T!"'.':"'!!'i:C ~...~. ............-. ~
: == ::::: ...~. II ['::1 I ~.,~~
. = = = .: t . I "'\.1~~' '.
I- I- = = _... .,.. 1 I ~ ;_ I""~ .
L.,... f-.-, r"T' . . :-: ~~ " " """ I' ~ I' I I II: III . I t "'T"T'"
---L l..i...i..;.l "'-'-'-'- ~ ... ..'" , . , '- :l'-...~ II
u'r~~. $TIt T :~:.. \~~
- t")jt~ Lj~~;:j~ ~'~~ :1:IIIIT'iI":~l/" , , ~.?~~'7~~
:.... ms~ .., ~- != :: !~ '~' .'.....n Q , ) 'I' Yl'-::" / / / m('
i 0 "1-111 c... I~ ~("1 lJ '//.'/.'(
I Till . ; , 1 I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I t--- _m ~l ! I I I I ~
.
I[=rl ~ 11 r I " Tl I I I I I I I I ' I II I ;..j t::';::::lI--!r-"1 l rr T
~:-Tli.11111 I il I L 'illlT1~{'~'i I II 1III IIIIIII
:r . AST In
""'" .,.,'" ,,,,,~,:"'''~''~~''''~N.''''',,,,,., '.' ~ ...,.~ I. I 111" I I
~.:t::i~ .~ ~~~~~'\~';-:;.1:'\...,\;\~~;,~.1:-.~.{\':..\....,,~,"C~~~~\\~~~-i'~ 'J =. : i " I: ~ U l \...-I..
\~~ :e"'~~A.~~i""""""('..~":'I!' ~1..:t:' . ..~., "':;-,:o.'_\~"'_"'r."1o'~'-),,~-;r.~:I ,...... I- ~ ~I- ~ \ I '. 'E:
~J.~\~\~"i~~~~~~)'..t"~~i~~~~~~~~~1~~:~~,...~\;.j;,~~i~~-:'t.\~~,~~~"""\~'" :... 1-1-1- 0'
~~_~ah.-3.-~~~r--~,~~"",~~~'),..~,\~..~~~.t~~....~..~.;"',...~1."\""~".';h~~"~.."~\')~"",,,~, : I I- I- l'
.....t~~,~\.i'-~.~~'i'~~~,..,,";.....~!, "c:'~i<l;.~,..t;"""{~";'~~<:'~~*~*~~~~~~: I- ~ J.<' '\
'-:r~~1-.1::(i'.s~;',,'~)...~~l~;::~.r.1-.7..'f.:~tt-~')S;~~I~'~~"'('~~~~~ : I t ~~ ~o ,~ ,,->
~~~~~~~,r~})f~;~\~t~~!:'l~~~r~~~J~~~~:~~~S5~~'~~:~~1;~\~~~ r." I r:: ~ 8,1.1 I' I II I II ~
~':"I4.~.~'V',"." ,..~ ..~.~....,.,.,~ ~{',i.;1*..\.;.....~"\,~,,:, ""f..':"........""""k-.~~......:'1; "'~":t!:1I ~ ~ ....J.....:...
~~'\....~...~;{ }:i~~i):\...'";rZ\~'It~:\~......;,t.+.\~'"':..~~~S-...:M~:i..~~ ~ f- ~ 1--.1-- r--r '"
~~~~~{:?~:~~~\~~~~~r~~~\~{~~~~\:~!s~~;~~,};~~~~~,~ Y; ~ ~I-I::I- ,~ =-
';.,~;\'j;,:.~ -,'-'S'-~\"-..'-";:""~'ti':(.~,:::-:;1-:.... O,'GO COUNT.Y CLUI ,<w'\\;;~'>;..:;;-:c,. 1--1-' . Y ~ "'-J ~
"~l:.'~";"'.. .-.c'~~,.,. "'~r"~'" ,.......~~~aT 'L~,~'\,~1...;~.5~:~~ ~ I- c---->~ ....,
,.1i;~,,~;~.,.'\.~~\i;':)~\':;.,'i\''';;'~'.,~:;\ GOLF COUll.. ~t.::.;,~}'.. 1-1- 1-1-.1' ~'-y~r-r-.
~~~",~-,.."",~,.. ~~~~~.....~..:",;~t':\"""~~~ -r.""io'I:H~ ~y(.._~~ ~ I- ~ J'o, ."
~~~,%~~~~,,~~~1~f~~:&\\~~~~~~\;~ti~~~~~~~~p,~~v*'3~9:J.~~ ~ ~
~ .( \~'~ ~""~~'\~;~~~~'""o"'~"~""-:,~>\w~"i~':}.~"'~"""~~~"~11':t.;:-~\...~~~\~~~ " r;::= I-~ 'L'" P'" 7Z
__~""A1~<1"i.*~.. .....,,"\\~~"!...~"":i..='",S:.i"'.;~~...~;:~..~".. ~~~~,~,-:;01\:.;\~.t~"",~;'" h rI ~ I- -'-'11 F I LEN O. c; .. 3
- --.....:.~.;....;...i1-.....,...::.,....;:,_),;~ ..........-.::_..~....~.;"\:,.....'o;:I..:.\~ ~_........:q _""""'\"o~.;">.;i:Q~-.:.,,, ~_".
_-....___~.__..J-I.__.
....-. j . J j I I L!"1 _L I \j r-\---j I
Jh-\.~i--1.....-i1 !I----
1111 :::: I: ,101 , : "
I ~f-
:;:'V J
J, n I
II
)::JI 'lH ~
""i"'~'\\'. i:.~;.. I-C=J
. ..,tA
;::1: <>
.
"
_:::
~
:::::::~
f-
:::.::::J=
noT...:1::::
--.~ , .
...-!
T
T..
. ..,....
: : ; : : . : : : ~...
-~
-I-
~
.'
~:~;':
. ~.
.....'-=-
~q-
-J:: .....,.-.
Jr-~ ~.~ ~)..
1-... 'f"~'.
rr
.
,...... " ", t'
, .. I I I i'": I .1"[' 1'.' ~ . '
~~-~_... , , ' ,
: ::: "\ III II
~I-': /~illi
~!:"h '\" _
H~ ::;::'II\,\\. -I!
l""-l:-J~ > III II :1-11
1// ~ S;; : I '- ~
. _ '- e-' .1 II I I I _
t.~ ~,.. :: = ~~ I I I r-
~T:fnFi II IItI '1111 1II1II11 ... ..,
I ..
mIl::: I I
~
.1-.
-I::::;::
:~: ; :
..1.. ,
.....
.--
I'll
I-J. 11
ffi:::
iffi::'
II
III
11
.
rf.I'
I
J:"..~
..-=f
-
..
....
,
,
... : t
,
:
no
..:..~ :
Pi.~ . 'j..
,,,h.. ~ ..un. :::::::
. .....~.
......~5.~..-- ...-.~-
III
, II
. ", I"
::.-~.~.~.' :.~:~.
---I
,I
,::::-.::':-:::.: II: :::::: :'~_1:':-: I r I
'---"-::':~'::; = ....... .u~:-: I
~ .1....-~______ ____L.
~--..-- Q -----
-_~__Tn..~
:;-l--rrn'-
I= ,,=
1= ~:::
t=: :::::
~
DWN BY:
EX/-{ / B/ T 1:4"
DATE:
..
I. l ______ .~
1-- 1..
I
I I ~
-Rj
= I \.
I
I
I
II
It
I
I . i l:i ,I!
I I I I .' I i I ~
.
: 1
C~'
I~"{
III
.. PRtvA rE ~\
ORA/N ~ \1
II
II
II
\\
Ii I
\1 I
\1
b 1;/ CITY'$ 18H
) ,..~, -H i OICAIi'I i
<./ if3IECT E .cn H .......'-.l .-::l
~:.J N K.OAG M'T ~O L . ~-f.9
,'I CuRB i
/NLL T '
:h
;i
EXH/B/ T liB 1/
EX/$ T 'G. 8L OG.
EXI5T'C;. BLDG.
I
I
I
I'
Et/5T'(r,
8LDG.
OWN BY: J ..,
DATE: '/1"'"
" ?'" StOcwAI.K
V CI.'IU5 L/J./E ---.l
LlJ .
!
~
20'
'<:
llJ
""'-
-
~
I
I
i I
i I
f I
"- Ii
~I f'.
~J ~!
~ ~.
~ 'I"
~ f.!
.... '
\.Ii
, c-
,
!
"-
\
~
....
-J
\-
(jJ
ct
-
I
It..
1
!
i
I
I
i~
I FILE NO. pe.nz
/tJ ,5'
Recording requested by and
please return to:
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
[X] This document benefits
permittee. Recording
fee required.
......,w. :::;:;.:::::::~::::::::~
-.-.......;...........:.:.:.:.:...;.:.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.:.:.:-:-;.:.:.:.;.:.;.;.:.;.:.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.:.;.:.:.;.;.;.;.-.;.:.:.;.:.:.;.;.:.:.:.
':':':':':':':':';':':'.':':'.':':':':'.':'.-:':':':':':':.:-:.:.:.;-:.:.,.:.:.,.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.;.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:
..............................'...'.................................,.....,.........,...................................-.....'.w.
...............:<.:,:.:.:
(This SDace for Recorder's use. onlv)
..'.....'.'...'.....'.'._.w...;._....._._._.
...................
.....
Affects A.P N.: 573-410-06
AUTHORIZATION FOR ENCROACHMENT IN CITY RIGHT OF WAY
Pennit No. 0710-40-PE-372
Application Fee:
Receipt No.:
Inspection Fee:
Receipt No.:
$ 105.00
155710
$ 123.00
155710
Pursuant to Chapter 12.28 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, permission is hereby granted
by the City of Chula Vista (hereinafter "CITY") to: St. John's Episcopal Church
(hereinafter "PERMITTEE") to do work within right of way belonging to the City of Chula
Vista. All terms and conditions of this permit as to the PERMITTEE shall be a burden upon
permittee's land and shall run with the land. All conditions apply to PERMITTEE and all
their heirs, assigns, successors or transferees.
Whereas, the PERMITTEE has requested the permission from CITY to encroach on CITY's
right of way adjacent to and for the direct benefit of the following described property:
ADDRESS:
760 First Avenue
A.P.N.: 573-410-06
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOTS 26 AND 31 IN QUARTER SECTION 122 OF RANCHO DE LA NACION IN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 505,
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 13, 1888,
TOGETHER WITH ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHERLY HALF OF 'K' STREET, FORMERLY
THmD STREET, ADJOINING LOT 31 ON THE SOUTH, AS CLOSED TO PUBLIC USE BY RESOLUTION
NO. 38; PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, JULY
20, 1920. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WESTERLY 360 FEET THEREOF. ALSO EXCEPTING
THEREFROM THE NORTHERLY 30 FEET THEREOF.
0710-4O-PE-372
EX~II /31T "e. /I
IIJ ...t,
Page 1
PERMISSION is hereby granted to do the following work:
INSTALL PRIVATE 12-INCH DIAMETER R.C.P. STORM DRAIN PIPE IN FffiST
A VENUE AND CONNECT TO PUBUC SYSTEM (EXISTING TYPE 'B' INLET) AS
DEPICTED ON APPROVED PLAN, ENGINEERING DMSION DWG. NO. 96-81,
SUBJECT TO RELOCATION OR MODIFICATION, TO ENSURE UNOBSTRUCTED
ACCESS TO ADJACENT EXISTING PUBUC FACILITIES.
Now, therefore, in consideration of their mutual promises, and other good and valuable
consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows:
Permission is hereby granted PERMITTEE to install the above-mentioned encroachment on
the real property of CITY described above in accordance with the following conditions:
I. The encroachment shall be installed and maintained by PERMITTEE in a safe and
sanitary manner as determined by CITY.
2. Said installation shall, in no way interfere with any existing utility, including but not
limited to storm drain lines owned and maintained by CITY. Any changes of or to any
utility due to the installation by PERMITTEE of private facilities shall be at the sole
expense of PERMITTEE.
3. Maintenance, removal or relocation of the abovementioned installation of the private
facilities shall be the sole responsibility of PERMITTEE, and/or PERMITTEE's lessee,
should there be any, at no expense to CITY.
4. Said installation shall conform to all standards and specifications as stated in the Chula
Vista Municipal Code.
This permit is revocable upon thirty (30) days written notice to the permittee, and upon such
notice, the installation must be removed or relocated, as and when specified by CITY, at
PERMITTEE'S cost. If PERMITTEE fails to remove or relocate the encroachment within the
period allotted, CITY may cause such work to be done and the cost thereof shall be imposed as
a lien upon PERMITTEE's property.
PERMITTEE 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 attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the
PERMITTEE, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others (including third parties) in
connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement or the existence or
maintenance of such work. PERMITTEE's indemnification shall include any and all costs,
expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees.
PERMITTEE's indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent
declaration by the PERMITTEE.
0710-4O-PE-372 .
/IJ' ?
Page 2
The undersigned PERMITTEE hereby accepts the foregoing encroachment permit upon the terms
and conditions stated herein and agrees to comply with all stated terms and conditions and with
all applicable laws, including any applicable provision of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. It
is further agreed that if any part of PERMITTEE's encroachment or PERMITTEE's rights under
this encroachment permit should interfere with the future use of the CITY's right of way by the
general public, it must be removed or relocated at PERMITTEE's expense and such right shall
be terminated as and when indicated by CITY.
In the event of a dispute arising as to the terms or interpretation of this permit, the City
Engineer shall resolve said dispute in his sole and unfettered discretion, reasonably applied.
(End of page. Next page is signature page.)
0710-40-PE-372
If) ~.8"
Page 3
SIGNATURE PAGE
CITY OF CffiJl.A VISTA:
Permit approved by:
Date:
Clifford L. Swanson
Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer
(City Clerk to D1t~h acknowledgment.)
PERMlT'rF:E:
Signature:
Date:
Print name:
(Notary to D1t~ acknowledgment.)
ADDToved a~ to fann.
City Attorney
NOTE: Penninee is to submit a check or money order payllble to CotuItJ 01 San Diego equal to the total of $7.00
lor the first page and $3.00lor e~hpage thereafter, if all pages are 8* X 11 inches in size. (lljust one
page differs from those dimensions, the amount wiU be $7.00 for the first page and $5.00 lor each additioMl
page, no mOlter what the size.)
jwh[ c:\wpS 1 \pe\permit.372)
Page 4
/ tJ ;-1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item II
Meeting Date 10/8/96
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: ZA V-96-12; Continuation of a previous public hearing
regarding an appeal from a Planning Commission denial of a request
for a variance to increase the height of a rooftop sign from 35 ft. to 42
ft. for the commercial building located at 396 E Street in the C- T
Thoroughfare Commercial zone - Martin Altbaum
Resolution Denying the appeal and thereby upholding the
decision of the Planning Commission to deny the request for a
variance to increase the height of a rooftop sign from 35 ft. to 42 ft.
for the commercial building located at 396 E Street in the CoT
Thoroughfare Commercial zone
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning ;&-t
C;ty M,,"g,uy t(\ :J~\l
This is continuation of a previous public hearing involving an appeal from the Planning
Commission's denial of a request for a variance to allow the construction of a rooftop sign
to 42 ft. in height for the commercial building located at 396 E Street, within the C- T
Thoroughfare Commercial zone. The C- T zone limits the height of rooftop signs to 35 ft.
above grade.
REVIEWED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoXl
The previous hearing was continued with direction from the Council that staff negotiate with
the applicant to find a mutually acceptable solution regarding the height of the proposed
rooftop sign in conjunction with overall signage on the site.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt from
environmental review under CEQA as a Class 11 exemption.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council adopt the Resolution denying the appeal.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On June 12, 1996 the Planning
Commission voted 4-2 (I absent) to deny the request for increased sign height in accordance
with Resolution ZAV-96-12.
//..-/
Page 2, Item J I
Meeting Date 10/8/96
DISCUSSION:
Result of Staff/Applicant Meeting
This request was previously considered by the Council at their meeting of September 17,
1996. At that time, discussion by the City Council resulted in questions concerning the
height of the proposed rooftop sign as presented. The public hearing was continued and
staff was directed to negotiate with the applicant to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution
regarding the height of the proposed rooftop sign in conjunction with an overall sign
program for the site.
Staff has subsequently met with the applicant, who is now proposing a reduction in the
rooftop sign area to 124 sq. ft. and a reduced height to 38 feet. However, the applicant has
indicated that all four fascia signs which have already been constructed would be installed
as well (see copies of permits issued attached). The original compromise offered by staff
to the applicant was for a Zoning Administrator variance of a 105 sq.ft. sign at 38 ft. in
height. This was based upon the fact that no fascia sign age was proposed and thus, visibility
could be cited as a factor in approval. The applicant's latest proposal would have some
merit as a compromise if the fascia signs were not being installed.
Because the applicant is intent on installing the four fascia signs, staff has concluded that
the building has more than adequate visibility and exposure on all sides and have reached
the same conclusion that was reached in our initial report, which is that no hardship exists
to justify a variance to allow a large rooftop sign in excess of the height permitted by Code.
Therefore, we do not recommend approval of the compromise as offered by the applicant;
namely, that the four fascia signs and the roof sign would all exist on this property.
Clarification Regarding Previous Sign Program
As a point of clarification, at the previous Council hearing, the applicant expressed concern
that previous businesses had been issued sign permits allowing for the continuation of a
rooftop sign. The applicant is correct that a number of different financial institutions have
occupied this site since its construction, and that each of them used the rooftop sign
structure that was installed when the building was originally constructed. The most recent
sign permits issued (prior to Coin Mart) were permits for face changes for Home Savings
Bank in 1991.
The rooftop sign was not identified during the City's sign abatement program as a
nonconforming sign, apparently because information regarding the building height (and
therefore the height from grade of the rooftop sign) was not noted as part of the City's sign
records. Therefore, the property owner was not apprised at the beginning of the fifteen
year amortization period of the pending abatement program as were other owners of
nonconforming signs.
)/~ 2
Page 3, Item II
Meeting Date 10/8/96
The applicant's proposal for signage, including installation of a rooftop sign, triggered
abatement of the rooftop sign per the City's sign code for three different reasons:
1) Section 19.60.120 states that nonconforming signs shall be modified to conform to
zoning requirements if a change of land use occurs. This did occur since the
applicant was changing the use from financial to retail.
2) Section 19.60.120 states that nonconforming signs shall be modified to conform to
zoning requirements if a building permit for the proposed sign is required. Since the
proposed rooftop sign required the installation of a new cabinet, a building permit
would be required.
3) Section 19.60.060 states that all signs relating to a business which has closed or
moved away shall be removed, together with any supporting structures within 90 days
of the obsolescence. Since this building had been vacant for at least 90 days prior
to the applicant's occupancy, the supporting structure (pole) is required by code to
be removed.
Summary
Based on the reasons previously stated, staff recommends that the City Council deny the
appeal of the Planning Commission's action on this matter.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant has paid all applicable processing fees.
Attachments
1.
2
3.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Council Resolution
Locator, Plans
A-113 from meeting of 9/17/96 .
Planning Commission Resolution ZAV-96-l2 ~
Planning Commission Minutes, June 12, 1996 ,1v:
Wall Sign Permit Plans / .
Public Response
Disclosure Statement
(
"L'
/-p
"u
1 ~" L.'
jJ
(m:\home\planning\patty\coinmart)
/1,3
-f.
RESOLUTION NO.
J~1L-..J7
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COt1NCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DENYING THE APPEAL OF COIN MART
FROM THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
THEREBY DENYING A VARIANCE FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A ROOF-MOUNTED SIGN TO 42 FT.
ABOVE GRADE FOR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING
LOCATED AT 396 E STREET WITHIN THE C- T
THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ZONE
WHEREAS, a duly verified variance application was filed with the City of Chula
Vista Planning Department on April 12, 1996 by Valley Neon Sign Company, and;
WHEREAS, said application requests approval to construct a roof-mounted sign to
42 ft. above grade for the commercial building at 396 E Street within the C- T Thoroughfare
Commercial zone, and;
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this
proposal is exempt from environmental review under CEQA as a Class 11 exemption, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said
application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely June
12, 1996 at 7;00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission, AND;
WHEREAS, after hearing public testimony and considering the project, the Planning
Commission voted 4-2 to deny the request in accordance with Resolution ZA V-96-12, and;
WHEREAS, on June 13, 1996 the applicant filed an appeal from the Planning
Commission decision with the City Council, and;
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the City Council hearing on
said appeal and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
September 17, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the
City Council, and the hearing was thereafter continued, and;
/1-1
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the continued hearing on said appeal
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500
feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
October 8, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City
Council, and the hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES
hereby find, determine, resolve, and order as follows:
The above-described application for a variance is hereby denied based upon the following
findings and determinations:
I. Findings.
1. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the
owner exists. Said hardship may include practical difficulties in developing the property
for the needs of the owner consistent with the regulations of the zone; but in this context,
personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits, and neighboring
violations are not hardships justifying a variance. Further, a previous variance can never
have set a precedent, for each case must be considered only on it individual merits.
No hardship peculiar to the property exists since rooftop signage within the height permitted
by the code would be visible to traffic in the area, although proportional requirements could
limit sign area. Additionally, the code would allow alternatives to this sign proposal; these
include the possibility of a freestanding sign elsewhere on the property, and wall-mounted
signage on the building parapet. Therefore, a hardship does not exist relative to this
property and the proposed signage.
2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and
in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special
privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors.
The approval of this variance would not serve to preserve property rights for this owner
enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the same vicinity; as other
properties in the immediate vicinity currently utilize freestanding signage which complies
with code requirements or is actually less than that allowed. If granted, the proposed
variance would therefore constitute a special privilege of the recipient.
3. That the authorizing of this variance would be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property, and would materially impair the public interest.
The approval of this variance would be detrimental to adjacent property in that it would
provide this property with a sign of excessive height and visibility and an advantage with
respect to business identification in comparison to other surrounding properties.
/1-5'
4. That the granting of this variance would adversely affect the general plan of
the city or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
The approval of this variance would not be consistent with City policies and the General
Plan for the reasons outlined above.
II. A copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the applicant.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
,
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
'---?~- ~
II-?
, \
l
--lTE-r/~ :ff-iL
Rr.::-Cr:"t
.'-. -. ., 'r.::-
_J y,-O
OCTOBER 4, 1996
r........
- J.... i U ~ ,:(",,..,_
....: <1:'~
PLAN!""" _,
v, \(;.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDING
CHULA VISTA CIVIC CENTER
276 FOURTH AVENUE
CHULA VISTA, CA. 91910
RE: CASE NUMBER ZAV-96-12
ATTENTION: PATTY NEVINS
ONCE AGAIN, I AM WRITING ON A MATTER THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN
FINALIZED MONTHS AGO.
APPARENTLY, WHILE I WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY ON VACATION, MR.
ALTBAUM APPEALED THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE
MR. ALTBAUM APPLIED FOR, I.E. TO INSTALL A 42 FOOT ABOVE GRADE
ROOF TOP SIGN, ATOP THE BUILDING AT 396 E STREET, CHULA VISTA,
CA. .
AT THE APPEAL HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, ACCORDING TO THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT, IT WAS BROUGHT OUT THAT MR. ALTBAUM HAD
ORDERED AND PAID FOR, FOUR, 18 FEET 9 INCH BY FOUR FEET FACIA
SIGNS, APPARENTLY TO BE INSTALLED ON THE FACIA ON EACH SIDE OF
THE BUILDING AT 396 E STREET. ON TOP OF THIS, HE STILL WANTS THE
42 FOOT ABOVE GRADE ROOF TOP SIGN!!
AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR, MEMBERS
OF THE COMMISSION POINTED OUT THAT FACIA TYPE SIGNS WOULD BE MORE
APPROPRIATE FOR THIS BUILDING. MR. ALTBAUM REJECTED THIS IDEA,
SAYING THE BUILDING WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED TO ACCEPT FACIA SIGNS!
HE WANTED A 42 FOOT ABOVE GRADE ROOF TOP SIGN CONTRARY TO THE
CITY ORDNANCE! THE COMMISSION OFFERED MR. ALTBAUM A COMPROMISE
OF 38 FEET. HE REJECTED THAT TOO! NOW HE HAS ORDERED AND PAID
FOR THE VERY SIGNS HE REJECTED IN JUNE, AND HE STILL WANTS THE
ROOF TOP SIGN!
AFTER LOOKING AT VALLEY NEON SIGN COMPANY'S DRAWING NUMBER 72096,
IT IS QUITE APPARENT TO ME, AS I'M SURE IT IS TO YOU, AND ANYONE
ELSE WITH GOOD TASTE, THE FACIA SIGNS ARE EXACTLY WHAT THIS
BUILDING CALLS FOR. THEY WILL SERVE WELL BOTH AESTHETICALLY AND
TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW, FROM ANY DIRECTION, WHAT BUSINESS IS
LOCATED THERE. THE ROOF TOP SIGN, NO MATTER WHAT HEIGHT, 35 FEET
ABOVE GRADE OR 42 FEET ABOVE GRADE, WILL ONLY DEGRADE FROM THE
OTHERWISE, AESTHETICALLY PLEASING LINES OF THE STRUCTURE, AND IS
COMPLETELY UNNEEDED.
AS STATED IN MY PREVIOUS LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT; THE
I
PREREQUISITES FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE HAVE NOT BEEN MET. NO
HARDSHIP HAS BEEN SHOWN BY MR. ALTBAUM. NO OTHER BUSINESS IN THE
AREA HAS WHAT HE WANTS, SO AN APPROVAL OF THIS VARIANCE CAN ONLY
BE CONSTRUED AS A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE FOR MR. ALTBAUM.
I STRONGLY RECOMMEND A DENIAL OF THE APPEAL, FOR THE 42 FOOT
ABOVE GRADE SIGN, OR EVEN A 38 FOOT ABOVE GRADE SIGN, AND A
APPROVAL OF THE FACIA SIGNS.
YOUR;S TRULY, v,^
,~~dJr~~
~a.-.~
RICHARD AND BETTY BECK
J10
~T~T8J~ -~.JJ-
.R2Cf:1VED
I
('.1-' 7"' I"'
-...,i. II ;
J ~, .~- :S':'5
OCTOBER 4, 1996
PLAN/,JiJ"'''''
. \(:;
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDING
CHULA VISTA CIVIC CENTER
276 FOURTH AVENUE
CHULA VISTA, CA. 91910
RE: CASE NUMBER ZAV-96-12
ATTENTION: PATTY NEVINS
THIS IS MY SECOND LETTER TO YOUR REGARDING THE VARIANCE MR.
ALTBAUM APPLIED FOR AND APPEALED IN REFERENCE TO THE 42 FOOT
ABOVE GRADE ROOF TOP SIGN AT 396 E STREET, CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA.
I HAVE LOOKED AT THE VALLEY NEON SIGN COMPANY'S DRAWING NUMBER
72096 WHICH I UNDERSTAND MR. ALTBAUM HAS ALREADY PURCHASED FOUR
SIGNS FOR HIS BUILDING LOCATED AT 396 E STREET WHICH IS ADEQUATE
ADVERTISING FOR HIS BUILDING. AS A LIFE LONG CHULA VISTA
RESIDENT, PROPERTY OWNER OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT
215 GUAVA AVENUE, I STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY VARIANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW
A 42 FOOT ABOVE GRADE SIGN TO BE INSTALLED AT 396 E STREET, CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA.
ALLOWING A VARIANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW A 42 FOOT ABOVE GRADE SIGN
TO BE INSTALLED AT 396 E STREET AS I STATED BEFORE IS DIRECTLY
BEHIND MY PROPERTY. ANY SUCH SIGN WOULD BE HIGHLY OBJECTIONABLE
TO ANYONE WANTING TO RENT MY PROPERTY LOCATED AT 215 GUAVA AVENUE
BECAUSE IT WOULD BE HIGHLY VISIBLE FROM THE REAR OF THIS
RESIDENCE AND IF LIGHTED WOULD BE HIGHLY OFFENSIVE TO RENTERS.
THE RENTERS AT THE PRESENT TIME HAS ALREADY EXPRESSED THEIR
CONCERNS AND WAITING FOR THE FINAL DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT
THEY WILL CONTINUE TO RENT.
SINCERELY, ,
..3::.....J a.. ~
FRANCES A. ZWAHLEN
~/ .
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
-I
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF 1HB CITY COUNCIL OF 1HB CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DENYING 1HB APPEAL OF COIN MART
FROM 1HE DECISION OF 1HE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
THEREBY DENYING A VARIANCE FOR THE
CONSTRUcnON OF A ROOF-MOUN1ED SIGN TO 42 Fr.
ABOVE GRADE. FOR 1HB COMMERCIAL BUILDING
LOCA1ED AT 396 E STREET WI1HIN 1HB CT
THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ZONE
WHEREAS, a duly verified variance application was med with the City of Chula
Vista pl8nn;l1g Department on April 12, 1996 by Valley Neon Sign Company, and;
WHEREAS, said application requests approval to construct a roof-mOlJnted sign to
42 ft. above grade for the commercial building at 396 E Street within the C T ThOlO\Jghfare
Commercial zone, and;
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has detennined that this
proposal is exempt from environmental review under CEQA as a Class 11 exemption, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said
application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely June
12, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 FOIJrth Avenue, before the pl8nn;l1g
Ccnnm;!I!I;on, AND;
WHEREAS, after hearing public testimony and considering the project, the pI.nn;l1g
Commission voted 4-2 to deny the request in accordance with Resolution ZA V-96-l2, and;
WHEREAS, on June 13, 1996 the applicant med an appeal from the pI.nnmg
Ccnnm;K-qon decision with the City Council, and;
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the City Council hearing on
said appeal and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within
SOO feet of the exterior bOlJndaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as Bvertised, namely
September 17, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 FOIJrth Avenue, before the
City Council, and the hearing was thereafter continued, and;
-0(
.'
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the continued hearing on IBid appeal
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within SOO
feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, Damely
October 8, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City
Council, and the hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED 1HAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES
hereby find, determine, resolve, and order as follows:
The above-descn'bed application for a variance is hereby denied based upon the following
findings and determinations:
I. Findings.
1. That a hardshlp peculiar to the property aDd not created by any act 01 the
owner exists. Said hardshlp may Include practical dlmeultles In developing the property
lor the Deeds 01 the owner consistent with the regulatloDS 01 the zone; but In this context,
personal, lamlly or financial dlmeultles, loss 01 prospective profits, and neighboring
~olatlons are not hardshlps JustIfYIng a variance. Further, a previous nrlance can never
have set a precedent, lor each case must be considered only on It individual merits.
No hardship peculiar to the property exists since rooftop signagewithin the height permitted
by the code would be viSJ'ble to traffic in the area, although proportional requirements could
limit sign area. Additionally, the code would allow alternatives to this sign proposal; these
include the possibility of a freestanding sign elsewhere on the property, and wall-mounted
signage on the building parapet. Therefore, a hardship does not exist relative to this
property and the proposed signage.
2. That such nrlance Is necessary lor the pre&erfttlon and eqJoyment 01
substantial property rights possessed by other properties In the IIUIIe zoning district and
In the same ~clnlty, and that a variance, II granted, would DOt constitute a IpecIaJ
privilege 01 the recipient Dot eqJoyed by his nelghbon.
The approval of this variance would Dot serve to preserve property rights for this owner
enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the same vicinity; as other
properties in the immediate vicinity currently utilize freestanding signage which complies
with code requirements or is actually less than that allowed. H granted, the proposed
variance would therefore constitute a special privilege of the recipient.
3. That the authorizing 01 this ftrIance would be 01 substantial detriment to
adjacent property, and would materially impair the public Interest.
The approval of this variance would be detrimental to adjacent property in that it would
provide this property with a sign of ~ssive height and viSJ'bility and an advantage with
respect to business identification in comparison to other surrounding properties.
--3 .
4. That the arantlng or this ftl'tance wouJd adwnely aired the pneral plan or
the city or the adopted plan or any IOftI'IIIMntal agency.
The approval of this variance would not be consistent with City policies and the General
Plan for the reasons outlined above.
n. A copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the applicant.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
Ann Y. Moore
Acting Cty Attorney
-i
--5
- - ....-
. -.
--_0.-. _____
---.-- .__.-
.
.e..&~
\
...-
.
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR I'IIOJ!CI' CoIn Mart . PIQEI'~,....
C) Nl'llCNfl'I ::..... VARIANCE
~, 396 or ........ ~a roof~.lgnto 42 ft. from
graCIe (17' aWM roof line). COde IWIfricII height
SCAlI: .- I'll NIIMIIII 10 InCllllmum 35' aWM grGde.
NORTH Noble ZAV.96-12
- /-
-
T
.
...
. ,
~
"
.,
\'-..
...
.,
\c\
11
1
II~I - - ' I ,
.
, !
I}IO ~ ~; ,
IJj ,
l'lal
tl t
Iff ~
I ~i ;
. ' ~
N~I
1111
I ,
~i:!
J. .
II!' ,
;
l~i;1 I ,
I
IIII! ;
.
;
j
lill! III. i
.hll. I Ii' t
.
ill,' I ~ dll. ,
I
.'
.
\)0
~~-1
.
i-:.-t
~
~ "
[QS ~:
'~ @S'
~d
~~
(Q)lli!J]
,y :
,
, ....
~
i
~
I.
'. " , .' . .
." . .
. t .., ..
-
.
I'"
'I ., .
. - '
-'7' ' ~
II --_. . -
~ ~~ .;;;.,J.
"~P'
1-. ,#tr.
. .
r -- :1 T lal
. . 'II~
~
. f
i ~
, I, iii
~ ~ I,f
-.:- -'/,'70+ ~ I. I
, B
~~-- -'-f 1111
II; J;=!
. r
'11, ~ I
I .. II:i, I
. . ~ I
, .
I Ii
.. IIII!
-\
~. i >>~c!> .111
, ~
, ~ 1'~li
..
. I
I
,---2' -- --i ilH. J f .
I.
.
;
i
j
1
,
)
t 1-- Q... -:-+-- ~ ~
I
i
J ~ I
.1
"
'j
I
I
""
: -
! ~ -..
;
, ~
,
. i
;
i
I . ' i.
,- .
-F/
-
"
~
~''!''''.'.''''''''''.' ,.
-I
'. ... .
~
.
.
-
. (
COVNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item If .
.,....... Date ~117iJj
.
ITEM TITLE: 0 Public HeariD&: ZAV.96-12; Appeal from pl.,nl",. o-mlulOD
. deuial of a requeat for a variaDce to iDcreueo the heJaht of a rooftop
lip from 3S It. to 42 It. for the -mercla1 buDctiDJ located at 396 E
S1reet iD the CoT ThorouJbfare I'WRmerdal zeme . Martin Altbaum
ReIOlution DeDyiD. the appeal and thereby 1IphoJdiDI the
decJlion of the pI....."" O'-mlufon to deny the requeat for a
wriance to iDcreue the hefsht of a rooftop lip from 3S It. to 42 It.
for the _merdal buDdiDI located at 396 E S1reet ill the CoT
ThorouJhfare I'WRmerdaJ zeme 0
Director of PI."""'I ~
SUBPduuw BY:
REVIEWED BY: Ci1)' Muaser
(4'5tb1 Vote: Yea~o..x.l
(
This is u appeal from the ".....1"1 {'-Iulon'. deuial of a requeat for a variaDce to
allow the construction of a rooftop lip to 42 It. iD hefsht for the _merc;iaJ buBdiDI
located at 396 E heel, within the CoT ThorouJbfare o-merdal zeme. The CoT zeme
limits the heilht of rooftop lips to 3S It. above pade.
The Environmental Review Coordinator lau detenDiDed that this projeCt iI exempt from
environmental review UDder CEQA u a au. 11 exemption.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ReIOlution deDyiDI the appeal
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On JUDe 12. 1996 the pl.....""
C......mlulon voted ....2 (labaent) to deny the requeat foriDcreued lip heJahtiD accordance
with Resolution ZA V.96-12.
DISCUSSION:
"
Bac:bnnmC\
.
(
.
This -merdaJ buBdiDI prevfODlty had a roof.moanted lip wIdch was oriPlDy
constructed to 4S It above pde (17 It. above the buDdiDI roofIiDe). Althouah this lip met
the lip criteria at the time it was CODstructed, IiDce 1972 the 7....."" Code hu Jimited
rooftop lips to a IJ'&.I...um of 35 It. above pede. ne buDdiDa hu been VlcaDt with DO
-/0
.
.
(
(
(
- - - - -
. Paae 2, I"'m
MeetIaa Date 9/171tfj
rooftop sip for . Dumber of yem, ad CofD Mart DOW occapfea the buDdin,. 11e
app1icaDt is requeatiD, . rooftop sip at 42 ft.. above pade. which ~cb the mmmum
height aDowed for auch Iip.,e. .
.
.
.
~
:
The project site CODSista of . .......men:iaJ buDdiD.located em . site jut aver 25,000 aq.ft.
in area at the southeat comer of Fourth A~ue aDd E Street. A .......men:iIJ buDdin,
(formerly a bank) ,ppto4uately 6,800 aq.ft. in size fa located em the Dorthweat comer of
the property. A drive area designed for former tdIer wfDdowa fa adjllCellt to the buDdiD.
OD the easterly aide, and a small kiosk buDdin, and aite partin, are located eat of the drive
area.
~
North.
South .
East .
West .
CT .
co-p.
CT .
CT .
Vacaut (future fast food)
Residential It Officea
Cmnmen:iaJ
Cmnmen:iaJ
A vacant parcel upon which a fast food facility fa proposed fa located to the Dorth across
E Street; a retaD flower &hop is located to the west across Fourth A~ue. To the south,
across au alley, are residentialaud office UIeI, and .......men:iIJ service 1I1eI are sited em the
eat side of the property.
E Street at this location is desipated em the GeDeral PlaD u a four laDe major atroet and
IeI'Yel u a maiD uti)' to the City from both 1-5 and 1-805. Fourth A~ue fa ako a maiD
uti)' from SR-54. .
J'rq;posaJ
The proposal is for the CODStructiOD of a roof-mounted lip .t 42 It. above pacIe (17 ft.
above the buDdin. roofIiDe) to Il'!NWI'Imodate buliDeas iclutificatiOD for the Dew OCCIIpIDt
of the .......men:iaJ buDdin. em this lite. The hefsht of the JiJ~c.ed lip woulcI be thJee
feet lower than that of the oriafDa1 roof-mouted lip. While that alp met -""
teplatiODl at the time of itI CODStructlOD, uder ClllteDt alp onIiDaDce 1eJ1IIati0Dl
(adoptecIlQIDe 25 JUlI &10) it woaJd be .......;dend DOIICODfanDiDJ.
...16.
The buDdin.and lite were oripIaIly desiped with . rooftop alp in mlDd. '111. buD"",,
fa located.t the comer of the property abuttiDJ both Fourth A~ue and"E" Street, ....~
it impractical to locate a freestaDcIiDJ alp at the eomer. However, the pl.....,
C--iDiOD pointed out that the facia could arc- ....."'odate .. in a 'Vel)' tutefuJ manDer.
Permits for waD IiJDI em the facia have in fact beu -eel; pleue lee plaD copies attadaed.
-I (
Pap s, ...-
MeetIDI Date t/17/96
.
palYlls
,CurreDt Sip ~ftions
As stated previous1y, the C T ('Iborou&hfare Cr--en:ial) :&ODe restricts the height of roof-
mounted lips to a m~um of 35 fL above pUe. At the time that this repJation was
adopted, it was reasoned that roof.mounted lipuhould be accorded no areater heightthaD
was permitted for around-mounted freestaDdiDa aipa, which are Jimited to 35 fL 1d&h
tbroulhout the~. The C T :&ODe II the cm1y :&ODe withfa the ~ which aDOM rooftop
aips.
.
(
FreestaI1diDl lips are cumntly coatroDed by three fac:tmI: roof.mounted lips are limited
to 35 It. above grade iD overaU heilht; the height of the rooftop lip above the buildiDl on
which it is located may not aceed the height of the buDdiDa; aDd the maximum area of aDY
roof-mounted lip is 150 aq.1t. The height of the proposed lip does Dot e--ed the
buildiDl heilht, aDd thus II Dot aD issue. However, the overaU height of the lip above
lI'ade aceeds the pemrltted heipt by 7 feet aDd represeDtla 209& bacrease bathe maximum
aUowed heilht. III addition, the ploposecI lip area depictecl on the pJaus (1S3 aq.lt.)
aceeds the maximum area aDowance by 3 aq.1t. aDd would have to be reduced by 3 aq.ft.
to comply with the maximum lip area aUowecL The app1ic:aDt has stated that this II not
a problem.
lip_Ie rrcmose4
The hiply vist"ble buildiDl II aitec1 directly on the Dorthwest oornef of the parceJ,
overlootiDl the iDtmection of Fourth AWDUe aDd E Street; the rooftop lip II proposed
to be located on the northwest comer of the roof. Further, there are DO obstructions of
views to the buildiDl from the other comers of Fourth Awnue aDd E Street or the vi~
of the intersection. As a result, a CODformiDl lip', viaibility does Dot appear to be at issue,
Dor hu the applicant arpedauch.
rlanDiD~ C'.nrnmissfon Action
(
The majority of the Cr-ml.mon did Dot favor iDcreaIiDa the height of the lip beyond that
required for leaibmty, partic:aJarIy for a type of alp (rooftop) which they OODIIdered
illherently obtruaive aDd baCOlllisteDtwith the attnedve deaip of the bufIdiD,. There were
nautions that aD attempt be made to tr.coa....ate lips O8to the buDdiDa facia. (Note: the
Code would aUow a _hlfmum 60 aq.ft. facia lip &"""J"E" Street, aDd 110 aq.ft. facia lip
fa";'1 Fourth Avenue. ..
ID reapoDse to the Dotice of the p1.....h\, r-.n..l.mou he.adDi for this project, the p1.....h\J
Department received three letters of obJecticm from property owaers ad __tI on Guava
AveDue (see attached). These IetterI were pi mnted to Cr-ml.mouers at the heariD.J, ad
a:preII coacerDI resardiDs lightiDl aDd vilual imJUIL
.' -/0;
.
~ ~ .. -
Pap 4, ....'"
MeetlDi Date '/17/96
~
(
ne majority of other buDdiDp located iD the vic:iDity of the project lite are of a relativeJy
lIDaD scale compued to the buDdiDa OD this site. Further, both the florist OD the aouthwest
comer of the iDterleCtiou aDd the IU atatiOD/miDi-mut OD the Dorthwest comer Iaave
mouument lips ... keepins with the 10wer profiIea of the buDdiDp they identify. III
addition, the Desip Review Committee is eurreJltIy proceeMa pm for . Dew reataurant
to be located across "E" Street at the Dortbeut comer of Fourth aDd Eo with a low-profile
mouument lip proposed. Staff lIu concluded that the lIeiallt of the proposed roof-
mounted sip is not required for visibility aDd is Dot iD bepina with other buiJdiDp aDd
sipase in the immediate vicinity.
One of the requisite findiDss for apprOYBl of a variance is the aUtence of a hudship. No
hudsbip has been presented by the appHcant, aDd u indicated in the previous disc:ussicm,
both staff aDd a majority of the pla1l1l;1IS C......"';mou were unable to find a hudship
justifying apprOYBl for the proposed hefalat iDc:rease. nerefore, Itaff'. pM'II'ft"'cdatiou is
for denial of the appeaJ u preaentecl.
At the City Council meetms of 719195, Council requested that project visuals be provided
ahowinS how the proposed lignage would look. ne applicant wD1 be providing such visuals
at the meetms.
FISCAL IMPACI':
ne applicant has paid aD applicable pr-.e;..S fees.
Attap..........
L 0-- .,_ww.
2 1ocator. PIaIII . ~.
3. pl...., a. t...~ JtemIatkm ZAV-.12
4. plonn"'a Qr-I-- Min_ Jae 12, t!IH
5. WaD Sip PaIIIIt I'JaIII
6. I'IIbIie ae..-- .
7. ~SI,~
(
~- i". ".!.. :. ~
-/~
.
.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
-I'"
c
:-1
RESOLtmON NO. ZAV.N-12
RESOLtmON OF THE CITY OF CHULA VlSI'A PLANNING
COMMISSION DENYING A VARIANCE FOR 11m
CONSTRUcnON OF A ROOF-MOUNTED SIGN 10 42 Fr.
ABOVE GRADE FOR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING
LOCA1ED AT 396 E STREET WlIHIN 1HE CoT
mOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ZONE
WHEREAS, a duly verified wriaDce application was filed with the City of ClauJa
Vista pll1nn;'g Department on AprD 12, 1996 by VaDey Neou Sip ComPIID)', aDd;
. WHEREAS, said appJication requests approval to CODJtn1ct a roof-mounted lip to
42 ft. above grade for the r.nmmerclaJ builctiJ1g at 396 E Street within the CoT Thoroughfare
Cmnmercial zone, aDd;
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review CoorctiJ1ator hu determined that this
proposal is exempt from environmental review under CEQA u a CJus 11 aemptiOD, aDd;
WHEREAS, the PJ_nn;ng Director let the time aDd place for a h.ma on ufd
application and notice of said hearing. toaetherwith its putpOSe, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of aeneral circulation in the ~ aDd its mailiDa to property owners within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at leut 10 days prior to the hearing. aDd;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place u advertised, namety lune
12, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Foa11h AveDUe, before the pl_..n~g
C......m;S!ion and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, mEREFORE BE n RESOLVED THAT 1HE PLANNING
. COMMISSION DOES hereby fiDd, determine, naoJve, aDd order u foDowa:
The above-descnoed application for a wriaDce Ja hereby denied bued 1Ipon the foDowiDa
fiDctiJ1gs and determinations:
J. FiDctiJ1gs.
1. No banI.hlp peculiar to the propen, uc1 DOt created by .., act 01 the 0WDeI'
GIlts. Said hard.hlp may IDclude practical dUDcaltlulD dfteJoplDa the property lor the
Deed. of the 0WDeI' eoDIIltent with the ftIIIJatlODl of the mile; ht In thI. COIItat, penonaJ,
IamUy or ftDaDcIa1 c1UDcaltlu, 101. 01 Jaot.,edf... prollts, uc1 ....,.""'rIDa.1atlODl are
DOt banI.hlp. Ju~ . ftI'Iance. .........,... prniou. ftItaDce aD DeftI' .... -.I .
plee..Ient, for each cue IDDIt lie CODddend mdJ on It IDdMdnal mut~
Rooftop lipage within the heisht pennitted by the code would be visible to traffic in the
area, although proportional requirements could Iimft lip area. AdditionaDy, the code
would aDow atterDativu to this lip "opouJ; these include the posabiIiV of. freeltaDctiJ1,
lip ebewhere on the property, aDd wa1J..mouted Iip.,e on the 1ndIdiD, puapet.
Therefore, . hards1Up doel1lot aist relative to this property aDd the propc.~d Tip.
-1.:5 .
l
u
2. No ft1'IaDce II IlK'elIUJ lor the p..... ..tIoa aad eqI"luasod oIabltaDtIal
property rlptl poI...secI by other properdellD the I8IDe 110_ dlltrlct ad ID the I8IDe
.tdnlty, and that a ft1'IaDce, ., 1I'aJIted, WDUId DOt COIIJtItate a apedaI ,mu. or the
recipient DOt eqloyec1l1y hll aelaJIbon.
.
.
The approval of thiI wriaDce wauld Dot IeJ'Ve to plUelYe property IiPtI for thiI OWIIer
enjoyed by oth~r propertiu m the ame ZODiDg diltrict ud m the ame ~ u other
properties in the immectiate W:iDity.. currently atitize freeltaDctiDg qu.,e which campJiel
with code requirementl or iI actuaDy lea thu that aDowecI. If aruted, the proposed
wriaDce would therefore CODItitute a 1pC";~ prMlege of the recipient.
3. The authorlzln. ortbll ftI'IaDcewould be or nbltaDtlal detdmentto adjacent
property, aDd would materlaUy impair the pubUc hdwut.
The approval of this var1auce would be detrimental to adjacent property in that it would
provide this property with a lip of excelsive height aud visibility aud u ac1vaDtage with
respect to busiDea identificatiOD m comparilOD to other IUJTOIJDctiDg properties.
4. That the arantln. or tbll ftI'IaDce would adftlHJJ aired the aeneraJ plan or
the dty or the adopted plan or all1 lOftI'IIIIIUdaIaJUlC7.
The approval of this wriaDce would Dot be CODIiIteDt with City poJicielud the General
PIau for the reuoDl outlined above. .
n. A copy of this relOlutiOD lbaD be traDImittecl to the appJicant.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY1HEPLANNING COMMISSION OFCHUI.A VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, thil12th day of Jane, 1996, by the foDowiDg WItt, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
Chair Tuchlcher, C.......mfHf'3DerI Ray, TuaDtiDo, Willett
C.......mfufODen DaviI, Thamu
ABSENT: O'-mfu{ODer SaJu
./ r-~
-"lJDOiD"C, ........... D, ""'"
----"
~~ ~.,
NauC)' ef, I
-/~
..
."
-/7
Excemt from 6/12/96 PIAnni"" ('-,,",mission Minutes
ITEM 2.
PUBUC HEARING: ZAV-96-12; REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO .
INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A ROOFTOP SIGN FROM 35 Fr. TO 42 Fr.
FOR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 396 E STREET IN THE
C-T mOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ZONE - VaDey Neon Sign Company
Principal PIamIer Griffin distributed three letters of objection to the request since the report had
been delivered to the Ct>mmiASionm, alODg with an altemative resolution of approval reflec:tiDg
the earlier staff "compromise" offered to Mr. Altbaum. Mr. Griffin pve the bistory of the
building and the rooftop sign. He noted that the architecture of the building did not lend itself
well to waD signs without substantial modification, and ~ was no room for a freestanding
sign.
A revision to the sign code in the 1970's had reduced the height of an aDowable roof sign to 35
feet. Mr. Altbaum was requestiDg a variance to go up to the originaUy permitted sign height
of 4S feet with ISO sq. ft. in area. Mr. Griffin showed sketches, slides, and overheads
illustrating the various heights including the request. Staff had suggested a 41 foot high sign
with 10S sq. ft., 6 ft. off the roof. The alternative resolution of approval was available to
approve the staff compromise.
Answering Commissioner Davis, Mr. Griffm ~ted that staff had thought the buildiDg was 25
feet tall when they originally offered the staff compromise, but subsequently discovered that the
buildiDg is 28 feet taU.
Commissioner Tarantino asked the height of the pole currently on top of the building. Mr.
Griffm said it was left ~ from the original sign and was approximately 10 ft.
Mr. Griffm concluded his pre&eDtation by stating in regard to the staff compromise that staff felt
a 100 sq. ft. sign was a very substantial sign, very readable and id"nrif'l8ble. They felt that by
aDowiDg the additional height up to 41 feet, 6 feet above the Code, that perllaps by reduciDg the
. size of the sign but still mAintAini", identity was fair and appropriate and may address some of
the concerns of the neighbors with the visual ~ of the sign.
.
.
Commissioner Tarantino noted that in the I'dllllMtiOn. Mr. Griffin had stated a waD-type sign
could not. be accommodated on the buiJdlf1i. Mr. Tarantino asked If could be accommodated
on the facia. Mr. Griffin did not feel it would be very attractive; ~ was no space on the
building which was designed to graciously accept the sign. It would look tacked-on.
Ct>mmiL~ioner 'J'tonmAII asked If there was anotlIer sign in the City that was IS' x 7' to give them
some idea of the size. Mr. Griffin stated it would be about the size of three 4x8 sheets of
plywood.
-/g
.'
PC Minutes
-4-
.June 12, 1996
Commissioner Davis coDf'iimed that staff's Cu""'P.uwtse was 105 sq. ft. and tile origiDal request
was ISO sq. ft. Mr. Griffin c:oncurred, and stated that ISO sq. ft. was also aUowed by Code.
Commissioner Thomas asked if there were my restrictious for tile applicant; could they
completely cover that 10S sq. ft., iDcludiug pictures and diagrams. Mr. Griffin replied that tile
Code restricts tile combination of copy and graphics to no more than SO" of the background
area and advertising to no more than 2S" of the face of the sign and advertising is distinguished
from identificatiozt Mr. Altbaum'sproposa1 was inconform.~ with Code. Mr. Griffinstated
in terms of copy and design of logo, staff does DOt analyze that. ADsweriDg Commio.cioncr
Thomas, Mr. Griffin said that tile picture would conform with Code.
Commissioner Willett asked if tile sign was iii on both sides. The applicaDl indi<:ated that it
was.
This being the tilDe and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Martin Altbaum, 396 "E" Street, Chula Vista, owner of Coin Man Jewelry, noted that tile
building was built in 1972. The original sign had been up for almost 20 years. If in fact there
was a sign removal process which aUowed IS years to remove no!H:ODforming signs, tile sign
should have been removed in about 1988. The sign stayed up until 1992. Mr. Altbaum stated
the reason they neede~ tile requested sign was for visibility. The picture can be no more than
2S" of tile sign and tile written part could be no more than 2S" of the sign. With a request
for ISO sq. ft., they really are getting only a 7S foot square sign. The COlDfl1014ise with tile City
was 41 ft. high; they were williDg to cc.mptoJnise at 42 ft. Mr. Altbaum stated they were also
williDg to compromise on tile size of tile sign if tile Commio.cion aUowed tile origiDal size
lettering and picture. There would be less white space. He inttoduc:ed Mr. Koonce.
Robert Koonce, 27500 Old Highway 80, Guatay, CA, stated he was the branch manager at
the time the building was constructed and was very involved in tile architectural set-up. A lot
of time had been spent deciding how large the sign should be at diff~~ heights and positious.
Mr. Altbaum noted that tile logo was a baby picture of his son and had been used 16 years and
was an important part of his advcrtisiDg. Mr. Altbaum and his wife Ihowed a 3 ft. ]I: 3 ft.
picture of tile baby and noted that tile actual sign would have a 6 ft. ]I: 6 ft. picture along with
tile lettering. He showed the difference in the IettcriDg tile City was pzOpO&iDg 'VerSUS what he
proposed. A compromise would be tile SUDe plclure and IettcriDg with less white space. The
City was proposing a 7 ft. x IS ft. sign, 41 feet up. He would c.u...p.oJnise 1 ft. higher, longer,
and higher. Mr. A1tbaum showed some c:omputcr-generated s1ides of tile building with tile poles
removed, and also showed the design elCllk>LlI*.OD the waU of the buD""'I. He had thought he
could put some letters in between, but h did DOt fit.
Commissioner Tmntino asked If tile letters would fit above the ~ area. Mr. Altbaum
stated h would be too smaU.
-/&f
PCMiDutes
-5-
June 12, 1996
Chair 1\lclJsdIet asked if the sign would be directed towards Fourth Aveuuc IDd wEw Stn:et at
an angle. Mr. Altbaum stated it would be euctly as the originallign was positiODed.
Discussion eusued regarcIiJII the orieDtation of the original sign IDd the P10poaed lignage. Mr.
Altbaum noted that he bad a hardship regarding sipge. He c:ouId DOt put a pole sign on the
{lJoperty siDce the buildi", was buDt on the Plc.perty line. He could put it in the parkiDg lot by
removing some parkiDg spaces, but it would DOt be IeeD from the street. Mr. Altbaum stated
that he did a lot of out-of-area advertisiDa by radio, television, busi~, cuds, etc. IDd used the
buDding to do that advertisiDg.
Mr. Griffin noted that Mr. Altbaum bad stated the sipase c:ould DOt cover more than 50% of
the background area. In this case, the backgrouDd would be the sign face and the copy IDd
picture applied to it should DOt cover more than 50%. Mr. Altbaumproposed to divide that into
2S % picture and 2S % copy. If tile white space is reduced too much, there would be a
wsqu~zed. appearance to the sign.
No one else wishing to speak, the public heariJJg was closed.
Commissioner Davis saw the problem with the lign IDd why the sign bad previously been on
the roof. She was happy to see staff trying to work with the applicant. She was concerned that
Chula Vista should be more user frieDdly IDd business frieDdly. She thought the sign ordinal1l'.f!
needed to be readdressed. This was one of the times wilen it did DOt quite fit because of
visibility. She eucouraged ~ Commiaion to look at giving the applicant the 42 feet. She was
c:oncemed about the squet'mI effect with the 105 sq. ft. sign. She would support a sign of 150
sq. ft.
Commissioner Thomas was cxmcemed about the ~limin.tion of the white area. This was a
massive sign and it would be critical to ...1........ it perfectly. Regarding the complaint letters,
Mr. Thomas asked if staff bad any suggestions, such as Clltti", the size down or turning the
sign's lighting off at a certain time.
Mr. Griffin stated that staff felt that by reduclDg the size, it might reduce the J1are IDd the
intpw. Regarding turning off the sign at night, it is a c:ommerc1al zone IDd pan of the Identity
was to have the identity available for 1ate-Dight travelers. Staff bad DOt considered restricting
illumiDatiOD during nigJ>ttinv! bours.
C.nrnmiaioner Ray stated that the b"ild~ was a unique buDdi", within the City of Chula Vista,
IDd any sign on the roof would take away from ar<'h~lral ~iti of the buiJdillg. Be would
rather see somethiDg on the fltI'''- or fIciDg of the upper portion of the bniJdillg.
.
C.nrnmi.~oner Tarantino c:oncurred with Commi.moner Ray. He felt it wai an Om''''la! buil"i",.
at a critical location, at the gateway of the City. He disliked the idea of a sign on the roof. He
thought a sign at the top of the facia with Ughtf'd, individual1etters would be in good taste IDd
would get the point 1CfOSS. He could DOt support any sign on the top of the roof.
-010
-- . - -
PC Minutes
-6-
Juue 12, 1996
Commissicmer Willett bad looked at the buiJdif1i aud tried to envision otber signs on top of the
roof. To retain the visibility of the buildiDg, be supponed the sign going along the facia on the
side of the bulldiDg. He thought a 6 ft. high sign could be used tbere. He wu against the
vertical sign.
Chair Tucbscbcr commented tbat be wu happy tbat Coin Mart bad stayed in ChuIa Vista. He
felt the sign ordinll....... relative to propottion made some logical sense. As far u height, size,
etc. be felt the ordinal1C/!! wu over-restrictive aud cha1Ienged mercbaDts. Design Review tried
. to ba1ance that with what looks right. He uked staff if there were any plans for the small street-
level sign aud if it bad any bearing on total signage allowable under the ordinlll1C/!!. Mr. Griffin
explained that it was an approved sign. On bui1diDgs, there could be a combination of signs.
There could be wall signage plus free-standing signs and directional signs. 1n this case, a roof
sign of a certain size was allowable. 1n addition to that, there could be wall signs. A sign
permit had been issued for the small sign. aud it was conforming with Code.
Chair Tuchscher questioned the onJinal1C/!! relative to banners after an additional sign was put
up. Mr. Griffm stated the banners are a graud opening feature. Since Mr. Altbaum wu
pursuing a permanent sign, staff had been flexible in allowing the graud opening banners to
remain and provide some identity until permanent signage was installed. Upon installation, the
banners would be down.
Chair Tuchscber commented that the bulldiDg bad a unique architectura1 style. The features
across the top were problematic. He felt that signage which ran the length of the facia on top
of the building might be a solution that would give visibility aud address the CODCerDS of the
other Commissioners.
Commissioner Ray uked bow mucb of his business wu drive-up versus someone who wu
actua1ly seeking out their business.
Chair Tucbscber noted that Mr. Altbaum did a lot of out-of-area advertising aud directed people
to Cbu1a Vista to his location, and the signage helped them recognize it.
1n response to Mr. Ray, Mr. Altbaum stated tbat most of his advertising wu by radio aud most
of his business was out of town. Having been at the old location for 20 years, some of his
customers still go to tbat address. He needed the signage to direct them to the Dew location.
He felt if all the utility poles were removed, it would look good on the side of 1he bundif1i aud
would be seen. However, u it is, vision would be obscu.recl aud he Deeded it on the roof.
Commiosioner Ray stated that two of 1he five poles were wnpotary, 1he one on the ",mer aud
the one on the roof. The only o1hers were street Hgbts. To him, street Hgbts were DOt an
impairment. He uked if the utility line would be undergrounded. Mr. Griffin felt it would be
undergrounded, but be did not know the rim~, He felt it might be undergrounded when 1he
property at the northeast corner developed.
- .;;?r
PC Minutes
-7-
June 12, 1996
Qmunk,ioDCr Ray felt tbat if IOIIIeOJIe were looking for a particuJar jewelry store, they would
be looking for something tbat would catch his eye to let bbn know he was there. He perscmally
did DOt see a big diffClence between the pole sipage aDd the facia aipAp. He thought the roof
sipage took away from the arc:hitecture of the building,
Mr. Altbaum stated that he would be UDbappy to go to the Design Review ('.nmmitfee to c:baDge
an existing building that would be very difficult to c:baDge. He did DOt believe he could get
approval to remove the architectural ~If!m~ts.
Mr. Griffm stated if the idea was to make the facia smooth aDd DOt have the elements in order
to accept a facia sign more comfonably, be did DOt feel k would detract from the building. It
did not seem to be something that would Design Review Committee approval or a formal
process aDd a lot of expense or review.
Commissioner Davis understood the concerns of the CommiRsioners, but felt the 6 ft. x 6 ft.
picture of the baby, which is the ttldf!mark; Mr. Altbaum used, would DOt fit on the facia. She
felt that was an important part of the sign which could DOt be elimin.t.....
Commissioner Ray asked the height of the facia. Mr. Griffin stated it was a total of about 5
feet.
.
.
Commissioner Davis pointed out tbat in the ordina~, Mr. Altbaum bad a right to a rooftop
sign. It was the height that was in question. The fact that the Commissioners did DOt like the
rooftop sign was not as vital to the question as was the height. The Commissioners bad a
recommendation for a variance of 41 ft. by staff with 105 sq. footage of sign. Whether or not
the Commissioners liked a rooftop sign was DOt important; k was what size 'of the rooftop sign
they were going to allow him to put up.
Chair Tuchscher noted that the applicant bad a right to a rooftop sign, but a workable rooftop
sign that would fit within the height limits, etc.
C(llftllliR,ioner Willett stated that be was confused on the lettering which would have been in the
7 ft. x 15 ft. sign. What percent would it have been. Mr. Griffin replied that staff bad DOt
calculated what size lettering tbat would have allowed. Staff felt the overall sign dnn.-il)D was
more than adequate to provide visibility. It could be klf'fttif'\ed from surrounding streets aDd the
copy could be easily seen.
Chair TucbsclJer cJarified tbat this was DOt a scientific calculation. There was a certain amount
of sipage coverage. From his perspective, he would like to see an allowance ex~;ng the
c:um:nt ord;na~, but to bring tbat sipage down to the facia. It was a difficult bldld;",; he
would be comfortable ex..-ling the total allowable aigDage if it were positioned differently. He
would rather give the applicant two big signs on the facia.
.
-~:;;>
PC Minutes
-8-
June 12. 1996
('.nnun;~,ioner Thomas stated that the 1'1m1m_ he had made were based on the concept that
the Cnmmi~~\on could DOt deny tbcm a rooftop lip. He asked that the City Attomey cJarify
that.
Attorney Googins said he understood that the existin& govemlng ordin.......... would permit a
rooftop sign that would not rxceed 35 feet above grade with certain dim.....S\ODS. The notion that
the Commissioners would prefer the sign IOIDeWhere else was DOt before the Commi~,ion;
however. the comments were legitimate ones to factor into their decision to the extent that if a
reasonsble alternative exists which could place the sign on the f'......"r. then a legitimate basis for
Dot finding a hardship would exist. The comments were legitimate; a rooftop sign would be
. allowed. At the same time. not wanting a rooftop sign at all was a legitimate COnsideratiOD to
the extent it had an impact on whether or DOt there were reasonsble alternatives.
Commissioner Thomas stated be would tend to support.a facia sign.
Principal Planner Griffin reiterated that Mr. Altbaum could have a sign 150 sq. ft., no higher
than 7 ft. above the 28 ft. high roof line. which would DOt exceed the Code requirement of 35
ft. above grade as a matter of right. as long as the picture and copy did DOt exceed 50% of the
background area. In tenDS of the facia signsge. because of the intervening elements.oD the
facia. a sign could Dot be put OD there except in the form of a sign "can". The background for
a sign is dermed as something that is unintenupted by arcbitecturaI features. If the facia were
smooth. SOtDe CIlt-out letters could be added to that. Trying to fit individual sign letters between
the architectural elements and spaces would DOt wort as the facia is del'\pM.
Chair Tucbscher asked if the Commi~siOD took action recommending signsge of a certain size
OD the facia, would there be any additional process. if the applicant agreed that would work?
Mr. Griffm replied that approval of conforming signsge was a staff process. There was DO other
public bearing or discretionary process.
Chair Tucbscher believed two signs 150 sq. ft., one on "E" Street and one on Fourth Avenue.
OD both facias. would accomplish the applicant's task and would solve the concerns of the
residents. The signs would be 5 ft. x 30 ft.
Commissioner Davis asked if be would allow the applicant to rxceed the background of the
verbiage. Mr. Tucbscbcr stated he was just defining the paratneters outside the sign. They
would be .~1ri'lg the applicant to comp.Owise off his l',upuHI. He may DOt be able to get his
logo on the signs the size that he wanted. It would mean the Commi"q1)D was far outstretcbiDg
the City ordinR""" to .....ntnmtJdate a vel)' unique ~tildi'lg and pedIIps solve some of the be"'"
concerns. ..
QmmoiL"ioncr Ray would DOt mind giving the applicant another 6 inches over the height and let
the sign go over the top of the facia. He was concerned that where the facia Stops, a roof sign
would taIce away from the architectural integrity of the ~,i1di'lg" He couId DOt support any roof
sign on top of the building.
-~3'
PC Minutes
-9-
June 12, 1996
Chair Tuchschcr asked Mr. Altbaum to step up to the microphoDe to comment on the possibility
offacia signs. Mr. Altbaum did DOt agree to the facia signs. He stated he would put up a sign .
on the roof that was 2 ft. high by 75 ft. lema while the appeal prooessed, m.1n'1g the 150 ft. he
was allowed to have. He would appeal it to City CouDcU, and then take it to court. He
believed that if a sign is left six or seven years past the sign moratorium when there were 15
years to remove it, that there is tacit approval that it caD remsiD there forever.
Commissioner Ray made a motion that the Cnmm;-Qon DOt aa:ept staff's proposal but allow two
ISO sq. ft. signs, ODe on the facia faciDa wEw Street and ODe of the facia faciDa Fourth Avenue.
Commissioner Ray asked for confirmation that it did DOt require any other approvsl.
Mr. Griffm stated that he and the City Attorney were coDCerDed bec~1Jse there was a specific
request before the Commi-~ion which had been noticed. The proposal by the Commi-sion may
require another notice, involving another VIriance for size or background. He DOted that the
basic staff recolDll1elldation which was part of the report was to deny the request as submitted.
The motion died for Jack of a seccmd.
MS (Rayfl'lIJ'8DtiDo) to approve starrs ~.........4atlon to deny the request as submitted.
Commissioner Davis stated that she was against the motion. She was in favor of allowing the
rooftop sign of 42 ft. with ISO sq. ft. She felt the sign ord;"'~ needed to be revised; ChuJa
Vista should be business friendly and she felt this sent the wrong message by not allowing him
to put up the type of sign he wanted. She didn't think it exceeded Code very far; staff was
compromising at 41 ft.; the other sign was at 4S ft. before.
.
Commissioner Ray agreed that the City should be more business friendly; the sign or'tnn.~
needed to be revised. However, part of the pmtntation was that this was a unique buUili'1g ,
He did not think it needed to be degraded by a rooftop sign.
Chair Tuchscher asked the City Attorney if there was any type of pr.......i}ltive rights that might
run with the fact that the old sign was in place for some period of time beyond the point it was
asked that all signs were to be in conformaDce. .
City Attorney Googins stated that the genmllUle was that where there was previously a use and
the Code is changed 10 that that use becomes to a non-conforming type use, under City Code
which implements general laws, the IIOJ1-COJIformi use should be e1Imm."'" at the earliest
possible moment so that if a p.oposaI comes forwanI to change the existing use or apply for an
slternative use, the first inclination is to make that use a conforming use. However, where
standards are established, variances caD also be panted ~ wry somewhat with the
appropriate circnm_- from what is being p'~, He DOted that the City is generally
immune to any action apinst the City in order to challenge the City's ability to hupu.e that DeW
and revised use apinst subsequent purchaser.
.
- -;;; '7
PC Minutes
-10-
June 12, 1996
Chair Tuchscber asked if a ~mlOUS use was a part of that ~ issue. If tbere was a VBriaDce
or non-c:onforming use, it is allowed to continue until such time as tbere is I discontiDuation of
that use.
Attorney Googins replied that it would be even more supportive of tile &~ Me. The notion
that a use is allowed to continue to be non-c:onformiDg does not prevent tile City from IeqUiring
conforming uses ~a time that an alternative use is plupOSo:d.
Chair Tuchscber noted that the fact that tbere was a sign tbere at one time should not be a part
of the Comml..ion's decision. Before the Comml..ion was a new sign application and variance
to the City's sign ordlmonC<!. .
Attorney Googins said I sign being tbere at one time may have IIOIIIe bearing on the
Commission's ability to make findings in relationship to the VBriaDce application. . The fact that
there might be an old sign may factor in to support findings the Comml.sion may need to make
to grant a variance. But it need not factor in.
Mr. Griffin added that, in this particular case, Mr. Altbaum could have I rooftop sign as well
as facia signs. Facia signs are coDSidered wall signs. In addition to rooftop signs, tile Code
states that each business is allowed a combined wall sign area of 1 sq. ft. per lineal foot of
building frontage facing a dedicated street or alley. However, the sign area may be increased
to a mnlmum of 3 sq. ft. per lineal feet of building frontage provided the sign does not acecd
50% of the background area. By right, Mr. Altbaum could have 1 sq. ft. of wall sign area per
lineal foot of building frontage facing both Fourth Avenue and "E" Street in addition to a
rooftop sign. The rooftop sign could ODly be 7 ft. high ber-'~ of tile exiFring height of tile
building.
Commissioner Ray stated he wanted to do what was right for tile City; he did not feel a rooftop
sign would ....hanC<! the building nor Mr. Altbaum's business to the extent that the building
should be altered. From a visual standpoint and from a "quality-of-life" standpoint for the
citizens of ChuIa Vista, he would like to start mAIMng am......mf!IIh: to the sign ardlnAN'.<!. .
Chair Tuchscber suggested that tile sign ordlnA~ be dealt with in an upcoming workshop.
Chair Tuchscber noted that even if tile current motion failed, tile Commi"ion would not be
moving forward in the process. He wished to allow tile system to move Mr. Altbaum forward
in a positive way. There may be IIOIIIe way to address Mr. Ray'. concerns by creating a
variance and allowing language to restrict ~l"'Ige ellewhere on tile building, or limiring tile
building to one sign. .
Commlosioner Ray clarif'1cd that tile motion was to deny the 42 ft. sign.on the top of tile
building.
-PIS
PC Minutes
-11-
June 12, 1996
VOTE: 3-3 MonON F" n .1m (CommI"'ODel'll Dam, Thomas, and T1...h....ber TOted
apbut.)
r
Chair Tucbscher DOted that be bad voted "DO" on the motion even though be did DOt like the sign
nor the iDconsisteDcy of the sign. He did DOt W8Dt to send the mercbsDt away to do whatever
he wanted in the way of rooftop sipage, side of the buildiDg sigDage, etc. aDd end up with
something that is worse.
CommiRsioncr Ray said that there bad to be some way to prevent the signs from going up prior
to a tevision to the sign C)I'lIin.""" , He felt it would be the WlODJ thing to allow the rooftop
sign, especially on this building.
Chair Tucbscber asked if there was a potential to add language into whatever variance the
Commiqion allowed that would limit additional signsge on the building.
Mr. Griffm thought if the applicant agreed to that, it would be ap...u...1ate.
.
Attorney Googins stated that depending upon the Dlture of the condition being proposed,
arguably, such a condition could be included as an element wbich the Qlmmiuion found
necessary to make the findings that would be required in order to grant such a variance. In
order to limit the detrimental impacts, ODe of the findings required is that the authorization of
the variance would not be of substantial detriment to adjacent p.opeitieB; or tbat approviDg a
sign that is larger than what is otherwise permitted would be of some detriment but for the fact
that elimination of other signs reduced the proliferation of signs in order to "O'.ntf!rNll.ftt'.e the .
fact that a slightly larger sign than Code is being allowed. He believed that. such a condition
PC Minutes
-12-
JuDe 12, 1996
After reviewing the findings, Mr. Griffin DOted tbat item 3 would have to be revised to exclude
the reference to reducing the overall area. Mr. Googins stated tbat fiDdiDg 2 would also Deed
revision.
VOTE: 1-5 MOTION F.AD.Rn (AD ('-'monel'll acept CmmnImoDel' Davis yoted
against)
Chair Tuchscher suggested that the previous motion be put back on the rable which would allow
the applicant to immediately appeal it IDd take it to Council.
Commissioner Ray stated that one of the three who voted against his motion would have to vote
for it to be sent forward to Council with a denial from the plannil1g Commic,ion.
Motion by Commissioner Ray to reconsider staff's recommendation to deny the request as
submitted.
Commissioner Davis asked if the tied vote could move forward to Council with DO
recommendation.
Attorney Googins said he understood that Mr. Rudolf, who bad previously staffed the
Commission, had opined that where there is a deadlock and insufficient vote to deny a permit,
so that the applicant could progress, an additional vote-if in fact four votes to deny could not
be obtained, the matter can proceed for appeal to the City Council so they could reconsider it.
Chair Tuchscher asked that, for housekeeping pwposes, the motion be put back on the table to
be revoted.
jrnST A TEMENT OJ: ~OTION
MS (RaylTuchscher) to adopt staff's recommendation to deny Resolution ZAV.,.12.
Mr. AItbaum asked if he could speak. The City Attorney recommended tbat the public hearing
be reopened.
Chair Tuchscher declared the public hearing reopened.
Martin AItbaum stated tbat he would make a compromise if it meant anything to the vote. He
would agree DOt to put anything on the facia on either side of the tmi1dil1g at any time in return
for the rooftop sign under the conditions be talked about before (42' x 17' x 9'). A rooftop sign
was allowed, but the question was how high. He would put up a rooftop sign. It would DOt be
with his baby IDd it would DOt be the size be wanted, but be would conform to the 35 foot. It
would be 75 feet loug, but it would put his II8JDe in front of the public IDd it would give him
the 35 foot height limitation. He did DOt 1hink it would look attractive and be would cominue
on appeal to get the original one.
-~7
_ . _.__ ___nn_
PC Minutes
-13-
June 12, 1996
Robert Koonce, 27500 Old Ilighway80, Guatay, aid he was a disiDterested third party. Be
said there were two tllings that made that bulletins pretty. The buiJdi", won the award in 1972
for being the most beautiful in ChuJa Vista becall&e of tile facia and the pillars. During the 15
years he had been manager theIe, DO one bad ever suggested any c:haDges to the archit.ecture or
facia. There is DO commercial bulletins in Califomia that wouldn't look prettier if all of the
signs were taken away. If they were, it would DOt be a commercial bulletins anymore.
Chair Tuchscher told Mr. AItbaum he appl~iated the offered comp1omise. In a deadlock
situation, notlling positive happens. Be was takiDg the position to allow the app1icaDt to move
quickly to the next step, he was ..1rit,g staff to hurriedly bring this item to Council.
Chair Tuchscher closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Thomas stated that by adopting the staff recommf!lld.tion, it would move it
forward to the appeal process.
VOTE: 4-2 (Commlllclonel'S Tbomu ad Davis ,.oting 8Ia1nst)
.
.
..
.
-~$
.'
-;;{7
1-- -- I~--- I \ I
i' I \,
i t~.. 11
, ,(L ~ ' I
j~ - . i
I .. I~-':2:
.
. # .
.
\.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1r-t-"f.
. ,. .
. '
,', r' ,
...
....
,
,
.
~ ~ .
.
~I. . -, .
~
, I I I 'III
.d I
'III
r
.1 .~
:i; II!
.1 i--I
lilll..
1,.;1
:~I! .
.~u '
1..&
nil
I I
If
r
~ I ~ ;
.
" "
i"
,,' ,
~ ,,'
'"
, ...
-
, 1"
.
"
.
"
,
..'
~
Iffii]
~
. .
c:::{]'
.. A
.'
0- J
, J~
~'
._~
<Q)
~
. I......
~
~
I
.
... . '
'to \, .,.
. +-"\-i
. ~.
"
..~
~
~
~.
.,--- ------.- -,
I ~'i .,
i .. j
!. I
1. _ _.._ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___I
"l
~
- ,3cl
..~.
?' r_ .A.A..
~.,#
1 '"
, j ~
i I
f -
i .
,t
JH'!
1,"1,' .
. ,.,
"'=1
ifil .
',.., .
!!'I
;.,.
I'U
J:.s
nil
I I
,:
r
:'.
III.,
~
. --.-\
I .A'
'Ir-- ...
r ~ ....
~L
~ -......
11
,-
. . . \ J
. .
.
. o. f .. .!
'.. , - :
I, . ~(O)
.
.
. p - ~(Q)
p -
. .. . I \
t. ~
,
-0 . :<:~. ~~
. [==3 ~
~~
,~9
. ~
I ~"':-+1 " .~
~ ..... .
. , .
,
!
.
;.;.."
- Sf
...-' ~
't"
~.....,:.- '"
..~~,~~
.---.--- ---
--- .--
~""~.~.,w",.,,,.
.-. ~, ~~ ,.'- ~~~""""'I"
.,,-..~ - - ,. --..~ -.--- - --
,. ~~-~.----."'~.'--..''''''' ._~-......a;.;.- . ...
.
.. .
.
.
,.
. ~
~
.
. .
. .
:?'" .
1<-\-'1-
,. .
. . .
.': ,r ~ .
till
.ft
'.
.
.' .
.t
. .
.
. .
. .
.
..
, . .
.. .
.
; ,
.
.
,
:..
~--+-"'.-+
... .
~
'. - 3.;c
ft/
~ ...
.. "r
+-\.....
. ~. l
. J
~
~
~. .........
[ffii1
~-- ~
t.~..
~~
I~'
.
.
.<Q)
~
~
db
o
. .
rt!i1J
.
:
i
. .
.
. .
,
.
i
. .
,
,
. ;
. ,
.
.
... .
l'
____ _ r .
I '
~,~~r ~-J i .
PUBLIC RESPONSE
-33
-
-
.
.
RCCEfVED
JULY 3, 19'6
,." 0 .
,~'.;:... . t9gs
PLANNiNG
I
PIJUDIIRG DEPARTMEIIT
PUBIC SERVICE BUILDIRG
CHULA VISTA CIVIC CZRTBR
276 rOURTH AVERUB
CHULA VISTA, CA. 91910
REI CASE IlUMBER IAV-96-12
Ar.r_TIORI PATTY JlBVIRS
I'VE BED IIII'ORMBD THAT THE PLlRRIRG COMMISSIOR, VERY WISELY I
MIGJa ADD, HAS DERIED THE VARIAllCE APPLIED rOR BY COIR MART, AT
396 "E" STREET. I HAVE ALSO BED IIII'ORMBD THAT THE 01DlBROr COIR
MART, MARTIR ALTBAUM HAS APPBALBD THAT DECISIOR. THERErORE, I
rEEL I MUST MAD A rn MORE COMMBRTS OR THE SUBJECT BErORE THE
CITY COURCIL MADS ITS DECISIOR.
.
rIRST 0.. JU.I., I HAVE DRIVD DOIIII "E" STREET, DOIIII THIRD' AVERUB,
DONII rOURTH AVERUB, DOW BROADWAY ARD DONII Or" STREET, I HAVE
LOORJ:D AT RUMBROUS BAlIK BUILDIRGS, rOOD MARltBTS, SERVICE
STATIORS, CREDIT URIOH BUILDIRGS, STRIP IPU.II ARD MAllY MORE &)Bu.
BUSIDSSES. ROT 00 HAS A SIGH AS TJU.I. OR AS LARGE AS THE on
PROPOSED BI COIR MART. THE CITY ORDIRAllCE. 19.60.060 REGULATIRG
SIGRS, LIMITS THE HEIGHT TO 35 rUT ABOVE GRADE ARD A MAXIMUM 150
SQUARE rUT IR SIIE rOR THIS PARTICULAR nPE 0.. SIGH. I rEEL
THESE LIMITS ARE WAY ~ GznROUS ARD SHOULD BE REDUCED, BUT
THAT'S AIIOTHBR MATTER. THERE WAS A DAY WHBR THE HIGJDfAYS ARD
rREJ:1fAYS WERE LInD WITH HUGE BILLBOARDS. THE DAYS or LARGE,
VISUJU.I.Y POLLUTIHG SIGHS ARE GOD, HISTORY I TODAY, PEOPLE WAJIT
MORE SUBDUED ARD DVIRORMJ:RTJU.I.Y PLBASIRG SIGHS.
COIR MART IS A VERI LARGE, rORMIDULE BUILDIRG, IIOT BASILY
MISSED. A SIGH, 0.. THE MAGBITUDE PROPOSED, IS ROT DEDED. A
BARROW SIGH ALORG THE TOP CORBICE 0" THE BUILDIBG WOULD BE MORE
THAR ADEQUATE TO IIII'ORM PEOPLE IlHAT BUSIDSS IS LOCATSD THED.
AS I STATED IR Nt PREVIOUS LBTTBR, BIS BUS lOSS IS SURROURDSD BY
Rl PROPERTY. THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THED, ARD WHO ALSO RAPPD TO
BS VOTERS, DO IIOT DESSRVE BIS ftPS 0.. VISUAL POLIoUTIOB.
ARD rI8JU.I.Y, THE CITY ORDIRABCE I.IMITS THE IIBIGJft or SUCH SIGHS
TO 35 rsu ABOVE GRADE, IIR. ALTBAUM WAJlTS ~2 rUT I DB CITY
ORDIBAHCE LIMITS SIIS TO 150 SQUARE rSST. IIR. ALTBAUM WAJlTS 153
SQUARE rEUI DB CITY ORDIBAHCE STAUS, "DB SIGH SPaT.T. BE
PLACED PERPERDICULAR TO DB 8TUJ:T IT 18 ORIDTBD TO...". I
ALWAYS BOUGJa PERPBRDICULAR MBAIIT AT A RIGJft AIIGLJ: TO A GIVD
1.101 DB PROPOSED 81GB 18 IIOTI IT 8UMS IIR. ALTBAUM BIlOtS lIB
CAB GBT IlHADVER lIB WAJlT81
.
.
- 5J.{
.
.
.I
~ PREREQUISITES POR GRARTIIIG A VARIAlICB HAVE II~ BED NET. 110
HARDSHIP HAS BEER SHOD BY MR. AL'.rBAUM. 110 ~R BUSIIlESS III ~
AREA HAS WHAT HE WAlf'lS, SO All APPROVAL 01' BIS VARIAlICB COULD
01lIo! BE CONSTRUED AS A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE POR HR. AL'.rBAt1M.
I B'.rROIIGLY RECOMMEIID A DDIAL 01' BIS APPEAL.
lOURS DULl,
~
~CL../3:
I.~
RICHARD AIID BETTY BECK
203 GUAVA AVEIIUE
CHULA VISTA, CA. 91910
.
.
.
!
/
,.
-.
--..;-
-3S
I
'--
.7UI1B 7, It"
PLUJJIRO DEPARDUT
PUBLIC IERVICE BVILDIRO
CHVL& VISTA CIVIC CERTBR
27' POURTH AVUUB
CHVL& VISTA, CA. '1910.
RB. CAlB .uMBI:R IAV-"-12
M'URTIOWJ PATTY DVIRS
Mr HUSBAIfD UD OUR DO CHILDUR AU CURUJlTLY ItDTIRO !ftII!:
RESIDUCE AT 215 GUAVA AVE. 1fB UCEIVED !nIB ROTICE VIA MAIL
REGAJU)IRO TIll!: PROPOSBD 402' ABOVE GRADB nOR IIGIf THB COIR MART
AT TIll!: CORHER OP 40TH , B ST. WOULD LID m PUT ow mp OP !nIBIR
ALREADY VERt TALL BVILDIRO, 80TH Mr HUSBARD UP I ITRORGLt
OPPOSE THIS BYE SOUl III I
Ii~c
- '="'\!:
-, ...-
. ~.~
..IV', - -
'I.
'. l.r...~
.;J~~t:'
PI ~ .i.)
~1\1:".I'.'. .
'-
.
OUR BACKYARD WHICH PACES THB COIR MART II ROW PRIVATB as PAR as
TRAl"FIC ROISI: UD EYE POLLUTIOW (EXCEPT POR !nIB ~t mo 'fALL
BVILDIRO). IF THIS LAROB SIGIf IS ALLOIIBJ) m GO UP OUR BACKYARD
"ILL BE ILLUMIRAHD AT RIGHT, ROT m IIBRTIOW ~T 1fB "ILL HAVE m
STARE AT THIS SIOH EVERt TINB 1fB VSE OUR PATIO, WHICH II QUIU
OPTER SIRCE 1fB DO LIVE IR IURRY BAR DIEGO COO_n III !ftII!:
TEMPORARY "ORAJll) OPUIRO" IIGH ~T !nIB COIR MART BAS PLAlHUD
ALL OVER THEIR BVILDIRO BAS ALREADY WOIUI OUT ITI 1IBLCONB. CITY
ORDIRAHCE ALLOWS ORLt 140 DAtS POR TEMPORARt IIGHS. !nIBSE IIGlfS
HAVE BEBH UP POR 3 KORTIIIIIII
!nIB COIH MART IS U BSTABLISIIBD BVSInss, BVBRYOD IR 'rOIfJI DOWS
THAT !nIBY HAVE IIOVI:D m THIS nw LOCATIOR. 1fB AU ROT lVU WHAT
THIS SIOH IS POR EXCSPT m TRY UP DIUUf PBOPLB IR PROM DEL MAR OR
BAR YSIDRO MADEn, &LBO !nIB BVSInss II ROT IIBU !rO JI1fX 5 OR 805
WHBU TllEU MIGHT BE A no !rO DIUUf TRAl"PIC. .
. ..---. -~._. - -'.
.-.......... ~.
IR CLOSIRO, 1fB BALIIE ~Tn LIVE ~R A CCIIIIIDCUL UP
RBSIDBJlTIAL PART OF 'rOWR, BUT UTI UBP __:1.-0lOI CBVL& VISTA
LOOItIRO LID A RICE PLaCS !rO LIVElli 'rIIII nw "X 17' now IIGIf
WILL BE VltACCBP~.T.'R11I
n Au: IR TOTAL OPPOSITIOW !rO BIS VARIUCE.
,~~~
RAYMORD UD DDORAII LVTIIBR
215 GUAVA AVE
CIIVLA VISTA, CA 91910
- 2:./.p
l
07UD',lt"
--
\
.
,'--
- ~\.....:.S
"~,.\:) , ,J #
~\Jt
fi...i~~...4'.~
I'LIUOIIRG DEPARTMEn
PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDIRG
CHULA VISTA CIVIC CEnER
276 FOURTH AVEInJE
CHULA VISTA, CA. "91910
RB; CASE IlUMBER IAV-"-12
ATTEnIOR: PA'nY IlEVIRS
K! RAME IS FRARCES A. IWlun.-. I AM A LIFE LORG CHULA VISTA
RESIDEn OF 53 ~EARS ARD I AM !mE OWJIBR OF PROPERft LOCATED AT
215 GUAVA AVERUE. THIS IS A SIRGLE FAMIL~ RESIDUCE ARD IS
C1JRRI!:nLY BEIRG REnED B~ A FAMILY OF FOUR.
I AM SftOHGL~ OPPOSED m An VARIUCE ~T WOULD ALLOW A &2 FOOT
ABOVE GRADE SIGH m BE IRSTALLED AT 3" -E- STREET. 3'6 WE-
STREET IS DIRECTL~ BERIRD K! PROPERft. An SUCH SIGH WOULD BE
BIGHL~ OBJlCTIOIIABLE m Anon WAllTIRG m REn BIS PROPERn ARD
CORCERKS HAVE ALREAD~ BEEH EXPRESSED BY !mE PRESBn OCctJPAllTS
AFTER RECEIVIHG !mEIR ROTICE OF PUBLIC BEARIRG OR THIS MATTER.
THIS SIGH WOULD BE BIGBL~ VISIBLE FROM DE REAR OF BIS RESIDUCE
ARD IF LIGHTED WOULD BE BIGBL~ OBJlCTIORABLE. A SIGH OF BIS
IlATURE WOULD URDOUBTEDL~ CAUSE ME A MODTARY LOSS IR n~uKE
REnAL DGOTIATIOHS.
I REQUEST ~T ~OU DEn BIS VARIUCE.
SIRCEREL~,
...1:A...,. ...J(l... ~
FRARCES A. IWAHLEH
28 LID IlELIZ DRIVE
LA MESA, CA. '1'41
-37 "
~~
JUlIE " I'"
r-. ..~. .~. r'.... "_.-
~ '.' ."
PLaJIJIING DEPARTMBD
PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDING
CII1JLA VISTA CIVIC ~:I:..A
276 POURD AVERUE~
CII1JLA VISTA, CA. '1'10
U, CASE IlUMBER IAV-96-12
A:i::i:..dION, PAnt' IIBVINS
AS USIDEftS WHO RAVE LIVED AT 203 GUAVA (CDDX can: LUB) SINCE
1980, ME OUR VERX STRONGLX OPPOSED TO AR'f VARIAllCE WHICH WOULD
ALLOW DE PROPERTI OWRBR AT 396 "E" 8TUET, TO INSTAJ.L A ROOF
MOuJiTED SIGN TO DE IlEIGHT OF U PEU aBOVE GRADE OR BIS
BUILDING. .
Jut! 0 7 19::5
PLAN&"~.!":~'
PROM OUR USIDDCE 1m RAVE ALUADX BBD J'ORCED TO DDUU RIGHT
TIME LIGII':ING PROM ARCO'S AM-PN KINI MART (OPD 2& BOURS) AJID
"IDI'S n.oRIST PARKING LOT LIGHTING. NOW, II' DI8 VARIAllCE 18
APPROVED, XOU AU ASKING U8 TO DDUU DT AIIODER VISUAL BU
BOU, A LaRGE SIGN LOOMING BIGH OVER OUR PATIO AJID BAClt'fARD WHICH
"ILL VRDOUBTEDLX BE LIT AT RIGHT BADING OUR PATIO AJID UAR
IftERIOR OF OUR BOMB IN n.oUSCEft8. ORCE AGI.1N BIS 18 All
IRVASION OF OUR PRIVACX. DI8 IS ROT ACCEPTI:JtT.II!.
1m LIVE IN All AREA OF COMMERCIAL ~ U8IDBRTIAL IORING. 1fB
8TRORGLX PEEL THAT IN ARBA5 8UCH AS BI8, ROI8E POLLUTIOR, VI8UAL
POLLUTION AD AIR POLLUTION CUAUD BX TBB COMMERCIAL PROPun
01fRI!:R8, OR BX DE OWRBR OF 396 "E" 8TUET, TIlE RIGHT8 01' TBB
USIDEftIAL PROPERTX OWRBRS 8URROURDING TBBSE COMMERCIAL
PROPERTIES SHOULD TAU PUCEDDCE OVER DB COIDP'RCIAL PROPERn
OWRBRS RIGII': TO IRSTALL A VISVALLX IRDU8IVE U FOOT UOVB GRADE
RIGHT LITE UOVB OUR PROPERn I BI8 18 ROT ACCEPUBl.1I! I
UT'8 asK OURSELVE8, 18 BI8 118 UaT.T." DCBS~' IIBAT 1m ARB
TALKING ABOUT lIEU IS A 1IBLL E8TABLI8BBD CII1JLA VI8TA BU8IDS8,
(COIN MlRT) WHICH BAS IIOVBD PROM BIRD AV_IJB IRTO A VBRX LUGE
TWO 8TORX BAJIIt BUILDING LOCATED AT 'B I I: 8TUft BAT 18 VERX
BARD TO KIS8 VISUALLI, BECAV8E 01' 1T'8 BIGHT &lID IT'8 LOCATIOR
OR A CORnR. 1 AN A1WUI: 01' A PURLI suaSIVE RADIO CllCPU8 TO
IIID PEOPLE IR DB COURn A1WUI: BAT BI8 BU8ID88 BAS IIOVBD UD
OF ITS nw LOCATION. TO ALLOW BII BUSID88 OIIIIBR TO IRSTALL A
VBRI LUGE ('PT. Z 17n.) 818, OR AR'f 811E POR BAT ICILftER, ATOP
A VERI LaRGE BUILDIRG (2 lTORI), 1IBICH WILL .10 ADVBRSELI . IMPACT
10 JWII USIDEftIAL BOMBOWRBRS LIVING RIGHT nzT DOOR OR DIUCTLI
ACROSS TIlE lTUET PROM BII BU8IDSI, II COICPLB'RLI
IRUSPORSIBLB. UT JIll: asK IOU DI8, 1IBD II DB LIST TIJII: IOU
.'
-38
r-
'--
',_I
DROVE AROUJID 20n ItOOltIRG FOR A 'ARTICULaR BUSIDSS BY ItOOltIRG
FOR A 42 FOOT 81GB SIGH WITH IT'S IIAMJ!: OR IT' I DID DIAT MOST
'SOI'Ll!: WOULD OBTAI." THE ADDRBSS OP THE 'ARTICUI.aR aVSIIlESS, DRIVE
20 THAT LOCATIO. AHD, VOIIoI:', DBRB'S DB aUSIDSS. 80 42 FOOT
81GB IIGR HIDIDI 80 VIIUAL POLLUTIOR, ALL IURROUJlDIRG
USIDIRTIAL 80ME OWIIERS ARE HAPPY 1 LIt'1 II GOOD' A IIGR OR DB
FACE OP THE aUILDI.G IHOULD SUPPICI: 20 LBT 'SO'1oI: BOIf WHAT
BUSIIlESS IS LOCATED DBREI I AM BURS 'SO,1oI: WILL FIG DIB
BVSIDSS ISTABLISJDIIRT WITH 80 'ROBLBM, AHD DBRE II ABSOLUTELY
80 IlEID FOR A 42 FOOT ABOVE GRADI IIGR AT 396 wlw ITREET, URIoBSS
DB O1QIBR IS nURG 20 ATTRACT '10'101: IR TIJUAIIA OR LAJOLL&I
WI DBRlPORl STRORGLY O'POSE GRARTIRG BIS VARIJUlCI:.
;;J;:;f;>L.i'- , ~<LiLu
RICHARD AHD BITTY BECIt
203 GVAVA AVlHVI
CHULA VISTA, CA. '1910
-.
- ?::> 7
.
.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENr
.
-.yo
11-IE rrrv OF oruu. VISTA DISCLOSURE ;A~
You are required to me a Statemcnl or Di~losure or ccrtaln ownership or financial Interests, payments, or campaign
eonlributions, on all mailers which will require discretionary action on the pari or Ihe Cily Council, Planning Commission. and
111 other official bodies. The following information must I>c disclosed:
I. Li... Ihe names of all per"on~ having a financial inlerC51 in the properly which 1.\ Ihe subject or the application or the
cuntract, e.g., owner. applicant, alDlraclor, 5uhl.~lnlractor, material supplier. .
iY}~TIAI A-LtSA-UIVl
~8kf A- It-LT1.3.4-tJn,.
/.]u:-.;, G: ~tA
2.
3.
4.
S.
6.
Date:
Jr anypersono idenlmed pursuanl to (1) above 1.\ a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning
more than 10% of the shares in the corporalion or owning any partnership interest In the partnership.
If any person' identified pursuant 10 (I) above i~ non-profit organi7.ation or a tru.... list the names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organilOltion or a~ tru...ce or beneftciary or truMor of the trust.
Have you had more than $2S0 worth of bu.\incs.\ tran5acled with any mem!'er.J)llhe City starr, Boards, Commissions,
Commillees, and Council within Ihe past Iwelve monlhs? Yes_ No~ )'C.\, please indicate person(s):
Please identify each ind every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who
you have aSsigned to represenl you before the Cily in this mailer.
/YJ Id'tll tV t4- L- -n8A1.J!!::J
Have you and/or your officers or agents. in the aggre2at~ntributed more than $1.000 to a Councilmember in the
currenl or preceding election period? Yes_ NoK if yes. state whieh Councllmember(s):
~ .4IUII 2,l / rft,
· · · (N011!.: AtLadl additJoDBI pap . -''Y
~:PPucant
/l ~e;;r (;'. ~#
Print or type name of contraClor/appUcant
--'(/
o fm!!! II ~ III: "Any iIIdi....." fin... co-f'l"'N"hip. joiIfI_ _ilJli"", -W clkb,fr-ruIJ 1M" ,....;.... CtJIfItNIiDn. _ ....".........,...uc..
INs IJ1Id """ otNI ~ c/Iy... ........,.. city lllUJuciptlJity, diIftcI. '" otNI poIiIiclll ~ '" """ otNIlfO'JP '" ->>t..... ..,.. UIIIL"
..
"
247 PI!2 SEP 24 '96 22;22
NOTICE OF PIJBUC
HEARING BY THE ClIlILA
VISTA CITY COUNCD.
CHULAVIST~
CALFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY OJ.
VEN THAT THE CHUIA
VISTA CITY COUNCL wi!
hold . = fI!Iarirv 10
CO:idel~'lIIt1::'; Pfen.
n~ Coirimisllon drill 01 a
I8QU8Irt for a V8IIance III In-
crease fie height of . roof.
!i'P IIan tom as feet 10 42
I8it lor the commeJdal
bulldila Ioca18d at 396 "E"
SUet Tn fie CoT TIIorough.
fire CommIl'C!aJ zane. For
fuIIher inbmatlon c:aII Patty
Nf\W in the Plannl Dept.
11691.0105. no
If JCU wish 10 ~
the ~s aGtion Gn d1is mil.
ter In ~ you may be 1Im-
lied 10 ralsl1l9 only thale II.
suec you or scmeone 81M
raJ&eG at !he publ'lG hearing
deIcribed In tIIs ftOIIce, or iii
writltn ncIenc8 I>>-
livelld ~ Clerk's Of.
flOe 11 O'r ;;;iof~ fit ~
~?~ HEARING
Will BE HELD BY THE
CITY ~IL on rues-
clay, O<:Iober ~ 1998, at
6~ p.m. in IIW CounCil
ChImbenI, PublIc Senioes
Building, 276 Fourlh
Avenlll!, at which .me any
P&ISOII _Iring to be heard
mrA~'September 25,
1998
CV08297 11128/96
." ,t'
,. .":'
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
/ ~'S-3
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
Item J~
Meeting Date 10/08/96
SUBMITTED BY:
Community Development Director
cS,
REVIEWED BY: City Managerz::;Y- (4/5ths Vote: Yes-X.. No_
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 properties). 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 1 993, 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
/;;. -;
" \"
Page 2, Item J j...
Meeting Date 10/08/96
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 B.)
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
/.2 - ,;z
Page 3, Item /2-
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).
(fk) M;\HOME\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\ 10-08-96\marina.l 1 3 [October 3, 1996 ~1 :33pm)]
/:2.-.3
RESOLUTION NO.
JYJ/--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 Attorney's office.
as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve
1. The terms and conditions of sale of Marina View Park to the San Diego Unified Port
District, attached 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
[jfk) M:IHOME\COMMDEV\RESOS\marina,res (October 2,1996 (1:26pml!
J~-i
Ce"
EXHIBIT A
COMMUNITY OEVf[OPMHa--
OEPARTMENT
Of S-"",
Oo;'tJII 11"'%
0.$1,. '~::(%o
V '~
c .;....
-:.. ~v
~. -, --~"'~
('0 ..... ,,,
.oORT Q
Port of San Diego
and Lindbergh Field Air Terminal
c.
(619) 686-6200 . P.O. Box 488, San Diego, California 92112-0488
SEP 2 319$
September 19, 1996
Fred Kassman
Redevelopment Coordinator
Community Development Department
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. Propertv: 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.
J~--S
. .
,
"C"
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
J~-?
",,")
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.
)~-?
c
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
J~-~
.~I
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 so 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 administrative agency
~~
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
"J" Street Marina dated September 28, 1977 ("Original 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
/d. ~/tJ
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
DAS/lks
Enclosure
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONCURS
WITH PROPOSED TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
By
Title:
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form
Acting city Attorney
/d - ) /
~
-~
~
~
~
~
,
~
j
I
j
j
i
j
j
-cj
,
Property
Purpose
Estate Valued
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 Mark::t 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:t acres estimated useable (82,375 net square feet)
Currently Public Park (NQ! Highest & Best Use)
Hold for future development of office or mixed use (office/retail)
May 1, 1995
Land ($9.25 per useable square foot)
Sales Comparison Approach
Final Opinion of Market Value
$762,000
$762,000
Major Assumptions
Date of Report
Appraiser
-j
~!
i
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 Stevens MarshaJl & Thene, Ine.
1
);2. -)~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. / .3
Date October 8, 1996
ITEM TITLE:
REPORT: Recommend that the City Implement a Six Month Pilot
Program Changing the Frequency of Collection for Participants in the
Residential Yard Waste Collection Program From Once Per Week to Every
Other Week. The Change Would Make the Program More Efficient and
Would Reduce Operating Costs
SUBMITTED BY:
Conservation Coordinator
~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes No-X.)
The City of Chula Vista currently has one of the lowest monthly residential rates of all 17 Cities
in the county. One of the City's primary goals in the residential refuse and recycling program is
to maintain low residential rates. To achieve that goal staff continues to explore options that provide
opportunities to reduce operational costs and increase program revenue without reducing the quality
of service or increasing rates. In that regard, staff has developed a list of measures that have the
potential to make the program more cost effective (see Attachment A). The most significant of
those options is a change in frequency of collection for yard waste.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to execute the public education and
operational changes necessary to smoothly transition residential yard waste collection from once a
week to every other week collection for a six month trial period beginning November I, 1996.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/ A
DISCUSSION:
Without a reduction in operational expenses or an increase in revenue, the residential program might
experience budget shortfalls. City staff has implemented a curbside anti-theft program to reduce
the theft of curbside materials and increase the potential revenue to the program. City and Laidlaw
Waste Systems Inc. (L WS) staff have also worked with the sub-contractors that process the yard
waste and recyclables to reduce their operating costs and financial impact to the program.
Section 8.23.230 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code establishes the Residential Yard Waste
program as a weekly service and states that, "The Grantee (Laidlaw Waste Systems Inc.) and the
City will mutually agree to any changes in the Collection schedule frequencies or Removal
Frequency. "
/3 - (
. \\
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 10/8/96
;J
City Staff and L WS believe that yard waste can be collected every other week without significantly
impacting the amount of material collected each month or jeopardizing the City's ability to meet
state mandated landfill diversion goals. The switch from weekly to every other week collection will
produce a potential savings of up to $0.52 per household per month. That savings is a key
component in balancing the program's future revenue and expenses. Attachment B is a letter from
Laidlaw Waste Systems outlining their recommendation for an operating change to residential yard
waste program. Attachment C is a table representing the actual tonnages collected from residents
over a twelve month period.
Staff recommends that the change to every other week collection be established as pilot program
which LWS and City staff will re-evaluate after six months. Staff believes that every other week
collection may be acceptable to the public during the fall and winter but may be more difficult in
spring and summer (see attachment B for months with low yard waste tonnage).
Public education will be a critical component in obtaining public acceptance of the proposed change.
Staff and Laidlaw Waste systems propose to implement at least the following public education
elements:
. Placing at least two large advertisements in a local newspaper(s) publicizing the change.
. Placing an insert in the October mailing of the refuse billing statement that outlines the
program and lists the future dates of service.
. Making public education material and a calendar of service dates available at City facilities,
garden stores and nurseries.
. Promoting the change at public events (Arturo Barrios Run, Fire Department Open House)
over the next several months.
. Publicizing the change through Laidlaw Waste Systems customer service personnel and the
City Conservation Coordinator information telephone lines.
Laidlaw Waste System's reports that most Chula Vista residents set their yard waste out for
collection less frequently than once a week. The new program will not reduce the volume of
service residents currently receive. Residents will be able to place twice as much yard waste out
for collection every other week as previously allowed under the weekly collection schedule.
Additionally, staff and Laidlaw will work with customers to develop reasonable alternatives to
special circumstances. Finally, staff will report back to Council within six months with a report of
the program's financial and operational status and a recommendation regarding its continuation.
)3/,)...
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 10/8/96
)3
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City budget and staff is not recommending a
residential rate change at this time. The program change could generate up to $85,000 in
operational savings over six months that will be taken into account in future rate reviews.
mtm:cas
yrdwaste.chg
Attachments
J3~
Attachment A
Residential Solid Waste Program
Options to Improve Efficiency & Effectiveness
Options to Increase Revenue
I) Execute the Curbside Anti-theft Grant,
2) Recommend and implement a policy to enforce participation in the franchise agreement, including
developing better enforcement mechanisms against residents and businesses who are not paying for
the collection services or are not using Laidlaw Waste Systems for their refuse service.
Options to Reduce Operating Costs
3) Investigate an automated unit pricing collection system that charges residents based upon the
amount of waste disposed of. Automation would make collection more efficient. A unit pricing or
"volume based" system would maintain low rates for 60% to 80% of customers, reduce rates for
10% to 20% of the customers however, it may raise rates for the 5% to 10% of customers that
generate above average amounts of waste,
4) Implement cost savings measure's that involves public participation such as "twinning" or asking
residents to place their refuse, recycling and yard waste on common property lines to reduce the
number of stops per block,
5) Seek more competitive bids for recycling and yard waste processors
6) Consider longer-term arrangements with processors to reduce costs,
General Options
7) Monitor and support proposed legislation that helps curbside programs and oppose legislation that
attempts to dismantle curbside incentives
mtm:cas
$options.cas
/3'1
-'
.'
ATTACHMENT B
8888/188
LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS
August 28, 1996
Michael T. Meacham,
Conservation Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Meacham:
As a follow-up to our discussions to identifY opportunities to manage services in a more cost
effective and efficient maMer to reduce the yard waste program costs t~ the customers,
recommendations for the yardwaste program are made below. Our objectives are to reduce the
program costs to the customer, maintain aMual yardwaste volumes minimally at current levels,
and to continue to provide quality service.
At present, Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. provides weekly yardwaste service to each residential
customer in the City of Chula Vista. The monthly' volume of yard waste that is picked up curbside
and transported to a local yard waste processing facility has averaged approximately 925 tons per
month since the program was implemented on September I, 1994. During this period the
monthly volume has fluctuated from a low of422 tons (December, 1994) to a high of 1,257 tons
(May, 1995). The monthly volume fluctuations are caused primarily by the changes in the
growing seasons and the amount of rainfall received during previous periods.
Each week Laidlaw drives by every household in the City to pick up yardwaste. However, every
household does not setout yard waste on a weekly basis. Laidlaw only stops at those customers
who have setout their yardwaste for pickup. The amount of yard waste picked up each week can
vary depending on the seasonality of the yard waste volumes and the time between each
customer's yardwaste setouts.
If the time between customer yardwaste setouts can be lengthened, then the number of stops
necessary to collect yardwaste along a route will decrease and the number of households we need
to drive by without setouts will decrease. The total amount of monthly yardwaste tons collected
remains the same. The cost to collect and transport the yardwaste decreases.
Our focus is to reduce the cost of the program by lengthening the time between setouts while
maintaining the service level and quality required by the customers. By changing the yardwaste
program from weekly service to every other week service, program costs can be reduced without
a major service impact on most customers. Since most customers do not currently setout
yardwaste on a weekly basis, then the transition to every other week service should not have an
impact on the total volume collected or the frequency of service actually received.
P.O. BOX 967 . COOla Vista, Calnomla 91912 . (619) 421-9400 . FAX (619) 421-0841
1071dph.cIoc:
Recycled papeJ..-
j3-~
"
" .
i
.
8888881
LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS
We have reviewed monthly yardwaste volumes for the last two years in order to identifY
opportunities to maximize all loads each route day. We have looked at those months that
generate the highest seasonal volumes and have determined that the load volumes could be
expanded to include more volume.
Our proposal is to convert to every other week yardwaste service for the entire year. Based on
past load volumes, we feel we can adequately collect the tonnage and still provide efficient
service. During the peak growing seasons of the year there will be some households that will
generate yardwaste each week. In those cases the customer will only be able to setout yardwaste
every other week; they can setout aI] of their yardwaste, but not as uequently. This may be
inconvenient for a small number of customers, however, overall costs can be reduced for all
customers.
Once the new service level is implemented conditions may warrant a return to weekly yardwaste
service. In the event rainfalls approach record leve]s again resulting in additional yardwaste -
generated, then additional service frequency can be implemented. Our goal is to collect and divert
as much yardwaste from the landfill. We have the flexibility to increase the service frequency if
the program merits it.
Operationally, we would provide yardwaste service to one half of the City one week and to the
other half of the City the following week. We would communicate this schedule through a
message on the bimonthly bill, an insert in the bill, and notices in local newspapers. The service
areas could be split geographically (i.e., East of805 and West of 805) so that the customers can
easily understand which service area they are in.
Our recommendation to reduce yardwaste collection from weekly to every other week
service for the entire year is intended to produce operational savings that can be.applied to
reduce r~sidential r.ates~ We project that due to c'!~t reductions the resid~ntial yardwaste
~ rate coak! b~ rcil{~t:::: by.$.n.s~ p~l ~nnt!~'.p~~r .:~c1~(;'nti~t :uJif.i:t.t~e ,f-3gr:Uti.
We believe our proposal aggressively identifies areas to efficiently produce savings for the
customers. Once the customers have been notified of the service schedule changes, we could
implement the changes immediately.
Please Jet me know your thoughts and we can go forward with the implementation.
~.'
DanieIP.~~
C1eneral~anager
I071dph.doc
/:J -?
U
H
Z
'"
G1
u
<<:
H
H
<<:
on
'"
"'z
-0
~-
e"
~~
~O
u'"
",1:5
;Sz
..0
z-
~'"
ee!
"';;.
!:!Ci
<'-'
"1:5
"'",
>u
<t;
~!:!
u
i5
z
o
::0
fi1
""
'"
z
o
H
~ ~
- ~
~ 0
o ~
~ 0
U U
~
o
f-
u
w
~
;;.
~
H
U
o
""
W
'"
"
:J
<<:
~
~
~
..:
~
~
ffi
'"
~
-
00
M
""
on
M
~
""
M
M
'"
00
N
...
r-
,...:
N
N
M
o
M
...
00
M
M
'"
M
o
M
00
N
-
M
'"
o
M
on
'"
,...:
N
-
'" on
0-: N
N
r-
on
M
N
...
'"
00
N
~
6
~
o
"0
U
M
N
'"
o
M
~
M
00
on
M
on
on
M
'"
M
-
00
M
00
on
M
'"
'"
M
N
'"
M
r-
M
M
'"
00
-
'"
M
M
E
2
e
o
:;;:
'"
on
M
-
S
!::
00
00
M
on
r-
M
-
on
'"
'"
-
on
o
'"
'"
...
...
'"
M
M
'"
...
...
00
...
'"
00
00
'"
M
M
M
on
~
~
6
~
~
.0
~
00
N
,...:
...
M
'"
M
..
N
r-
'"
""
N
'"
'"
""
N
'"
'"
00
N
on
"'!
-
M
...
'"
00
N
on
'"
N
-
M
or;
...
~
M
N
'"
,...:
N
'"
on
~
...
r-
M
on
~
~
6
~
:;;
~
u
~
.5
'"
)3-7
'"
'"
'"
...
N
-
M
N
N
r-
~
N
...
r-
-
N
M
'"
or;
'"
M
,...:
-
...
'"
on
-
'"
...
~
~
'"
N
'"
M
""
N
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
,...:
-
...
M
N
~
6
=
~
~
is
00
on
,...:
...
N
'"
00
...
N
:!
-
..
;::;
M
~
:!
...
r-
M
::
M
-
r-
'"
M
M
":
-
M _
... '"
N <o:i
-
'"
00
'"
N
-
.~ u
] .~
"" 0:
**
:;; is
~ -0
U U
~ ~
"" ""
@ @
r-
-
""
on
'"
'"
""
'"
M
..
on
M
..
N
r-
..
N
-
on
M
r-
..
r-
oo
'"
-
00
..
on
M
..
'"
-
M
...
'"
..
...
'"
N
M
00
on
-
00
N
on
...
on
'"
N
r-
'"
or;
'"
N
...
'"
...
N
M
...
'"
r-
N
00
r-
or;
N
N
'"
00
on
N
M
o
'"
N
'"
-
'"
on
N
M ... M
00 '" r-
vj cO r-...
00 _
N
r-
"',
-
00
N
N
'"
'"
M
~
""
'"
'"
N
,...:
...
'"
00
on
00
00
-
N
'"
00
'"
'"
~
'"
...
...
'"
M
M
'"
...
...
00
M
,...:
r-
N
'"
N
r-
r-
N
'"
M
""
'"
r-
o
N
...
on
o
N
~
00
-
-
N
o
N
~
00
-
...
r-
oo
on
00
-
...
r-
""
-
00
M
N
on
,...:
-
,~
ti ~
~ '3
:u E: v
fJ' ..~::o OJ
0.. ""e.g
~ ~-I ~ ~
'"
r-
M
-
,
'"
-
'1
'"
r-
o
,
on
'"
o
,
,
'"
...
M
,
-
on
M
,
'"
M
,
00
'"
M
,
...
'"
'"
!::
"?
~ ~
of .,f
...
on
00
M
,
00
'"
l'
'"
,...:
on
00
...
'"
N
..
N
...
N
""
M
...
00
N
or;
'"
...
on
r-
M
r-
M
M
...
:!
...
00
M
""
on
M
'"
...
M
'"
M
N
M
'"
M
00
M
o
r-
M
'"
-
...
M
...
on
'"
...
"0
~
11 t:
u ~
'" '"
U EJ
~ ~
= 0/)
~ ~
~
OJ
~
g ~ i
r-
~ I'~ ~
r-
'"
...
'"
N
...
...
S
..
N &
~ :i::::~
~I~ ~
; g ~
N
'"
N
...
=-
wi
on
'"
-
M
'"
00
'"
N
...
vi
-
-
""'I
M
'"
00
'"
N
'"
...
-
-
~Ii g
on
'"
..
'"
r-
N
N
'"
r-
'"
N
~I~I~
~I~ ~
~
;j
~
11
~
~
:!!
.. ~
i:: =
:.:= ~
~' ~
r-
oO
...
on
'"
on
00
r-
or;
00
r-
M
'"
,...:
'"
on
N
-
00
'"
M
M
o
...
N
N
..
...
r-
...
'"
;:6
'"
...
00
o
'"
M
...
r-
r-
""
r-
...
N
...
00
'"
on
M
...
N
,...:
'"
on
N
":
M
00
;;;
00
on
'"
N
N
'"
...
...
'"
o
00
00
M
'"
'"
..
N
'"
...
'"
on
'"
00
M
'"
00
00
M
...
"0
~
~
~
OJ
'u
~
E ~
Ei -
o ~
u~
-~--
Chula Vista Yard Waste Tonnages
First and Second Quarter for 1996
January February March April May June July August
746 682 881 1069 1190 1028 1410 1376
mtm:gmwaste
96tons.grn
Printed on Recycled Paper, Naturally!
13
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item p(
Meeting Date 10/8/96
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Draft Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP)
Plan and Environmental Impact Report / Environmental Impact Statement
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning #C ~^
REVIEWED BY: City Manager VA /~~~Q" CYI\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
v-q --"?
The City of San Diego has re-circulated t Draft Multiple Species Conservation Program
(MSCP) Plan, Subarea Plans (including the Chula Vista Subarea Plan,) and Draft Environmental
Impact Report / Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for public review. Our staff has
completed a preliminary review of the Draft EIR/EIS. The following report contains City staff
comments regarding the Draft EIR/EIS, as well as comments received from the Resource
Conservation Commission regarding this document. In addition, the report outlines the proposed
process for final review of the MSCP Plan and Chula Vista Subarea Plan, including further input
from the Planning Commission, Resource Conservation Commission, and University Task Force.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
I) authorize staff to forward the attached draft letter and any additional Council comments
regarding the draft MSCP Plan EIR/EIS to the City Council by the October 15 deadline;
and
2) endorse the process for review of the final draft MSCP Plan and Chula Vista Subarea
Plan outlined in this report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission received a staff briefing on the MSCP Plan and Subarea Plan at its
meeting on September 25, 1996. Comments and/or questions raised by the Planning
Commission were focused primarily on the Draft MSCP Plan, and not specifically on the
environmental analysis contained in the Draft MSCP EIR/EIS. However, the Planning
Commission requested that these comments and questions be forwarded to the City Council at
this time (see Attachment A).
The Resource Conservation Commission met on September 30, 1996, and made numerous
comments on the draft MSCP EIR/EIS (see Attachment B). In addition, the RCC voted to
advise the City Council that, based on the deficiencies noted in their comments, the draft
EIR/EIS is inadequate, and any plan based on the information contained in this EIR/EIS would
also be inadequate.
;f-(
Page 2, Item If
Meeting Date 10/08/96
DISCUSSION:
On May 28, 1995 and June 13,1995, the City Council conducted hearings to review and receive
comments regarding the Draft MSCP and Draft MSCP EIR/EIS. The Council authorized the
City Manager to forward comments to the City of San Diego regarding these documents. Over
the past year the City of San Diego staff, in cooperation with the Wildlife Agencies and other
participating jurisdictions (primarily San Diego County, Poway and Santee), have revised the
Draft MSCP and Draft MSCP EIR/EIS and have re-circulated these documents for public review
and comment. In addition, the City of Chula Vista staff have prepared a Draft Subarea Plan for
inclusion in the analysis of the Draft EIR/EIS. This Subarea Plan, a document intended to
implement the policies of the MSCP at the local jurisdiction level, was brought before the
Council on May 21, 1996, and again on July 16, 1996, for authorization to have it forwarded
to the City of San Diego for analysis in the Draft MSCP EIR/EIS.
Comments Regarding Draft EIRIEIS
Staff has prepared the attached letter to the City of San Diego containing comments regarding
the Draft MSCP EIR/EIS (see Attachment C). Several of the comments relate to the EIR/EIS
analysis of policy options related to the University site in the Otay Ranch. These comments
were prepared by the City's biological consultant on University site issues and City staff.
Specifically, we are concerned that the analysis contained in the EIR/EIS does not contain
adequate information to provide us with an understanding of the basis for its conclusions
regarding the impacts of policy options which would allow for a university site in the area east
of Salt Creek Canyon.
In addition, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared comments regarding the
draft EIR/EIS, which are incorporated in the letter (see Attachment C, "General Comments").
Finally, as noted earlier, the RCC has provided comments on the draft EIR/EIS (see draft
comments, Attachment B.) It is recommended that these comments also be forwarded to the
City of San Diego as an attachment to our letter.
Process for Further Review of MSCP Plan and Subarea Plan
Staff has initiated its own review of the final draft MSCP Plan and Chula Vista Subarea Plan.
In addition, Council has reestablished the University Task Force to provide input on the issues
in the MSCP Plan and Subarea Plan pertaining to the designation of the University site in Otay
Ranch. At this time, it is anticipated that the University Task Force will meet three to four
times in October and November to receive information regarding the University site issue, and
to forward recommendations to the City Council on this matter.
J '1- ;L
Page 3, Item-.L.1
Meeting Date 10/08/96
In addition, the Planning Commission has requested that staff schedule a workshop meeting with
them to discuss with them in greater detail the MSCP Plan and Subarea Plan, particularly as
relates to the implementation issues which were brought up by them at the Commission meeting
on September 25 (Attachment A.) These issues related mainly to the financing of the MSCP
program, as well as specific policies such as mitigation banking. Staff will be scheduling this
meeting in late October or early November, and the Planning Commission will then forward
specific comments on the MSCP Plan and Subarea Plan to the City Council. Similarly, the
Resource Conservation Commission plans to discuss the draft MSCP Plan and Subarea Plan on
October 21, and provide comments to the City Council on these plans at that time.
Based on the process for review of the draft MSCP Plan and Subarea Plan as outlined above,
we would plan to return to the City Council in November with recommendations regarding the
draft Plan and Subarea Plan, incorporating comments and recommendations made by the
Planning Commission, RCC, and University Task Force.
FISCAL IMPACT: Costs associated with preparation of the MSCP Plan and EIR/EIS have
been paid through the City of San Diego Clean Water Program, of which the City of Chula
Vista is a participant. Costs for preparing the Chula Vista Subarea Plan, as well as costs of staff
review and participation in this program, are covered by the City General Fund as part of the
Planning Department work program. It should be noted that future implementation of this
program could result in significant additional City administrative costs, which will need to be
further evaluated prior to any final actions being taken by the City Council on this matter.
Attachments
A.
B.
C.
Planning Commission Comments and Questions of September 25, 1996 ~
Draft Resource Conservation Commission Comments from Meeting of September 30, 1996.
Draft Letter to John Kovac, City of San Diego, regarding Comments on Draft EIR/EIS for the MSC.
{J\ .Y~-
/4J-CY
"
M: HOME\PLANNING\MSCP\MSCP96.All
j{-J
ATTACHMENT A
Comments and Ouestions raised bv the Planning Commission at its 9/25/96 Meeting regarding
the Draft MSCP Plan:
Willett:
Willett:
Willett:
Salas:
Salas:
Salas:
Salas:
Thomas:
Ray:
Ray:
Willett:
Regarding MSCP funding, with the failure of recent voter initiatives to provide
funding for parks and open space, do we expect that the public is going to turn
around and vote for more public park acquisition in the future?
If $20 to $25 per household is estimated to pay for open space acquisition, will
this amount be on top of fees paid through an assessment district? When is this
information provided to property purchasers through their CC & R's?
I question whether or not Mello-Roos could be used to pay for an open space
maintenance district.
Is the $20 to $25 per household for open space acquisition in addition to the open
space dedications already being provided through Otay Ranch and the Preserve
Owner Manager? Does this apply to existing homes as well as future residences?
At the beginning of the executive summary, it indicates that "private lands
acquired with public funds for the preserve will only be acquired from willing
sellers. " What happens if you don't have a willing seller and the property
happens to be right in the middle of the sub-area plan or the MSCP?
It appears that the preserve would be restricting what an individual can do on
property that they own, so the argument might be from the property owner then,
if they're not allowed to maximize the use of the land, then the value of their land
is decreased. Please respond.
Is it correct to state that in no case would an existing structure be required to be
demolished when located within the preserve?
How much of this program is mandated, and how much latitude does the City
actually have?
Previously, there was discussion about mitigation banking. Where do we stand
with that at this point?
Is there a measurement as far as going into mitigation banking off-site? Is there
a yardstick that those lands are measured against as far as quality of that habitat,
or is it just between the owner and the buyer?
In reference to the Otay Regional Valley Park, I asked the tax assessor if the
parcels which had been bought within the focused planning area of the Gtay
I ~
--I
/1-t(
Regional Valley Park could be identified. He answered that there was no code
in their computer program to identify which properties had been bought. Is there
a way to identify such properties could be identified in computerized property
records?
Willett:
The Plan indicates that the proposed Habitat Management Technical Committee
would coordinate with an implementation coordination committee for the Otay
Ranch Preserve Owner Manager, and also a technical committee within the Otay
Valley Regional Park organizational structure -- who would all these committees
be reporting to?
(m:\home\planning\nancy\mscp3)
/'I~r/
ATTACHMENT B
COMMENTS FROM TIm RCC SPECIAL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996
Present: Commission.... BUlTascano, HaU, Marquez, Thomas, Fisher; absent: Yamada.
Also present: Doug Reid, Bob Leiter, Planning Dept.; June Collins, Dudek Company
1. Thol1UlS - concerned about the linkage corridors, that habitats would be choked off
between area/sub-area plans. Figure 2-20 shows how cores and linkages were developed
with the biologicaUy preferred alternative in mind.
2. The RCC expressed concern whether the Sweetwater River and Otay Rivers are the two
linkages designed to link core preserved areas. Dudek (June Collins) noted they already
provide protection and it has already been analyzed in the plan. She further noted that
the Otay Regional Park Plan restricts active recreation in these areas. This EIR only
evaluates the concept Otay Regional Park Plan but is not specifically dealt with.
3. Marquez noted letters in response to the Notice of Preparation weren't always answered
directly; Dudek stated they were indirectly conunented upon throughout various sections
ofthe ErR.
4. HalI- Concerned about the amount of money spent on the Nature Interpretive Centers,
that one was enough, and others are too costly to maintain. Dudek stated one is pIanned
for Otay Valley Park but is not in this EIR; it is in the sub-area plan if funding becomes
available. These facilities should be a lower priority than acquisition for conservation
purposes.
5. Marquez requested but did not receive a copy of the Biological Mitigation Ordinance;
Dudek to provide.
6. Burrascano - On page 4-3-79, Table mentions Maritime Succulent Scrub, but the
numbers are misrepresented. Dudek - noted the footnotes, which are missing nom these
particular tables, explains the numbers used and obtained by Ogden studies. (Table 4-3.1
shows how the footnote should appear to explain these numbers). Dudek explained that
the Subarea plan includes incorporated and unincorporated areas; Ogden used numbers
nom City ofChula Vista's incorporated boundaries. Burrascano felt the database is
therefore inconclusive as the numbers don't add up to the 17 acres of preserve, as stated
in table.
7. Fisher. concern with Poggi Canyon and Salt Creek Ranch, where some MSS and CSS
corridors are now missing nom the map. Beginning p. 21-23 of subarea plan shows
revision of gains and losses of sensitive species. Dudek said they had negotiated between
Baldwin, U.S. Fish & Wildlife and U.S. Fish & Game to create a better preserve design
and meet regional species conservation goals. Leiter stated that Salt Creek reflects the
GDP. Fisher requested to check configuration of open space, finger canyons, etc. as
they're different from previous maps.
~
1'1-1"
8. Burrascano - numbers of species being impacted are not listed~pecies are there but not
the numbers. Dudek showed Chula Vista's subarea plans table. No species were counted
on individual sub-area plans, and no separate maps were prepared. Dudek also explained
that the County had also asked what level of quantitative analysis documents needed to
be included in EIR.
9. Burrascano - felt the EIR is inadequate under CEQA. Leiter noted that the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife service will provide d~led follow-up comments through the biological opinion
document. He also has problems with connection of corridors and will include this in
EIR. This issue will already be addressed, especially at the university site.
10. Noted that the biological database and sensitive species list were provided by the u.s.
Fish & Wildlife as the federal lead agency; Dudek based their scientific findings and
criteria trom this list. Purpose of the EIR is to disclose impacts associated with the
MSCP Plan, Le., loss of species and other significant impacts. It was requested that
Dudek come back with the County's plan in the Bonita area as it was not included in the
EIR.
11. RCC commented that since the data is inadequate, it requested the City to keep the area
around the reservoir a total preserve area. Asked how Dudek dealt with the minor
amendment areas around the river? Ms. Collins stated the studies were done by Ogden
and counted as 75% preserve; she didn't know answer. She'll find out how they based
their infonnation and will make comment in her follow-up report.
12. M4rquez - question about survival of cactus wren within regional plan. Page 4-3-23
shows cactus wren is adequately conserved but feels the data is inadequate.
13. Fisher suggested that rather than building, leave Poggi Canyon as is or put significant
amounts of natural open space. Continuous land would be preferred in order to keep and
maintain the scrub found in the canyon for now. Keep natural lands to prevent flooding
later and destroy natural species and habitat that is still there.
14. M4rquez - Asked if Dudek looked at and analyzed the segmentation of luge projects
such as the Otay Ranch; would it change the significant preserve levels? Dudek stated
that resource agencies have looked at it and reviewed plans. The approved land use plans
are the land use regulations on the properties regardless of the ownership.
IS. Burrascano - Sensitive Resource Study area, Village 13 ofOtay Ranch, p. 24f of subarea
plan. the large area shows vernal pool and Acanthornintha. She asked that as
development occurs, if sensitive species are found, would it still be covered or will II
trade-off occur? Ms. Collins stated a 404 permit will be required as it is designated
development. If sensitive species are found, there is already a clause to adjust and
provide coverage for that species already addressed in the EIR. Also, according to
CEQA, they would need a subsequent document.
-+-
/'I-?
16. Ree was concerned that non-sensitive species could possibly be put at greater risk.
Leiter will address it in the plan rather than the EIR.
17. Fisher - concern about the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly which was dol1t1ant but was
recently found.
18. Fisher - Page 4-3-19, Table 2.2 describes the Red-legged &og as "discountable" and
wanted that defined. Page 4-3-27 defines discountable as being not reasonably expected
to occur in the MSCP study area. Fisher noted it had not been surveyed for but they have
been observed, and could possibly be listed.
19. Marquez - ambrosia pumila (San Diego ambrosia) should not be included on the list as a
new listing is coming out. Also, this is being confused with the ambrosia confertiflora
and does not need to be included in the document. This is the wrong plant and it appears
to be showing a lot of impacts. This is one example of inadequate scientific basis.
20. Burrascano - Additional level of protection for species outside the preserve will be
adequately covered. Covered species list - covered within preserve.
21. Fisher - Refer to arroyo toad p. 4-3-18, concern with finding it within Otay Valley, and
the potential impact in that area. Stated that these impacts Were not significant enough,
and ifit's outside the preserve, they have permission to take it. ElRmentions it's
measured in a "kilometer" limit of occupied breeding habitat.
22. Marquez asked about the shaded boxes in Table 4.3-1 shaded boxes. Page 4-3-27
shows the key but it's incomplete and inadequate. Ms. Collins to verify and ensure its
consistency in data. The shaded boxes should be priority species and federally and state
proposed species.
23. Thomas - asked ifthere was an ongoing monitoring plan in the preserve. Dudek said yes,
there is a biological monitoring plan but it's not required in the MSCP. It will be
included in implementing agreements between individual federal and state agencies and
local jurisdictions.
24. Thomas suggested to circulate reports locally, regionally, and federally with an electronic
database, including developers, could be linked to universities through internet and have
the global infol1t1ation include trash areas, rebuilt areas, development, etc. and more
specific information made available to the public.
25. Thomas. need MSCP technical committee involved with technical aspects of the project
to include natural historians, ecologists, science ombudsmen, biologists, and other than
just non-technical local staff-those with more expertise
26. Marquez asked why these areas (part of the finger canyons within the City ofChula
Vista, north ofR Street) are being included as open space as it is such a small ftagmented
.:.::,
/f-d'
area. She doesn't want credit for open space because it's too steep, and it doesn't
connect with anything.
27. Thomas. addressed exotic plants and ferrelI domestic animals within finger canyons.
Inadequate preserve design of canyons make it difficult to manage. EIR should address
more closely within the monitoring plan.
28. Hall - asked about the Biological Mitigation Ordinance for county. Horse property on
Chula Vista lots. Annexing areas will keep existing zoning. Horses are not generally
pennitted on City of Chula Vista lots. If areas in Bonita are annexed, will the same
County regulations regarding horses apply to these lots?
29. Did Dudek do an analysis of homes per acre in the General Plan pre--MSCP (a1lowable in
preserve) used for take. Marquez had great concern with the one dwelling unit per one
acre allowable in preserved area. She did not agree with the low density as explained on
page 6-3 of the subarea plan. It says it may be compatible and allows private land too
easily accessible to sensitive areas.
/tj- '?
---&:r .
ATTACHMENT C
October 3, 1996
City of San Diego
Development Services Dept.
Environmental Analysis Section/Public Projects
1222 First Avenue, 5th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
Attn: John Kovacs
Dear Mr. Kovacs:
The City of Chula Vista has completed its review of the Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) on the proposed Multiple Species
Conservation Plan. The following are the City of Chula Vista's major comments on the
EIR/EIS. As you are aware we have previously forwarded minor and technical comments
directly to your environmental consultant.
COMMENTS RELATED TO UNIVERSITY SITE ANALYSIS
1. Subarea Plan Description
The Subarea Plan description on page 2-23: University Site should be revised to read as
follows:
University Site: A potential university site is identified in the approved Otay Ranch
GDP, portions of which could be located in the Otay Ranch Portion of Salt Creek, an
area designated for preservation in the proposed MHP A. The site is located above the
slopes that define Salt Creek Canyon and consists of approximately 288 acres. The site
has been located to avoid impacts to Salt Creek Canyon, and to provide wildlife
movement corridors to Otay Lake between the Olympic Training Center and the
University site, and between the Otay River Valley and BLM lands located to the east.
The very short corridor to Otay Lake adjacent to the Olympic Training Center is 500-750
feet wide, a width acceptable in other portions of the proposed project. Other corridors
are at least 1,000 feet wide. This information has previously been provided to the lead
agencies and should be used in analyzing Policy Option 1.
2. Lack of Biologic Analvsis
The EIR/EIS presents a large and varied data base which, together with various
assumptions, were used to determine the amount of species occurrences and habitat that
~/
;'1-/0
John Kovacs
-2-
October 3, 1996
were being preserved by the proposed project (the preserve system). A number of
conclusions are stated relating to this data. The document fails, however, to provide any
analysis that allows the decisionmaker to understand how the conclusion was reached.
For example, the EIRlEIS states that 95 % of the known occurrences of Otay manzanita,
70% of San Diego goldenstar, 80% of narrow-leaved nightshade, 62 % of orange-throated
whiptail would be preserved overall by the proposed project. No information is provided
that states why this level of preservation is enough. The statement, "This is enough
because... ", is never completed. Such information is necessary for each covered species
in order for a decisionmaker to make an informed decision. In addition, such
information is necessary if the EIRlEIS is to be used as a programmatic document for
subsequent projects.
It is understood that statements that might be interpreted as "pre-decisional" to the
Biologic Opinion must be avoided. However, the EIR/EIS must meet the requirements
of CEQA which requires analysis. The analysis required for CEQA and that required
for the Biological Opinion are different and may even reach different conclusions. Please
provide the requested analysis.
3. Analvsis of Impacts. Significance and Mitigation for the Proposed Proiect
The proposed project (per Section 2) is the assembly and management of a preserve for
biologic purposes under the MSCP. The issue is whether the implementation of the
proposed project would effectively protect species and habitats. This issue cannot be
answered using the information presented.
The information presented in tables 4.3-8,9 and 10 do not allow the reader to compare
the differences between the proposed project and Policy Option 1. For example, Table
4.3-9 states that 16 out of 17 acres of maritime succulent scrub will be preserved under
Policy Option 1 while Table 4.3-10 states that 25.9 acres of this same habitat would be
excluded from the preserve under Policy Option 1. How can this be if there are only 17
acres under Policy Option 1 to begin with?
Table 4.3-8 states that Policy Option 1, which includes the 288 acre university site,
would exclude 41 locations of California gnatcatcher and 22 locations of cactus wren.
Is this with or without the unincorporated portions of the Otay Ranch component of the
Subarea Plan? Also, does this analysis take into account the fact that major fires have
occurred on portions of this site on at least two separate occasions since these surveys
were done? Is it known whether these fires have affected the long-term viability of the
site for habitat purposes?
In order for a decisionmaker to properly consider the impacts of the two alternatives and
make a meaningful decision, the same information for both must be presented. Please
~.
/0/-//
John Kovacs
-3-
October 3, 1996
provide tables that include the Otay Ranch component for both the proposed project and
Policy Option 1.
The information presented in Table 4.3-1 states that 2,814 "points" are known for
California gnatcatcher in the MSCP study area, and that 1,819 points will be conserved
under the proposed project. It is assumed that this excludes points for the MHCP and
NAS Miramar. The difference between the impacts of the proposed project and Policy
Option 1 are very small. In addition, Policy Option 1 provides corridors that meet or
exceed the standards stated in the EIR/EIS, meets the requirements for preservation listed
in the Otay Ranch RMP, and preserves more of this particular population of gnatcatchers
than is done in other areas of the proposed project.
In light of the information presented above, considering that corridors are being proposed
in Policy Option 1 that are as required by the resource agencies in other areas of the
MSCP, and considering that the additional loss is well within the range allowed in other
cores, please include analysis to support the stated conclusions in the draft document that
implementation of Policy Option 1 would make suspect the viability of the entire MSCP
preserve. Such an analysis is important to allow decisionmakers to make a reasoned and
informed decision about the proposed project.
4. Analvsis of the Impacts of the Proposed Proiect on the Existing Environment
Information presented in the EIR does not analyze the proposed project's impact on the
existing conditions as is done for the City of San Diego. Instead, the EIR/EIS analyzes
the impact of the existing environment on the proposed project, as if the proposed
preserve were already assembled. Such analysis leaves open the question of whether the
preserve will function biologically. It is assumed that configuration and edge effects
were considered in designing the preserve, and that the proposed project is adequate for
the stated purposes. However, the "analysis in reverse" included in the EIR/EIS
precludes any such conclusion. In addition, the net benefit that will result through
implementation of the proposed project (as opposed to what would happen under the
existing setting) is never stated.
Please analyze the impacts of the proposed project on the existing environment in the
same manner as was done for the City of San Diego.
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. The document initially on page ES-7 identifies the subarea plans as a project level of
analysis. It is our opinion that the implementing agreement, general plan amendments
and any zone changes necessary to implement the City of Chula Vista's subarea plan are
programmatic in nature and would be followed by more specific project level analysis.
->r--
/'/-/.,2
John Kovacs
-4-
October 3, 1996
2. Table I-Ion page 1-12 indicates that the City of Chula Vista would not be adopting
implementing ordinances or community plan amendments (general plan). This may not
be the case and this table should be modified to so indicate.
3. Figure 1-4 on page 1-15 indicates that some areas such as the western parcel of the Otay
Ranch and the San Miguel Ranch as being subareas under the County of San Diego -
south county segment. This figure should have some recognition of the fact that this is
an overlap area under which the jurisdiction may change and that implementation of the
MSCP would be by the City of Chula Vista rather than the County of San Diego.
4. Figure 2-2 on page 2-4 shows the area south of the Lower Otay Reservoir as 100%
conserved. This is inconsistent with the proposed subarea plan and the tentative
agreement between US Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and
Game and the property owners. It is also inconsistent with the Chula Vista General Plan
as depicted in Figure 2-5 on page 2-22.
5. Section B.1.1 on page 4.2-14 references a tentative development plan for the San Miguel
Ranch project. It should be noted in this section that this is a tentative agreement and
that the City of Chula Vista has not adopted the necessary general plan amendments and
zone changes to implement this tentative plan.
6. Figure 4.2-6 on page 4.2-33 delineates a circulation element road within the City of
Chula Vista from Otay Valley Road southerly across the Otay Valley terminating at the
City of San Diego jurisdictional boundary. This roadway is not shown on the Chula
Vista Circulation Element of the General Plan and, therefore, should be deleted.
7. Figure 4.2-7 on page 4.2-36 indicates the Otay Rio Vista Business Park within the City
of Chula Vista. Although this subdivision is technically valid, plans for an amphitheater
and water park have been approved on this site.
8. Section B.3.1 on page 4.2-58 indicates in the second paragraph that the biologically
preferred scenario would primarily affect the Rancho del Rey SPA III project. Because
almost all of this development has received approval of final subdivision maps, almost
all of the property has been grubbed and cleared and most of the area has been graded,
any major changes are not realistically feasible.
9. The EIR/EIS contains a table with an incorrect conclusion about the significance of the
impact of the Otay Valley Regional Park Concept Plan. The Table, ES-4, at Page ES-18
lists the impacts from the project as significant and not mitigated whereas the text at Page
4.3-235 correctly analyzes the impacts as less than significant after mitigation.
10. Until recently, EIRs analyzing impacts associated with certain kinds of projects, including
projects involving the preparation of joint CEQA/NEP A documents, were required under
.JS ---
Jy-/J
John Kovacs
-5-
October 3, 1996
CEQA to include a section addressing "[t]he relationship between local short-term uses
of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity."
That requirement, was repealed by the Legislature in 1994. Because NEPA documents
must still address the subject, however, a "joint EIR/EIS" must still address the topic.
In contrast, the MSCP EIR, a joint CEQA/NEPA document, does not.
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION COMMENTS
The City's Resource Conservation Commission has also reviewed the draft EIR/EIS, and has
requested that the attached comments be forwarded to you for response.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments at this time. Please feel free to contact
Duane Bazzel, Principal Planner, at 691-5101 if you have any questions regarding the matters
addressed in this letter.
Very truly yours,
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Attachment:
Resource Conservation Commission Comments on Draft MSCP EIR/EIS, dated September 30, 1996
(F:\home\planning\mscpeir.l)
f-
Ir-If